Content uploaded by Abid Hussain
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Abid Hussain on Oct 17, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
International Journal of Development Issues
Emerald Article: Status and factors of food security in Pakistan
Abid Hussain, Jayant Kumar Routray
Article information:
To cite this document:
Abid Hussain, Jayant Kumar Routray, (2012),"Status and factors of food security in Pakistan", International Journal of
Development Issues, Vol. 11 Iss: 2 pp. 164 - 185
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14468951211241146
Downloaded on: 27-06-2012
References: This document contains references to 42 other documents
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by ASIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
For Authors:
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service.
Information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
With over forty years' experience, Emerald Group Publishing is a leading independent publisher of global research with impact in
business, society, public policy and education. In total, Emerald publishes over 275 journals and more than 130 book series, as
well as an extensive range of online products and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 3 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is
a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation. *Related content and download information correct at time of download.
Status and factors of food
security in Pakistan
Abid Hussain and Jayant Kumar Routray
School of Environment, Resources and Development,
Asian Institute of Technology, Pathum Thani, Thailand
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to determine the level of food self-sufficiency, un-accessed
portions of food, and food gap between the national food security line of the country and consumption
by its people. It also aims to scrutinize the major physical and economic factors inducing food
insecurity in the country.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper applies descriptive statistics using mainly secondary
data with the support of some primary information.
Findings – Pakistan is almost self-sufficient in food production even if only 30 percent of its
production potential has been achieved. In spite of such a situation, the average food consumption of
its people is still significantly below the standards set up for the national food security line. The study
also established that the food gap in the country is 30 percent, while a 35 percent portion of available
food is un-accessed due to various constraints spawned by physical, economic and sometimes natural
factors. Out of the seven administrative units of Pakistan, Punjab and Sindh are the main food
producing units while the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) are the most highly food
deficit unit. Irrespective of the level of local food production, food gap still exists in all administrative
units due to inefficient food procurement and distribution system, illegal movement of food
commodities, poor monitoring of marketing systems, lower purchasing power and natural disasters.
Research limitations/implications – The paper elaborates on the average situation of the
country, and establishes the baseline for future research to investigate the issues of food security
deeply, providing some key recommendations.
Originality/value – The paper investigates the concept of food security through the important
indicators, i.e. food gap and un-accessed portion of food, and tries to sort out the factors inducing such
gaps.
Keywords Food security, Food availability, Food consumption, Self-sufficiency, Food gap,
Un-accessed portion of food, Food deficit, Physical factors, Economic factors, Pakistan, Food industry
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Challenges to reduce global food insecurity and poverty are becoming more complex
today than about three decades ago. The current challenges that impede many efforts to
achieve food security include price instability of food integrated with rising energy
costs, impacts of climate change and uncertainties in the financial markets (Naylor, 2011)
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1446-8956.htm
The authors would like to thank the Higher Education Commission of Pakistan for providing the
financial support for this study through PhD scholarship for the first author. Supporting persons
who include Muhammad Ashraf (MSc Agricultural Economics), Ghafar Ali (PhD, Environment
Management) and Asif Awan (Financial Expert) are also highly admired by the authors for
providing the timely help in the collection and compilation of secondary and primary data, and
supporting the authors during the whole research period. Last but not least, the first author
would like to offer heartiest thanks to his parents for their continuous support and prayers.
IJDI
11,2
164
International Journal of Development
Issues
Vol. 11 No. 2, 2012
pp. 164-185
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
1446-8956
DOI 10.1108/14468951211241146
resulting in increased incidence of hunger especially in the least developing countries.
Worldwide, 800 million people are facing hunger (IFDP-WFS, 2002) where South Asia is
one of the most vulnerable regions with 299 million of its people remain undernourished
accounting for about 40 percent of the world’s undernourished population. Although
there had been an annual decline in the prevalence of undernourishment in the South
Asian region by 1.7 percent in the past decade, failure of governments to reduce the
absolute number of the undernourished remains a major cause for concern. Estimates by
the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO) indicate that Asia
still accounts for one-half of the world’s undernourished population of which two-thirds
is from South Asia (Mittal and Sethi, 2009). Pakistan is the second largest nation in South
Asia where almost one-half of its population continues to encounter hunger and deal
with food insecurity (Sulehri and Ramay, 2009) with large portion of its population
remaining very vulnerable to food security risks. In 2009, Maplecroft ranked 148 nations
according to their food security risk indices and Pakistan emerged as the 11th which
indicated that Pakistan is at “extreme risk” of food security while India was ranked the
25th and considered as being at “high risk” (Maplecroft-FSRI, 2009). Like other
developing countries, the level of food security in Pakistan depends on its national food
production capacity and the people’s capability to access the food items. Although the
country’s food production remained stable in recent years but its people’s access to food
had weakened particularly due to the decline in the purchasing power of its people.
The First Millennium Development Goal was set to “reduce the worlds’ hunger by half,
irrespective of race, religion and gender by year 2015” (United Nations, 2000). It might
have been assumed then that the situation in Pakistan would improve, and production of
food will become stable and prices would remain affordable.
The Government of Pakistan has initiated different agricultural programmes and
marketing strategies under its national food policy (NFP) to achieve food security in the
country but the outcomes of these efforts had not been very satisfactory. Under the
country’s NFP, three objectives were set to be achieved such as adequate production of
food, stability of food prices and access to food by consumers (Khan, 2000). During the
last few years since 2006 however, food production has not significantly increased while
food prices fluctuated frequently. The condition of the country is becoming worse as
the number of food insecure districts increased from 74 in 2004 to 95 in 2008. The
country’s huge population is already food insecure which can become more threatening
if price fluctuation persists and inflation rate continues to rise (Sulehri and Ramay, 2009).
In the global scenario, world food prices started to escalate very steeply in 2006 and
reached a record level during the second quarter of 2008. Overall, food prices have
increased by 75 percent in dollar terms since 2000 while the foreign exchange earnings
and international purchasing power of all countries have decreased. With this scenario,
food prices will likely continue to increase in the near future. This phenomenon is the
consequence of rising standards of living in countries like China and India, increased use
of food crops for bio-fuels and animal feeds, increased prices of oil and fertilizers,
reduced production capacity in key grain producing countries due to drought,
and failures in the general pricing mechanisms (FAO, 2008, pp. 3-4; Headey and Fan,
2008; Simelton, 2011). South Asia has the largest concentration of poor and
undernourished people in the world (Kumar et al., 2010, p. 1) and any increase in food
prices would further fuel the situation. These countries which include Pakistan
have very few available options to deal with the challenges that they are being
Food security
165
confronted with. Nevertheless, stabilization of food prices may still have a positive role
in improving agricultural growth (Cumming Jr et al., 2006) and the overall social welfare
including food security (Myers, 2006).
Although modern debate on food security is mainly focused on food prices there are
other key factors which affect food security in developing countries particularly in
Pakistan. The main objective of this study therefore is to identify the gap between the
country’s national food security line (NFSL) and consumption by its people.
