the average resident of kerala is richer than the average resident of andhra pradesh: per capita gdp in kerala is around 23% higher than in andhra pradesh. as for malnourishment, it's much higher in andhra pradesh, of course. but according to a recent report prepared by the u.n. world food program (unwfp) surpluses producing andhra pradesh is also much more food insecure than kerala:
New Delhi: India's mineral-rich state Jharkhand is the most hungry and thirsty state in the country and also among the states that has the poorest of sanitation facilities.so, what did andhra pradesh gain from producing so much rice? nearly twice as many people were employed or underemployed, one can safely assume, in 2001, in the production of a little more than twice as much rice as in 1961. it'd seem like all that talk of technology-intensive farming that the green revolution had supposedly ushered in was just that: mere talk. because the green-revolutionary technology only seems to have increased the surpluses marginally because most of the increase in output could as well be attributed to increase in labour employed. by pursuing a model of development that placed less emphasis on people, andhra pradesh seems to have achieved efficiency in neither production nor distribution. this has produced a society more riven by more social and economic inequalities, more deprivation and discontent than it originally started with.
According to a report on the State of Food Insecurity in Rural India prepared jointly by the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) and MS Swaminathan Research Foundation (MSSRF), Jharkhand has replaced Orissa from top of the list of hungry states in the country.
The report, which is a corollary to the Food Insecurity Atlas of Rural India that was released in 2001, also ranks the country 94th on the Global Hunger Index of 119 countries.
"On the composite index of food insecurity of rural India, states like Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh are found in the 'very high' level of food insecurity, followed by Madhya Pradesh, Bihar and Gujarat", the report said.
The better performers include Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir, all of which report an Index value below 0.53, it added.
Surprisingly, economically developed states like Gujarat, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka find themselves in the category of high food insecurity in the report. [emphasis mine].
if we consider the pure economic costs now, ignoring the human, ecological, and even political and social costs, they seem to be much higher than the gains: the government pays rs.1,000 as m.s.p for every quintal of paddy now, which is as just as much as the farmer spends to produce it. and for more than two decades his gains have been as bad. isn't it time somebody started calculating the total real costs, not just the economic ones? especially those who are promising the people of telangana that a new state would mean more water and rice?
* the paddy to rice ratio is 3:2.