World food prices have increased by 40% on an average last year. This is becoming a major issue of debate world wide.

The global discussion gives attention to the global trends leading to this situation and they are not likely to go away quickly. Increased consumption by the rich people, changes in their food habits have created an increased demand for meat. Increase in urban population now reaching 50 % has reduced the numbers of people producing food compared to those consuming food. Food,particularly cereals and food producing land is converted to production of fuel. Increasing fuel prices have led to increased fertilizer and agrochemical prices, Climate change has increased crop losses. These combined say that food price increases will continue.

All these factors relate to ways in which "fast economic growth" is attempted. So, do we assume that fast economic growth is a global necessity? Do we want to examine questions such as ‘do we need fast growth?’ "Who needs fast growth?, who benefits from it ? At what costs? To whom? Who pays the price of growth?

In the rich Western countries the average share of expenditure of a family on food is about 8% of the expendable income, while it is around 50%, 60% or 70% of the income of a poor family in poor countries. In Sri Lanka it is said that the share of income of poorer people spent on food is around 80% of their income. Thus, a 50% increase in the prices of essential food for the poor, would make it impossible for them to have their food. Although food is the most essential requirement, the reality is that for most of such families there are other items of expenditure that can not be forgone. These include health ( taking treatment when sick ), education of children and even some requirements of personal care such as soap, clothing, washing, travel and electricity in urban areas, etc. This creates a situation where such people are compelled to reduce food including the essential nutritional requirements of children and mothers.

The price increases of essential food in Sri Lanka last year have been much more. Similar price increases have been taking place in the country during the previous years too.

Rice reached Rs 80 to 95 /Kg in the second week of April 2008, and it is predicted that a Kg of rice will go beyond Rs. 100 /Kg within the next month or so. A person in Sri Lanka eats a little more than 100 Kg / year and a family requires about 40 Kg per month. This alone will come to Rs. 4,000 /month, when 2.1 million poor families receive less than Rs 1,500 /month ( according to official figures ). Even if this amount is doubled to Rs 3,000 /month, their monthly income is insufficient to meet the rice requirements alone. Bread and wheat flour increased in price over the last few months to Rs. 40 /lb and Rs. 75 /kg respectively and consumption of wheat flour and bread has reduced drastically by 60 % on an average and 90 % in rural areas. The government is very happy about this achievement of reduced consumption of wheat flour and bread. But this is not a reason to be happy when we realize that rice consumption would also be reduced drastically due to the same reason of high and unaffordable price. It simply means that the poor people will not eat the minimum requirement of basic food.

In some items such as dried chilies, fish, beef, dried fish, sugar, where the percentage increase last year is relatively low, the prices were quite high even at the beginning of last year. Therefore, the trends of price increases over several years have to be looked at.

Cost of living index ( CCPI – Colombo consumer Price Index ) has increased steadily and rate of increase is growing too. The weighting pattern used in the index is based on the average expenditure of a sample of 455 working class households

These food price increases come in a situation where the other essential expenditures such as for education, health, transport (bus fares), house rents, electricity, fuel ( gas for cooking ), soap, tooth paste, washing soap, postal expenses, medicines etc are also very high. These price increases add on to very high cost of food.

The people receiving incomes of less than 1 US $ / day or some times less than 2 US $ /day are considered poor globally. In Sri Lanka, while there is lack of clarity about the proportion of people below poverty line the official poverty alleviation programme ( Samurdhi Movement) says that 2.1 million people receive less than Rs. 1500 /month. which is US $ 0.5 /day income. This is nearly half the country’s population.

Only half the country’s 20 million people are receiving the minimum daily calorie intake of 2,030, according to the latest poverty assessments compiled by the government.

"An average poor person in Sri Lanka receives only 1,696 kcal per day while a non-poor person receives 2,194 kcal," according to the Department of Census and Statistics, in a report entitled Poverty Indicators - Household Income and Expenditure Survey - 2006/07, released in March 2008. ( our addition - the tremendous increase in food prices after the period of study would have made the situation much worse )

Officials at the UN World Food Programme (WFP) told IRIN that high levels of under-nourishment prevail, especially in rural areas and those regions in the north and east affected by more than 25 years of conflict.

"The highest rates of under-nourishment are in the north and east as well as parts of the dry zone towards the centre of the island," Jean-Yves Lequime, the deputy head of WFP in Sri Lanka, said.

"Our information shows that these areas are some of the poorest on the island, with very high under-nutrition rates, poor education levels and poor sanitation, all of which contribute to under-nutrition," Lequime said.