Furthermore, the study also investigates the level of un-accessed portion of food
(UPF) due to key physical and economic factors, and determines the level of food
self-sufficiency for important food commodities as well as food deficit/surplus with
respect to the NFSL. However, some limitations of this study could exist because it does
not segment the different income groups in terms of their food security level although it
provides an average situation of all seven administrative units (AUs) and the country as
a whole. Moreover, in the assessment of food security status, this study avoids
replicating other preceding studies (FSA, 2003; Sulehri and Ramay, 2009) that tried to
determine the percentage of food insecure population and districts. Nevertheless, this
study attempts to deeply investigate the key factors which affect the country’s food
availability and level of consumption that could result in food deficit, food gap (FG) and
UPF. Keeping sustainability and accuracy in view, this study excludes the Afghan
refugees and food-aid in the assessment of food security. Based on the findings of this
study, policies to address the key constraints of achieving food security should be
reviewed for improvement.
2. Methodology for reviewing the status
Food security is a complex term and it is not as simple as it looks or as being
interpreted in literatures and general debates. Different studies and organizations
interpret food security in different ways taking into account the different indicators or
aspects. For example, FSA (2003) considered indicators such as food availability,
access, absorption and related uncertainties/risks. In some conceptual frameworks
uncertainties/risks are replaced by aspect of food supply stability (FAO, 2001b,
pp. 10-56; RSB, 2009, pp. 10-11). Samsung Economic Research Institute (2011, pp. 7-11)
conceptualizes food security based on two indices such as food supply stability and
food safety covering all aspects under these two indices. The objective of studies is
common to investigate the status of food security though approaches are slightly
different. This study also investigates food security situation with slightly different
approach considering the innovative concepts of UPF and FG along with the existing
concepts of self-sufficiency and food deficit/surplus. Therefore, this study initially
estimated status of food availability and food consumption to calculate the above
indicators. It also intends to investigate different physical and economic factors
affecting values of indicators.
Total food availability comprises the national food production and net factor of
food trade where imports are added and exports are deducted from the national
food production (Figure 1). Since total food availability is considered as the total food
requirements of any country (Kyaw, 2009, p. 26), a comparison of the total food
availability with national food production gives an estimate of the level of
self-sufficiency of a country (Kyaw, 2009, p. 26; FAO, 2001a, pp. 50-52). Pakistan is
an agriculture-based country primarily growing food crops while the major portion
IJDI
11,2
166
of its available food comes from domestic production with the effect of food trade being
not considerably high. Moreover, estimation of food deficit is informative to investigate
the food shortage by comparing the net food production with the NFSL of Pakistan.
NFSL is defined that every individual of the population has access to 2,350 kcal per day
per capita of food nutritional value at all times (Economic Survey of Pakistan,
Government of Pakistan, 2009, pp. 175-6).
Average food consumption is the ultimate food which the population consumes. It is
possible that the whole quantity of available food in any area cannot be accessed by the
population because after production the food goes through different channels and
accessibility is constrained by various physical and economic factors, and at times could
be affected by natural disasters. It is in view of such factors that a major part of the food
especially in the case of Pakistan remains un-accessed. Higher UPF might result in
bigger FG and lower food consumption by the population. Importantly, estimation of the
UPF and FG helps in assessing the impacts of the above mentioned factors. In recent
years natural disasters have further widened the values of UPF and FG in the country.
The examples include the earthquake in 2005, flood devastations in 2010 and continuous
war against terrorism. Such risks affect both availability of and access to food
commodities (FSA, 2003, pp. 109-120).
Data used
The study makes use of both primary and secondary data. In order to assess the food
security situation of Pakistan as a whole and all its seven AUs, namely: Punjab, Sindh,
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), Balochistan, Gilgit-Baltistan (GB), Federally
Administrated Tribal Areas (FATA), and Azad Jammu Kashmir (AJK), food
production and consumption data would be necessary. Thus, major parts of the
required data were collected from officially reliable secondary sources including
the five-year production data of all food sources such as crops and livestock especially
Figure 1.
Methodological
framework of food
security assessment
Food Security in
Pakistan
National Food
Security Line (2350
kcal per day per
capita)
Food
Consumption
Total Food
Availability
Domestic Food
Production
Net Trade Factor
(+imports–exports)
Un-accessed Portion of Food?
Food Gap?
Food Surplus/Deficit?
Food Self-sufficiency?
Source: Conceptualized by the Authors
Food security
167
in the case of the AUs. The main sources of the production data were the Agricultural
Statistics (2004-2005) of the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Livestock of Pakistan, as
well as the reports of the Economic Surveys and Food Security Analysis 2003. However,
the consumption data which were sourced from the Household Integrated Economic
Surveys conducted by the Federal Bureau of Statistics of Pakistan were available only
for the four AUs such as Punjab, Sindh, KPK and Balochistan.
Therefore, the households consumption data for three AUs such as GB, FATA and
AJK were collected through a field survey conducted in October 2009. There are
0.416 million estimated households in FATA, 0.231 millions in GB and 0.454 million in
AJK. Using the Yamane’s (1967), formula a sample size of 400 households was
determined in each AU at 95 percent confidence level and ^5 percent margin of error.
But the interviewed households were more than estimated sample size. Data from GB
and AJK were collected directly by the interviewers during the field survey using data
checklists, and 575 households from each AU were selected randomly covering the
55 percent ratio of rural and urban areas. In view of some security concerns, collection of
data from FATA was not carried out through direct interviews of the households.
Therefore, the necessary data were collected by making use of contact persons in the
Khyber and Bajaur Agencies. In this regard, the services of eight contact persons were
availed to compile the required data on households’ average monthly consumption.
Randomly, at least 80 households were selected by each contact person in their
respective areas who filled up the data checklists by themselves. Overall, 670 hous eholds
in FATA were interviewed (Table I).
The data on population were collected from the Population Census Organization.
In addition, complementary data including food movements, methodology related
information (Tables II and III) and supportive statistics were collected from other
reliable secondary sources.
Analysis and techniques
The results of the study are conveyed in descriptive statistics that include percentages,
indices and ratios. The analyses are divided into three steps where in the first step food
availability is estimated and in the second step the status of food consumption is
appraised. Based on estimated food availability and consumption, important ratios and
indices are reckoned in the third step to investigate the food security situation.
Food availability. For the domestic food production from all possible sources whether
plants and animals, only those that are culturally acceptable were considered in the
study. By culturally acceptable it means only halal food[1] items that are acceptable in
Islamic society while some food items are strictly not allowed such as pork. Therefore,
items such as cereals, pulses, vegetables (including potato), fruits, sugar, milk, vegetable
oils, mutton, beef, poultry meat, eggs, and fish were considered in the assessment.
However, some items such as condiments, shrimps, crabs and prawns were not
considered because of data collection constraints. The data on production from all food
sources were converted into nutritional energy units such as “kcal per day per capita”
based on the calculation procedures shown in Table I and supported by supplementary
Tables II and III. While Table II shows the non-food and wastage that comprise the
non-nutritional parts such as those kept as seeds, used as animal feeds and wastage that
occurs during harvesting and handling, Table III shows the nutritional energy (kcal)
chart of different kinds of food commodities.
IJDI
11,2
168
Assessment Formula Calculation/description
Net food availability
(domestic food production)
Fa¼PMi=Pj
365 £Ci(FSA, 2003) 1. Average of five-year domestic
production of all culturally
acceptable food commodities
from plant and animal sources
was used in calculation
2. Non-food/wastage parts
(wastage, seed, used as livestock
feed and non-nutritional part) of
the quantity of food
commodities were deducted
(Table III)
3. Conversion of quantity into
nutritional energy “kcal per day
per capita” using the formula
F
a
¼Net available food in kcal
per day per capita from all food
commodities
M
i
¼production of ith
commodity in million kg
P
j
¼population of jth unit
(country or AU) in millions
C
i
¼kcal in 1 kg of ith
commodity (Table II)
Total food availability with
trade factor/national food
requirement
Ft¼FaþTn
(Kyaw, 2009)
F
t
¼All above steps were
followed with trade factor (T
n
)
added. Imports were added to
and exports were deducted from
domestic production of food
commodities
Self-sufficiency ratio
SSR ¼Fai=Fti
£100 (FAO,
2001a, b; Kyaw, 2009)
SSR ¼Self-sufficiency ratio for
ith food commodity
F
ai
¼Net domestic production
of ith commodity at national
level (000 tonnes/annum)
F
ti
¼Total required quantity of
ith commodity at national level
(000 tonnes/annum)
Food deficit/surplus index (%) FDI ¼Fa
Fn
21
£100 FDI ¼Food deficit/surplus
index (%)
F
a
¼Net food availability (kcal
per day per capita)
F
n
¼National food security
line (2,350 kcal per day per
capita)
Negative value of FDI shows
deficit whereas positive value
shows surplus
Food consumption (%) Fc¼PQi=pj
365=12 £Ci
FCR ¼Fc=Fn
£100
Monthly households’
consumption data was
converted into units of
nutritional energy using formula
(continued)
Table I.
Assessment of food
security status of
Pakistan
Food security
169
Assessment Formula Calculation/description
F
c
¼Total Consumption of all
food commodities in kcal per day
per capita
Q
i
¼Quantity of ith
commodity in kg
p
j
¼Average household size in
jth unit (country or AU)
C
i
¼kcal in 1 kg of ith
commodity (Table II)
FCR ¼Food consumption ratio
F
n
¼National food security
line (2,350 kcal per day per
capita)
Consumers’ purchasing power
for food
CPPf¼1
CPI £100 (FBS, 2009) CPP
f
¼Consumers’
purchasing power for food (%)
CPI ¼Consumers’ price index
of food commodities in nth year
with reference to base year
(2000-2001) determined by FBS
(2009)
Un-accessed portion of food Fu¼Fa2Fc
Fa
£100 Percentage of gap between net
food availability and food
consumption
Food gap (%) Fg¼Fn2Fc
Fn
£100 Percentage of gap between
national food security line and
food consumption
Table I.
Commodities Wastage/non-food parts
a
(%)
Wheat 10.02
Rice 17.43
Maize 40.5
Other cereals 22
Pulses 38.5
Potato 16.57
Milk 20.5
Egg 15.56
Fruits 35
Vegetables 35
Oil seed 65
Sugarcane 91.43
Fish 6.9
Meat 14.15
Note:
a
Non-food parts comprises of wastage at field during harvest, seed, used as livestock feed and
non-nutritional part of food commodities
Source: Adapted from FSA (2003, p. 142), PARC (2003)
Table II.
Percentage of non-food
parts and wastage in
gross production
IJDI
11,2
170
Notably, the average values of all food commodities from the five-year production data
were estimated and used in the analyses (Table I) to prevent the effects of fluctuation in
production of any commodity in one or two specific years. Thus, no reference year of
production was set up because fluctuation of production in one reference year could
result in over- or under-estimation of the overall national food production.
Furthermore, non-food parts of all commodities (Table III) were deducted from the
production average values to minimize the chances of overestimation. In the next step,
the net production of all the commodities were converted into nutritional values (kcal
per day per capita) following the formula given in Table I. The total kcal per day per
capita of all the commodities gave an estimate of the food availability from national
production. Similarly, food availability of all the AUs was also calculated. Finally, the
total food availability of the country was estimated by adding the net trade factor to
the net food availability based on the national food production (Table IV).
Food consumption. The average monthly household food consumption data was
used to estimate the food consumption in kcal per day per capita (Table I). Data on food
consumption is however slightly different from food production data because in
production data, primary food products from plant and animal sources are taken into
account but in the consumption data the primary as well as secondary products are
considered. For example, sugar produced from sugarcane can be consumed either as
Food commodity Kilocalories per kilogram
Wheat 2,900
Wheat flour 3,640
Rice/flour 3,737
Maize/flour 3,227
Pulses 852
Millet 3,780
Barley 3,450
Sorghum 3,390
Potato 868
Fruits 980
Dry fruits 2,670
Vegetables 648
Sugar 3,875
Veg. oil/fats 8,857
Milk 598
Egg 1,480
Poultry meat 1,917
Fish 1,165
Sugar products 3,100
Mutton 2,630
Beef 1,500
Baked products 3,535
Butter/margarine 7,170
Curd/yogurt 610
Beverages 390
Source: Adapted from FSA (2003, p. 142), FAO Food Balance Sheet (2001b), USDA National Nutrient
Database-R-17 (2004), USDA National Database-R-22 (2009, pp. 1-26)
Table III.
Kilocalories (kcal) per
kilogram of food
commodities
Food security
171
primary product like raw sugar or in the form of processed secondary products such as
sweets and confectionery derived from sugar. Milk is consumed as a primary product
or in processed form of butter, yogurt or ghee as secondary products. For all
commodities, the consumption data included those of both primary and secondary
products. Nevertheless, no product is considered in the consumption data that is not in
the production data. For example, honey and spices were excluded due to logical reasons
and to keep the food availability and consumption comparable because production data
of these commodities are not available. Moreover, the contribution of these so-called
left-out commodities to the household consumption is also insignificant (FBS-HIES,
2006). Thus, the main commodities in the consumption data were wheat/flour, rice/flour,
maize/flour, pulses, other cereals, baked cereal products, fruits, dried fruits, vegetables,
fish, poultry meat, mutton, beef, butter/margarine, beverages, curd/yogurt, sugar, and
sugar products. Some commodities were also excluded from the data due to their
non-nutritional value like tobacco, tea, coffee, paan[2], among others. The consumption
data were then converted into kcal per day per capita following the steps in Table I and in
the supplementary Tables II and III.
Situation analysis. Important ratios and indices including self-sufficiency ratio
(SSR), food deficit/surplus index (FDI), food consumption ratio (FCR), UPF and FG
were estimated to unveil the food security situation of the country and its AUs. The
formula used to compute these ratios and indices are given in Table I.
3. Status of food security
Food availability
The results show that the country’s net food availability from national production is
2,562 kcal per day per capita which is above the NFSL (Table V) implying that Pakistan
is producing more than the standard requirements of its populace. Among the AUs,
Food commodities
Total available food including
trade factor
Net available domestic food (F
ai
) 000
tonnes/annum
(F
ti
) 000 tonnes/
annum
kcal per day per
capita
SSR
(%)
Wheat 21,728.25 21,640.07 1,088 100.4
Rice 4,771.29 2,449.69 159 194.8
Maize 1,198.05 1,198.05 67 100.0
Other cereals 2,885.16 2,885.16 177 100.0
Pulses 948.17 1,288.10 19 73.6
Vegetables 3,740.02 3,607.88 41 103.7
Fruits 4,828.23 4,587.17 78 105.3
Sugar 4,943.86 5,039.33 338 98.1
Milk 24,026.92 24,040.51 249 99.9
Meat 1,855.54 1,855.54 62 100.0
Fish 558.31 457.21 9 122.1
Eggs 360.90 360.90 9 100.0
Oil seeds
& oleaginous fruits 755.74 2,448.36 376 30.9
2,672
Source: Based on Secondary Data (GOP-Economic Survey, 2008-2009, p. 18; FSA, 2003;
MINFAL-ASP, 2005; POSDB, 2005)
Table IV.