Poverty and high energy requirements were also common in the rural agrarian areas, Gordon Weiss, chief of communications at the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) in Colombo, the capital, told IRIN. "Especially in the agricultural areas, they engage with heavy work, so they need more calories. Most of the agricultural-based areas are considered poor areas."

Child nutrition

"Sri Lanka has a significantly higher child underweight rate than would be expected on the basis of its [annual] per capita GDP [of US$1,599]," Lequime said. "Indeed, Sri Lanka has a child underweight rate that may be three times as high as what would be expected from a country with Sri Lanka's level of infant mortality."

UNICEF said 14 percent of children under five in Sri Lanka showed signs of wasting (acute underweight) and stunting (chronic underweight) while 29 percent of children younger than five were underweight for their age.

UNICEF said 14 percent of children under five in Sri Lanka showed signs of wasting (acute underweight) and stunting (chronic underweight) while 29 percent of children younger than five were underweight for their age

However, districts that have been affected by conflict record even higher rates, according to UNICEF’s Weiss.

WFP said the continuing conflict between government forces and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) had also raised concerns regarding overall food security and nutrition levels in the conflict zone.

"Food insecurity levels are high in areas affected by the conflict, according to the Integrated Food Security and Humanitarian Phase Classification conducted by WFP in April 2007," Lequime said. "Kilinochchi, Mullaitivu, Trincomalee, Mannar and parts of Vavuniya [districts] are classified as acute food and livelihood crises. Jaffna and Batticaloa are classified as a humanitarian emergency."

There are also fears that national nutritional levels will deteriorate further due to rising food prices caused by inflation running at a record high of 17.5 percent, the WFP official said.

"Heavy unseasonal rainfall over much of Sri Lanka, including the conflict-affected areas, has destroyed much of the main ‘Maha’ rice harvest, which when combined with global price rises and food shortages may indicate major problems for the future," according to Lequime.

If these people are to avoid being reduced to the degraded level of survival as animals, basically looking for food to keep alive, they have to meet their social obligations too, such as weddings, funerals, attending to such occasions of friends and relatives. In fact their level of survival can be even more degrading than of animals, since animals do not have to "beg" for food, since they do not pay for food. The growth of suicide rates, rates of malnutrition and hunger, growing indebtedness are clear indications where such requirements push them out of possibilities of survival.

While we look at the growth of urban population, globally, as a result of some affluent people wanting to have more consumption of goods , services and facilities provided by modernization, it is also necessary to look at the massive growth in the rural to urban migration into slums and shanties, feeding themselves on city garbage, as a last step in their process of being completely excluded from the market and then from society., before being compelled to take the next step of "disappearing from the face of the earth."

While social unrest, security problems, food riots, crime and robbery disturb the rest of society, some other calamities and tragedies such as suicide, malnutrition and hunger do not disturb the rest of society ( non poor ) to the same degree. Therefore, what goes in the name of "security arrangements", some times called "war against terrorism" obtains higher priority, more urgency and higher allocation of resources than the needs of reducing hunger and poverty.

Sri Lanka is a very illustrative example of all these phenomena.

Sri Lanka began on its path to faster economic growth (especially from 1977 ) moving away from an approach of protecting the poor and counting more on the ability of the "poor" people to meet their food needs and other essential needs. Since then we have had large and growing income disparities, more rural poverty, large and increasing malnutrition among children and mothers, very large increase in cost of living, growing food prices and costs of other services such as health, education, increased rates of suicide, social unrest and rebellion such as the youth uprising in late 1980s ( resulting in 60,000 disappearances ), a long war of 30 years resulting in even larger numbers getting killed and displaced, extremely large security expenditures, and crime. Huge expenditures were made on infrastructure and incentives provided to the rich and potential investors at the cost of threat to the very survival of the rural and urban poor. These have largely been a result of attempted "faster growth"

Now we have come to a situation where about half the population receiving incomes that are much lower than the standard poverty line ( of US$ 1 or 2 /day ) have been pushed to a level which makes it totally impossible to meet their essential requirements of food ( as shown by above figures )

While we say that we have to think of finding ways of meeting the increased demand for food arising out of factors such as more meat eating by the richer people, more fuel requirements for their vehicles and for further industrialization for expansion of markets and profit accumulation, it is necessary to have a clear understanding of "what needs" and "whose needs" should obtain priority.

The growing recognition that the small farmers have a greater potential in meeting the needs for higher productivity of food than the large scale, industrial farming that is accompanied by large subsidies, appears to be a step forward in the right direction.

However, the proposals of the WB to assist them by greater investments, greater allocation of resources, greater attention given by global corporations such as Unilever to link with the rural small scale producers have to be looked upon with caution.

Are these measures towards reducing poverty and hunger or towards making use of the small scale rural farmers to meet the requirements of the rich consumers?