Self-sufficiency level of
major food commodities
IJDI
11,2
172
Punjab comes out as the main producing unit followed by Sindh which also produces
food more than its local needs. However, food production of the other five AUs such as
Balochistan, KPK, FATA, GB and AJK do not reach the local food requirement level.
Taking into account the NFSL limit, AJK and FATA are considered as the least
producing units that are able to supply only around 20 percent of the local requirements.
Thus, these two AUs are heavily dependent on other AUs especially Punjab and Sindh
for the required food commodities. Meanwhile, Balochistan, KPK and GB are perceived
to be relatively less dependent on the main food producing AUs (Table V).
Food consumption
The average food consumption of the people of Pakistan is almost 1,700 kcal per day per
capita which is below the NFSL. While Punjab and Sindh produce more than their local
requirements, it is easy to imagine that food consumption in these two AUs could be
higher than the other AUs. However, this is not the case as the results surprisingly show
that the average food consumption in these two AUs is below the NFSL. In fact, food
consumption in these AUs and at the national level ranges from 1,300 to 2,000 kcal per
day per capita. Food consumption in the least food producing AUs such as FATA and
AJK is significantly more than their local production but FATA remains the least food
consuming AU while food consumption is slightly higher in AJK and GB than in FATA.
Notably, no AU is consuming food up to the level or beyond the NFSL which means that
the average food consumption in all AUs is still below the national food standards
(Table V).
Self-sufficiency
Being an agrarian country, Pakistan is self-sufficient in terms of most of the food
commodities that it produced. As the main food crop, wheat is consumed in all parts of
the country as a primary food item. Pakistan produces wheat which is sufficient for its
population’s requirements. In addition to wheat, the domestic production of maize,
vegetables, fruits, milk, meat, eggs and other cereals such as millet, barley and sorghum
can also meet the local requirements for food (Table IV). Pakistan also produces and
exports fruits like mango, citrus and apples but the country’s main export commodity is
kcal per day per capita UPF
Administrative
unit
National food
security line
Net food
availability
Food
consumption
kcal per day
per capita (%)
FDI
(%)
FCR
(%)
FG
(%)
Punjab 2,350 3,022 1,740 1,282 42 29 74 26
Sindh 2,563 1,494 1,069 42 9 64 36
Balochistan 1,779 1,514 265 15 224 64 36
KPK 1,677 1,964 2287 217 229 84 16
FATA 496 1,356 2860 2173 279 58 42
GB 1,280 1,446 2166 213 246 62 38
AJK 540 1,452 2912 2169 277 62 38
Pakistan 2,562 1,664 898 35 9 71 29
Source: Based on Field Survey (2009) and Secondary Data GOP-Economic Surveys (2007-2008, pp.
19-25, 2008-2009, p. 18), FBS-HIES (2006), FSA (2003), Govt. of AJK (2007), MINFAL-ASP (2005),
POSDB (2005), PCO (2000)
Table V.
Food security status
of Pakistan
Food security
173
rice with domestic production that is almost double than the local rice requirement. Fish
is also being produced more than what is locally required. In case of sugar, although the
SSR is almost 100 percent, in some circumstances Pakistan needs to import sugar from
other countries. Pulses and oil seed/oleaginous fruits are the main imports as far as food
trade is concerned. Pakistan is deficient in its production of pulses and oil seeds by
almost 25 and 70 percent, respectively (Table IV). Looking at the overall effect of food
trade on net food availability in the country, it can be seen that food trade contributes
marginally to the available kcal per day per capita of the country’s populace. While the
country’s domestic food production should provide 2,562 kcal per day per capita
(Table V), the total available food with trade factor provides an addition of slightly more
than 100 kcal per day per capita to domestic food production (Table IV).
Food deficit and surplus
Keeping in view the marginal contribution of trade factor to the total food availability
but with unavailable information on the distribution of imported-food items to the AUs,
domestic production has been considered as the benchmark for food availability in all
seven AUs and the country as a whole (Table V). In Pakistan, domestic food production
(DFP) is almost 10 percent more than the standard requirements based on the NFSL.
Production varies from one AU to another considering the variations in their biophysical
conditions and other factors related to production. Based on the values of the FDI,
Punjab is the main food producing AU with more than 40 percent surplus in food supply
whereas Sindh also has surplus in its food production (Table V). The main occupation of
populace of these AUs is agriculture. The other AUs such as Balochistan, KPK, FATA,
GB and AJK are deficit in food production. Specifically, the food deficit of Balochistan
and KPK is less than 30 percent while GB is food deficient by about 50 percent of the
standard food requirements. These five AUs are dependent on Punjab and Sindh for
their food supply but FATA and AJK are the most heavily dependent units (Table V).
Un-accessed portion of food
Considerable portion of food can remain un-accessed mainly because of the impacts of
different factors at different levels. Overall in Pakistan, 35 percent of food remains
un-accessed. As far as the AUs are concerned the inter-provincial/unit movement of food
has affected the level of the people’s food consumption and where significant parts of the
food supply could have been moved to other AUs. For example, in food-surplus AUs
such as Punjab and Singh, UPF is over 40 percent as a consequence of unrecorded
inter-provincial food movement along with the effects of other physical and economic
factors. The fooddeficit AUs suchas KPK, FATA, GB and AJK consume more food than
they produce, which means that significant portion of the consumed food comesfrom the
food-surplus AUs. It is also important to note that the food deficit AUs are smaller units
with less population compared to the food-surplus AUs. Therefore, only small portion of
the food from food-surplus AUs can provide the demand of these smaller units. Hence,
significant portion of the food from food-surplus AUs and also Balochistan remains
un-accessed, as clearly indicated in the overall 35 percent UPF in Pakistan.
Food gap
The data on FCR shows that the country’s population consumes only 71 percent of the
standard requirements for food, thus the FG is almost 29 percent (Table V) which is an
alarming situation in a country that produces more than its domestic requirements.
IJDI
11,2
174
The situation is also not much different in the AUs especially in Punjab and Sindh which
are noted as food-surplus AUs in terms of production. The deeply food deficit AUs such
as FATA, GB and AJK even have higher FCR with more than 60 percent FCR values
(Table V). Notably, food deficit unit KPK has the maximum FCR value which is even
more than the food-surplus AUs which could be due to the choice of food items by the
local population in addition to other physical and economic factors. People in KPK prefer
to consume nutritionally rich food items such as dried fruits, fats, meat and nuts but in
other AUs especially Punjab and Sindh their people spend considerable amount of
money on fresh fruits or vegetables which have comparatively lower nutritional value.
Even in FATA, AJK and GB, their respective FCR values are higher compared to their
production because of their people’s choice of food items along with other factors
although they are dependent on food supplied from Punjab and Sindh through
different channels.
4. Major factors of food security
Overall, Pakistan is producing more than what it domestically requires though the level
of production is well below the country’s production potential. Food production varies
from one AU to another because of disparities in the use of land and water resources,
supply of inputs and accessibility to credit facilities as well as the different biophysical
conditions of the units. Punjab and Sindh have significantly higher food production with
surplus of nearly 30 percent and ten percent, respectively (Table V) compared to the
other AUs because of better production factors. If the production factors in these other
AUs are improved, the self-sufficiency level of food in the respective AUs would also
increase. Improved self-sufficiency would definitely conclude with higher food supply
and lower prices in domestic markets, and ultimately improved economic access to food
commodities. So, self-sufficiency indirectly can reduce UPF and FG. Some of the factors
which are influencing the level self-sufficiency are discussed below.
As far as land resources of the country are concerned, 25 percent of its land is
experiencing salinity intrusion and water logging problems, out of which 13 percent has
been poorly utilized for agricultural operations and the other 12 percent has not been
cultivated at all (MINFAL-ASP, 2005). With whatever surplus the government has,
about 67 percent is being distributed to landless households locally known as Harees,
mazarae and Khaet Mazdoors under different schemes particularly in Punjab and Sindh
while almost 33 percent of cultivable land is not allocated nor utilized for any food crop
cultivation (MINFAL-ASP, 2005). This undistributed land can surely contribute to the
national food production, if it is only allocated to poor households or even to agriculture
professionals. In Punjab Province, the provincial government has taken initiative to allot
arable land to agricultural graduates with the objective of promoting agricultural
development and enhancing food production. If the saline and water logged land areas
are managed properly while the un-allotted land is distributed to be used for productive
agricultural practices, collectively the produce from this land could add to the net food
availability by 507 kcal per day per capita provided that the main cereal crop cultivated
on such prospective area is wheat (Hussain, 2010). In the other AUs, no steps for the
effective use of all cultivable lands are being undertaken as yet, especially in Balochistan
Province where huge areas can be brought under cultivation of fruits like apples, grapes
and cherry. Similarly, in the case of water resources, there seems to be a disparity in the
distribution and utilization among the AUs. In Punjab and Singh Provinces, well
Food security
175
established irrigation systems are in place. If only the government would also construct
smaller water reservoirs in other AUs particularly in Balochistan, its food production
situation could be a lot better than its present status. In recent years, utilization of the
water resources leads to both direct and indirect effects on food production in the
country, even in the food-surplus AUs. As for the direct effects, shortage of irrigation
water leads to shortfalls in food production while water shortage could also result in
severe downfall of the functioning of hydropower to generate electricity, as the indirect
effect. Considering that the total available surface water in Pakistan is 142.5 million acre
feet (MAF), it is dismal to note that only 42 percent reaches the farm level (MINFAL-ASP,
2005) due to mismanagement and water losses at different levels. Even in the main food
producing AUs such as Punjab and Sindh, farmers at the tail areas of canals suffer from
severe shortage of irrigation water and have to depend on ground water resources for
their needs. Adding to the problem, farmers have been facing difficulties to operate
electric tube-wells since the start of 2010 due to energy crisis.
Inadequate supply of inputs is also one of the factors that results in low food
production. In view of the inadequacy of inputs such as fertilizers, pesticides and fuel,
wheat production achieves only 32 percent of its potential yield while paddy rice and
sugarcane achieve nearly 25 percent of their potential yields, and in vegetables, potato
achieves nearly 40 percent of its potential yield (Muhammad, 2000). Overall Pakistan
achieves 30 percent of its potential yield. During the recent years (2008-2010), farmers
have been confronted with tough situations as far supply of inputs is concerned. Local
production of agricultural inputs is less than the local demand with a gap of 1.5 million
tonnes between local production and demand of fertilizers (FFC, 2009). Like improved
inputs in crops, advance breeds of livestock are also necessary to improve production
along with proper awareness of farmers. Farmers in Pakistan particularly those in
Balochistan, KPK, FATA, AJK and BG lack adequate access to inputs and advance
livestock breeds considering that provision of adequate inputs could result in
substantial increase in food production in all the AUs. If Pakistan could achieve even
50 percent of the achievable yield or food production, its net food availability would
increase by 100 percent.
The situation of the country’s formal credit system is similar in almost all AUs. The
system does not contribute significantly to productivity because of ambiguous
procedures and small amounts of approved credit granted (Amjad and Hasnu, 2007).
The statistics from the Census of Agriculture show that farmers with landholdings of up
to 0.5 ha receive only 8 percent of the credit they applied for from formal institutions
whereas farmers with landholdings of 0.5-2.0 ha receive only 19 percent of formal credit.
Meanwhile, farmers with landholdings of 2.0-10 ha, 10-60 ha and above 60 ha are
granted 48, 59 and 60 percent of the credit they applied for from formal sources,
respectively (ACO, 2000). Inadequacy of formal credits granted to majority of small and
medium farmers has surely created negative impacts on the national food production.
There are some critical physical and economic factors directly inducing the higher
values of UPF and FG. These factors are post-production losses, illegal movement of
food commodities, inefficient procurement and distribution system, marketing and
pricing systems, and higher food inflation rate. Post harvest losses usually occur during
handling, storage and transport that is why the result is a significant reduction of the
net food availability. For example, considerable quantity of cereals are lost after
harvest annually including about nine percent losses to wheat, 12 percent to rice and
IJDI
11,2
176
13 percent to maize production. Losses to citrus production could come to around
28-40 percent while losses to potato and onion production after harvest could be 27 and
26 percent, respectively (Din, 1998). These losses happen in all seven AUs but in Punjab
and Sindh higher losses to cereals production have been recorded. Balochistan and KPK
have surplus production in fruits such as apples, apricot, grapes, nuts and dried fruits
but Balochistan has also higher fruit production losses due to poor road network that
constrains the farmers from accessing the major output markets. Turbat sub-district of
Balochistan is a good example where farmers produce surplus quantities of dates but
due to limited market access they have to feed the dates to their livestock. Considerable
portion of the production of apples, cherry and grapes is also lost because of major
constraints in reaching the markets (Hussain, 2010). This is true not only for crops but
also in livestock production where higher post-production losses are experienced
particularly in Punjab and Sindh. For example, the government does not provide
collection system for milk produced in rural areas. Although some private companies
like Nestle collect milk from the rural areas but their networks do not have wide range of
coverage in the whole country.
Illegal movement of food commodities across the borders also adds to the widening FG
in AUs even in the food-surplus AUs. In the first stage, food commodities are being
illegally transported from food-surplus AUs like Punjaband Sindh to food deficitAUs like
FATA and Balochistan resulting in increased FG in Punjab and Sindh. At the second
stage which is more serious, food commodities are being smuggled to neighboring
countries resulting in losses to the national food production and wider FG. The long
stretch of land that borders Pakistan with Afghanistan and Iran makes the illegal
movement of commodities easy to undertake but very difficult to control. In the border
areas of the country particularly in FATA, the government does not seem to have strong
law enforcement making it convenient for smugglers to transfer food items across the
border. Pakistan has been losing more than five percent of wheat and around ten percent of
rice production from these illegal border movements while more than 11 percent is lost
from the refined sugar production. Notably, Pakistan imports pulses to adequately supply
its local demand but over threepercent of local production of pulses is also being illegally
transported to Afghanistan and Iran (Table VI). Therefore, Pakistanloses 130 kcal per day
per capita of available food because of the illegal movement of commodities across the
borders. Some items are also smuggled into Pakistan from these two countries but these
are mainly non-food items such as electronics, petrol/fuel and blankets, among others.
There is a need to control this illegal movement of food commodities by legalizing such
activities through regularized terms under fair trade agreements by the governments of
the three countries. It has been observed that illegal transfer of food commodities mostly
emanates from Punjab and Singh Provinces to FATA and Balochistan and passes on to
Afghanistan and Iran. This illegal transfer is one of the reasons for the food shortage,
higher prices of food commodities in local markets and wider FG even in the food-surplus
AUs (Table V) because smuggled food commodities remain un-accessed by the local
population in the AUs and the whole country.
Government procurement and distribution systems also appear to be inefficient in
handling the country’s national food production. The government procurement system
(GPS) was established to stabilize the food reserves and supply in the country, and to
offer subsidized prices to the producers. Under this system, procurement centers of the
Pakistan Agricultural Storage and Services Corporation, Ltd (PASSCO) have been
Food security
177
established throughout the country to procure food commodities mainly cereals. The
total storage capacity in Pakistan including those of the PASSCO centers could
accommodate 5,165 thousand tones of cereals while the total annual procurement on the
average could only reach as much as 4,747 thousand tones. It shows that the annual
procurement is only 15 percent of total production of cereals (MINFAL-ASP, 2005). For
perishable commodities like vegetables and fruits, there are 470 cold storage facilities
with storage capacity of 707 thousand tones (AARI, 2005) but on the average storage is
only for around eight percent of the total domestic production. This implies that the
government and relevant agencies are able to procure only smaller portions of the food
production from food-surplus AUs particularly cereals for onward distribution to food
deficit AUs like FATA, GB, Balochistan and AJK, similarly from fruits-surplus AUs like
Balochistan and KPK to Punjab and Sindh. The limited procurement of food production
easily results in higher food losses leading to lower FCR and widening of food gaps in the
AUs (Table V). As far as distribution of procured food is concerned, utility stores being
run by the Utility Stores Corporation of Pakistan (Pvt.) Limited, have served as the main
food distribution channels and there are 400 such utility stores in the country.
In Balochistan, FATA and GB, their poor road network systems and natural
topographical land features have constrained many people from reaching distant
government food centers, while those who can reach the centers are encountering certain
problems. While most poor people remain in lines in front of utility stores for long period
of time, the people with influential references get the food items from the stores first.
Moreover, the quality of the food items is not monitored regularly by government
officials especially with respect to freshness and wholesomeness. Transparen cy is direly
needed in the distribution of food to poor population because the government is already
partly responsible for the inefficient distribution of local food production in view of the
low storage capacity procured commodities.
Marketing system is also problematic and looks failed in reducing the UPF and FG
in all AUs. On papers, the marketing legislation in Pakistan is supposed to be
consumer-friendly but it has operational problemssuch as lack of monitoring and control.
The main objective of marketing legislations is to protect both producers and consumers
Average annual illegal
movement (000) tonnes
Food items
To
Afghanistan
To
Iran Total
Loss of kcal per day
per capita
Net domestic
production
(000) tonnes/
annum
Illegal
movement
(% of NDP)
Wheat 1,131.2 0 1,131.2 56.84 21,728.25 5.21
Sugar 547.5 5.0 552.5 37.08 4,943.86 11.18
Rice 219.0 270.0 489.0 31.65 4,771.29 10.25
Edible oil 4.38 0 11.38 1.77 755.74 1.51
Vegetables 42.5 35.0 77.5 0.87 3,740.02 2.07
Pulses 29.2 0 29.2 0.43 948.17 3.08
Fruits 0 3.0 48.0 0.81 4,828.23 0.99
Livestock
(meat) 0 15.2 15.2 0.50 1,855.54 0.82
130
Source: Based on secondary data (AARI, 2005; PARC, 2003; Sharif et al., 2000)
Table VI.
Illegal movement of food
commodities to
Afghanistan and Iran
IJDI
11,2
178
through subsidized prices, fair regulations, uniform units of measurements, and efficient
distribution of good quality agricultural products. These objectives are set under
Agricultural Produce Markets Ordinance 1978 and Weight and Measures Enforcement
Act 1975. Market committees are formed in all towns and cities which are tasked to
monitor market functions and activities such as pricing, quality, regulations and units of
measurements of all food commodities like cereals, eggs, meat, pulses, vegetables, fruits,
sugar and other processed products (Din, 1998). However, due to ineffective control and
monitoring, none of the objectives of market legislation had been achieved. Food hoarding
is also rampant inall AUs ofPakistanthat sometimes the people have to face the so-called
cosmetic food shortage[3]. Most of the food industries that produce flour and sugar as well
as rice mills are owned or controlled by influential personalities in society. Therefore,
cosmetic food shortages have now become very common in Pakistan initially in Punjab
and Sindh, and consequently affecting also the other AUs. For example, the wheat-flour
crisis in 2008 was created by mill owners because they hoarded the flour for expected
higher returns in the future. Despite the existence of around 400 flour-millshaving surplus
stocks, the common people continue to face flour shortages. Another example is when the
mills announced in 2009 that the price of sugar should be 54 Rupees per kilogram, so the
judiciary interfered and cut the price to 40 Rupees per kilogram. As a result, the mills
hoarded their sugar stocks and created a cosmetic shortage in the market, and in the end
the people had to buy sugar on black marketprices of around 100-120 Rupeesper kilogram
(Hussain, 2010). Even in regulated markets where offices of the market committees are
established, middlemen are controlling the system and buying products at prices lower
than the floor prices[4] and selling the products at prices higher than the ceiling prices[5]
resulting in lower income of producers and decreased purchasing power of consumers.
Market committee offices are supposed to enforce support or subsidized prices, quality,
measurement units and regulations but their role and presence in the markets had been
ineffective when it comes to market operations. Livestock producers are also having
similar concerns as there are no specific markets to sell their milk products and thus, are
still heavily dependent on local village collectors, who seem to exploit the farmers by
offering them lower prices. The same case is also true in local livestock markets where
middlemen locally known as Beoparis control the marketing system of meat locally
known as Bakkar mandis and in the end earn bigger market shares compared to those of
the farmers in all of the AUs. The governmenttherefore needs to review the whole pricing
and marketing systems to secure the people from future price instability and to achieve
food security in a sustainable way rather than achieving only the short-run objectives
(Byerlee et al., 2006).
Higher inflation rate is also one of the factors that contribute to the widening FG and
UPF, and lowering of the FCR in all of the AUs. As a consequence of escalating inflation
rate, the purchasing power of people for food items has significantly decreased
especially in all AUs of Pakistan. Taking into consideration the period 2000-2001 as base
year and examining the purchasing power (PP), it is very clear that this has been
continuously decreasing (Figure 2). The PP for food items is notably lower than the PP
for non-food items, as the PP for food items has gone down to 46 percent in 2008-2009
compared to that of base year 2000-2001. It can also be observed from Figure 2 that there
has been no year that the PP has remained stable but rather continues to diminish every
next year, making many people becoming food-poor or food-deprived who in the base
year 2000-2001 appeared to be marginally food secure. These information came from
Food security
179
official figures compiled for this study through various secondary sources but the
ground facts are even more adverse because of the interventions of black market prices
that lead to cosmetic shortages and hoarding. In short, the people’s real time PP is
actually much lower than those in the compiled official statistics.
In addition to the abovementioned seemingly controllable factors, there are
uncontrollable concerns that affect food security in the country. These include natural
disasters and calamities that lead to reductions in food production, creating physical
constraints such as damages to roads and bridges, and lowering of purchasing powers.
During the last decade from 2001 to 2010, disasters that occurred in the country
had resulted in lower food production and consumption, and created transitory food
insecurity in affected areas particularly in KPK, AJK, Sindh, Punjab, and Balochistan.
Nevertheless, these are beyond the control of the government except the few
human-made disasters such as terrorism and violence. Recent disasters such as
earthquakes and floods had badly destroyed many roads and bridges. In 2005, a deadly
earthquake with magnitude of 7.6 hit KPK and AJK which led to the blockage of access
routes to markets as results of land-slides and related damages. Millions of households
became transitory food insecure due to the loss of their income activities, and damages to
crops and livestock. A devastating flood in 2010 resulted in damages to roads, bridges,
crops and livestock in four AUs such as KPK, Punjab (southern part), Balochistan and
Sindh, and around 7.8 million people became vulnerable to lasting food insecurity (WFP,
2010, p. 18). These physical shocks not only affected physical access of the local people to
food but also affected future food availability and economic access in the long run. For
Figure 2.
Consumers’ purchasing
power Source: Based on Secondary Data (FBS, 2009)
IJDI
11,2
180
example, the flood in 2010 resulted in decreased rice production by 22 percent (USDA,
2010) leading to decreased food exports and reduced farmers’ incomes which ultimately
affected the national economy. It also rocked the income level of many people due to the
reduction in cotton production by three percent (USDA, 2010) which also led to reduced
purchasing power of food items. This happened not only in crops but also affected
livestock because the average 40 percent loss of livestock had significantly affected
many households (WFP, 2010, pp. 11-12). Terrorism has also become a form of disaster
for Pakistan affecting mostly the common people bringing about particular damages to
crops and inadequacies in income opportunities especially for the people in FATA and
KPK. Violence that comes with the government’s war against terrorism had displaced
about 3.275 million people in 2010 as they had to be evacuated to safer parts
of the country. During such displacement period, the affected people suffered from
transitory food insecurity (Hussain, 2010).
5. Conclusions and policy recommendations
Current debates on food security in Pakistan go on with contradictory statements and
figures. Independent international organizations like the Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the Maplecroft claimed that Pakistan is
one of the countries which are at the greater risk of food insecurity but government
statistics and statements present comparatively better situations. The findings of this
study however, conclude that Pakistan is still lagging behind especially in achieving the
objectives of its national food policy. Although the country is believed to be producing
less than 40 percent of its actual potential, this is actually true because of the inefficient
utilization of available land and water resources, inadequate supply of inputs and
inefficient formal credit system. Despite producing below its potential, the country is
almost self-sufficient in most of the important food commodities. Even if food production
is adequate but there is a gap between food availability and consumption by the
populace because a considerable part of the food produced is un-accessed due to key
physical, economic and sometimes natural factors. The key physical factors include
post-production losses, illegal movement of food commodities across the borders and
inefficient structure of food procurement and distribution systems. The key economic
factors have brought about prices instability, ineffective marketing system and higher
inflation rates resulting in lower food purchasing power of the people. In addition,
natural disasters have also seriously impacted on food production and level of
consumption in the country pushing a huge portion of the population under transitory
but could become lasting food insecurity if such concerns are not addressed.
Pakistan needs to review its current policies at all levels in order to achieve the
objectives of its national food policy. Notwithstanding the adequate supply of inputs and
existence of formal credit system, the efficient use of natural resources especially land
and water is also urgently needed to optimize the production potentials of important
food commodities. The Government of Punjab has initiated some steps towards
utilization of arable lands by providing these lands to agricultural graduates. Once this
policy of enhancing agricultural production is proved to be successful, it could provide a
good example for other AUs to also undertake. As far as water resources are concerned,
the issue has already been politicized as the proposed construction of big water
reservoirs in Pakistan had been under debate for quite some time without getting any
results. One alternative would be to construct smaller reservoirs in all the AUs.
Food security
181
Evaluating the performance of institutions is more important than just formulating
policies. Marketing and pricing policies are public-friendly on papers but the actual
unsatisfactory performance of concerned institutions makes such policies ineffective in
controlling price fluctuations and cosmetic shortages, and in promoting uniform levels
of quality and measurements. There is need to properly monitor the whole marketing
system in order to encourage the relevant institutions to be transparent in their
operations and in the end become performance-oriented. In this regard, direct
communication with the public is very important by developing a physical and virtual
(internet) complaints and feedback mechanisms rather than fostering the conventional
top down monitoring system. Likewise, in food procurement and distribution systems,
policy changes are very urgent and necessary. National storage capacity should
be increased to reduce post-production losses while illegal movements of food
commodities through middlemen should be minimized if not completely eliminated.
Evaluation of the performance of food procurement and distribution systems is also
suggested based on a public-developed monitoring system. Particularly, in the case of
illegal movements of food commodities to neighboring countries, an appropriate trade
agreement with corresponding terms and regulations should be established to curb the
unreported food losses from such illegal food movement because it would be quite
difficult to stop or monitor this activity because of the very long stretch of areas that
boarder Pakistan with Afghanistan and Iran.
Macro-economic factors like inflation also cause price instability and lower the
purchasing powers of people for food items especially if the people’s income levels
remain very low. Therefore, the government should establish effective policies for
stabilizing food supply and prices in local markets. High dependence on foreign debts
and imported energy sources also result in more incidences of price shocks in local
markets. Rise in fuel prices in international markets leads to higher production costs
in developing countries subsequently resulting in higher food prices. Some quick steps
can be taken by the government to reduce the effects of global market changes. As in
2007-2008, the re-emerging and persistent inflation on food prices resulted in sharp
inflation from 50 to 100 percent especially in basic staples in South Asian countries
particularly in Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. India quickly reacted to such
situation by banning the exportation of main food items like common rice, wheat, and
corn and further suspending future trading of these food commodities to ensure
consistent supply of important food commodities in the local markets at stable and
affordable prices. In Pakistan, such quick steps were not undertaken in cereals
trade, e.g. rice therefore food supply and prices in domestic markets were since then
not stabilized.
As observed in recent past, natural disasters have left severe consequences on food
security in the affected areas of the country. Huge part of the population became
food-poor due to loss of assets, damages to agricultural land and infrastructures, and
limited and reduced income opportunities. The recent flood in 2010 is a good example to
reckon the consequences with. Unfortunately after one year had passed, the government
failed to reconstruct and/or rehabilitate the basic infrastructures like roads and bridges
let alone the other requirements in terms of agricultural support services. Consistent
planning exercise and policy development is therefore necessary to set the currently
affected population in motion and to mitigate the impacts from future disasters.
IJDI
11,2
182
This study has provided baseline of the key factors that influence food security in
Pakistan but based on the findings and possible policy recommendations, it also opens
the door for possible in-depth research on efficient use of water and land resources,
addressing energy crisis, properly managing post-harvest losses, effective marketing
system and food movements, disaster preparedness, mitigation, and management of
macro-economic issues in order to achieve sustainable food security in the country.
Notes
1. Food considered as permissible according to Islamic Sharia/law.
2. An ethnic Indian chew traditionally served during special ceremonies and social functions
which comprises betel leaf, areca nut and slaked lime paste.
3. Artificial shortage of items created and controlled by persons or system despite the food
items being considered as reserves.
4. Government-imposed minimum limit of price to protect producers, which is always greater
than the equilibrium price in markets.
5. Government-imposed maximum limit of price to protect consumers, which is always less
than the equilibrium price in markets.
References
AARI (2005), Distribution of Citrus Fruit in Pakistan, Ayub Agriculture Research Institute,
Faisalabad.
ACO (2000), Census of Agriculture 2000, Agriculture Census Organization, Federal Bureau of
Statistics, Lahore.
Amjad, S. and Hasnu, S. (2007), “Smallholders’ access to rural credit: evidences from Pakistan”,
The Lahore Journal of Economics, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 1-25.
Byerlee, D., Jayne, T.S. and Myers, R.J. (2006), “Managing food price risks and instability in a
liberalizing market environment: overview and policy options”, Food Policy, Vol. 31,
pp. 275-87.
Cumming, R. Jr, Rashid, S. and Gulati, A. (2006), “Grain price stabilization experiences in Asia:
what have we learnt?”, Food Policy, Vol. 31, pp. 302-12.
Din, M.Q. (1998), “Post harvest losses in agriculture commodities and their containments”,
Economic Review, May, available at: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb092/is_n5_
v29/ai_n28706440/ (accessed 9 November 2009).
FAO (2001a), Analysis of the Medium-Term Effects of Hurricane Mitch on Food Security in
Central America, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.
FAO (2001b), A Hand Book, Food Balance Sheet, Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations, Rome.
FAO (2008), Soaring Food Prices: Facts, Perspectives, Impacts and Actions Required, paper
presented at High-Level Conference on World Food Security: The Challenges of Climate
Change and Bio-Energy, Rome, 3-5 June.
FBS (2009), Agriculture, Prices and Population Welfare Statistics, Federal Bureau of Statistics
2009, Statistics Division, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad.
FBS-HIES (2006), Household Integrated Economic Survey 2005-06, Federal Bureau of Statistics,
Government of Pakistan, Islamabad.
Food security
183
FFC (2009), Production and Sales of Fertilizers in Pakistan, Fauji Fertilizer Company Limited,
Sadiqabad, available at: www.ffc.cpm.pk/ (accessed 2 Novemver).
FSA (2003), Food Insecurity in Rural Pakistan 2003, Food Security Analysis, World Food
Programme-Sustainable Development Policy Institute (2004), Islamabad.
Government of AJK (2007), “Population of districts of Azad Jammu and Kashmir”, available at:
www.pmajk.gov.pk/home.asp (accessed 23 October 2010).
Government of Pakistan (2008), Economic Survey 2007-08, Ministry of Finance, Government of
Pakistan, Islamabad.
Government of Pakistan (2009), “Food & nutrition”, Economic Survey of Pakistan 2008-09,
Ministry of Finance, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad, pp. 175-6.
Headey, D. and Fan, S. (2008), “Anatomy of a crisis: the causes and consequences of surging food
prices”, Agricultural Economics, Vol. 39, pp. 375-91.
Hussain, A. (2010), Achieving Food Security in Pakistan: Assessment of Current Situation and
Policy Issues at National and Regional Levels, LAP Academic Publishing, Saarbrzcken.
IFDP (2002), “Food sovereignty: a right for all, political statement of the NGO/CSO forum for food
sovereignty”, Institute for Food and Development Policy, World Food Summit, Oakland,
CA, June 14.
Khan, M.A. (2000), Food Security in Pakistan, Asian Productivity Organization, Tokyo.
Kumar, A.G., Roy, D. and Gulati, A. (2010), Liberalizing Food-Grains Markets: Experiences,
Impact, and Lessons from South Asia, Oxford University Press, Oxford, IFPRI Issue
Brief 64, August.
Kyaw, D. (2009), “Rural households’ food security status and coping strategies to food insecurity
in Myanmar”, V.R.F. Series, No. 444, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan.
Maplecroft (2009), Food Security Risk Index 2009, Maplecroft Risk, Responsibility and
Reputation.
MINFAL-ASP (2005), Agriculture Statistics of Pakistan 2004-05, Ministry of Food, Agriculture
and Livestock, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad.
Mittal, S. and Sethi, D. (2009), “Food security in South Asian: issues and opportunities”,
Working Paper No. 240, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations,
Islamabad.
Muhammad, A. (2000), Improved Seed Production and Technology Transfer to Farmers in the
Nena Region, Asianics Agro-Dev. International, Islamabad.
Myers, R.B. (2006), “On the costs of food price fluctuations in low-income countries”, Food Policy,
Vol. 31, pp. 288-301.
Naylor, R. (2011), “Expanding the boundaries of agricultural development”, Food Security, Vol. 3,
pp. 233-51.
PARC (2003), Data Base of Pakistan Agriculture Research Council, Government of Pakistan,
Islamabad.
PCO (2000), Population Census 2000, Population Census Organization, Federal Bureau of
Statistics, Islamabad.
POSDB (2005), Oil Seed Database, Pakistan Oil Seed Development Board. Government of
Pakistan, Islamabad.
RSB (2009), Food Security Guideline RSB Version 1.0, Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuel,
Energy Centre, Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, Switzerland.
IJDI
11,2
184
Samsung Economic Research Institute (2011), New Food Security Strategies in the Age of Global
Food Crisis, Monthly Focus No. 4-2011, Samsung Economic Research Institute,
South Korea.
Sharif, M., Farooq, U. and Bashir, A. (2000), “Illegal trade of Pakistan with Afghanistan and Iran
through Balochistan: size, balance and losses to the public exchequer”, International
Journal of Agriculture and Biology, Vol. 2 No. 3.
Simelton, E. (2011), “Food self-sufficiency and natural hazards in China”, Food Security, Vol. 3,
pp. 35-52.
Sulehri, A.Q. and Ramay, S.A. (2009), Food Security Where We Are (Current Status)and Where
We Want to Go (Way Forward), Parliament of Pakistan, Strengthening Democracy
Through Parliamentary Development, UNDP, Islamabad.
United Nations (2000), United Nations Millennium Declaration, paper presented at 8th Planery
Meeting, United Nations Headquarters, New York, NY, September 8, 2000, Resolution
Adopted by General Assembly.
USDA (2004), National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 17, US Department of
Agriculture, Agriculture Research Service, Beltsville, MD.
USDA (2009), National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 22, US Department of
Agriculture, Agriculture Research Service, Beltsville, MD.
USDA (2010), World Agriculture Production, The 2010/11 Pakistan Flood Damage on Crops,
Circular Series WAP 09-10, US Department of Agriculture.
WFP (2010), Pakistan Flood Impact Assessment, World Food Programme, Rome, September 2010.
Yamane, T. (1967), Statistics: An Introductory Analysis, 2nd ed., Harper and Row, New York, NY.
About the authors
Abid Hussain is a PhD Candidate in Regional and Rural Development Planning at the School of
Environment, Resources and Development, Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand. He has
three and half years experience of work on a supervised agricultural credit scheme launched with
the objective of achieving food security in Pakistan. Currently he is doing research on
smallholders’ food security. Abid Hussain is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:
abidwaqas670@hotmail.com
Professor Jayant Kumar Routray is Coordinator of Regional and Rural Development Planning
at the School of Environment, Resources and Development, Asian Institute of Technology,
Thailand. He has vast experience in regional and rural development planning methodology and
techniques, decentralized planning, evaluation and impact of the study of rural development
programs, rural urban relations, food security, climate change, environmental planning and social
impact assessment, market centers and rural development, rural transport development, and
community forestry. He has published several journal articles in well reputed international
journals.
Food security
185
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
