Chapter 8: In conclusion: rural households of Assam require continuous food based interventions provides a commentary on the role and significance of food based welfare
4.7 CONCLUSION
100
Table 4.7State Issue Price (SIP)/Central Issue Price(CIP) for APL_Grade A rice in Assam, 1995 to 2008
SIP , 1995to 2008 Year CIP
Distance slab
Plain Riverine Hill 01.12.1997 to 28.01.1999 7 (in km)
0 to 5 8.96 8.97 9.02 29.01.1999 to 31.03.2000 9.05
Above 5 to 10 8.98 8.99 9.02 01.04.2000 to 24.07.2000 11.8 Above 10 to 30 8.99 9. 00 9.05 25.07.2000 to 11.07.2001 11.3 Above 30 to 50 9.01 9.03 9.06 12.07.2001 to 31.03.2002 8.3 Above 50 9.02 9.05 9.08 01.04.2002 to 30.06.2002 7.3
01.07.2002 to 18.02.2008 8.3
SIP , 2008 to 2015 Year CIP
Distance slab
Plain Riverine Hill 01.07.2002 to 18.02.2008 8.3 (in km)
0 to 5 9 9.02 9.11 2008-09 8.3
Above 5 to 10 9.04 9.05 9.13 2009-10 8.3
Above 10 to 30 9.07 9.09 9.18 2010-11 8.3
Above 30 to 50 9.1 9.14 9.21 2011-12 8.3
Above 50 9.14 9.18 9.23 2012-13 8.3
2013-14 8.3
Source: The SIP for different geographical slabs has been calculated based on the information provided on transportation costs and profit margins of the fair price shops. Information of CIP is from www.indiastat.com, browsed on 30th June 2017.
include or exclude the beneficiaries accordingly, though in practice the state government failed to do so. After the introduction of TPDS, many BPL households were left out from the benefits of PDS, therefore, GoA has decided to introduce a new state specific food distribution policy as MMASY scheme. The GoA selected 15,000 families per Legislative Assembly Constituency and decided to provide 20kg of rice per household in 2010.However the distribution of rice under this scheme has came down and became irregular after initial two years.
Assam follows a unique method of fixation of SIP based on geographical distance between GPSS and FPSs. SIP for rice in Assam is fixed by dividing the districts into Plain areas, Riverine area and Hill areas and considering the distance between GPSS and FPSs. The distance between GPSS and FPSs is divided into different categories of 0-5km, above 5km- 10km, above 10km-30km, above 30km-50km, and above 50km. However, the norm of keeping SIP of BPL rice within limit of Rs0.50 above the CIP of BPL rice has never been followed in the state.
The state government keeps the SIP always open and never given any strict instruction to the GPSS and FPSs to charge a fix SIP from the consumer. Thus the distributing agencies add the rising fuel price in transportation costs and push the burden to the consumers. Most importantly, the multiple pricing creates lots of information distortions among people. As the SIP is fixed on the basis of geographical categorisation and distance, the SIP may vary from place to place within a district. Thus there are 15 different SIP for BPL and APL rice in the state. There are indications that the levels of information distortions and leakages are very high. This is validated from the cross section data from the village studies in the following chapters.
102 Chapter 5
Socio-Economic Composition of Households Excluded from TPDS:
Errors of Exclusion in the Study Villages
Drawing from the theoretical framework of Sen‘s entitlement approach used in Chapter 1 of this thesis, we know that entitlements play an important role in the capability set of an individual. Public programmes prove to be an important support system to poor households by providing an entitlement to access economic and social benefits inherent in them. Since the TPDS is the single most widely implemented food based welfare programme in Assam, possession of ration cards provide the basic entitlement of food. In the WFP framework of food security assessments, the component of accessibility includes along with income, instruments such as ration card that enables households to be able to access the food.
Therefore an assessment of the extent of households covered under the PDS through distribution of ration cards is the first step in ensuring household level food security.
Households that are not in possession of a ration card are thus automatically excluded from the food based welfare programme. If the excluded households are left out of the fold of PDS, while their socio-economic characteristics show that they are facing destitution, then we may consider their not possessing a ration card as a loss of entitlement and thus reduced capabilities. This chapter discusses coverage of TPDS in the two flood and erosion affected revenue villages of Chaudhurirchar and Kumargaon in Dhubri and Jorhat districts of Assam.
Section 5.1 highlights the basic socio-economic characteristics and distinguishing features of different types of card holding and non-card holding households. A comparative picture is drawn among all households based on average Monthly Per Capita Expenditure (MPCE) variable. Construction of MPCE variable is explained in appendix to chapter 6. Section 5.2
is the analysis of the coverage of TPDS programme in the two villages based on the size of operational holdings of the households and occupation of the head of the households. This section also discusses how income targeting has failed with the example of MMASY scheme. Section 5.3 contains discussion on targeting errors in the studied villages. Inclusion and exclusion of beneficiaries based on NFSA 2013 is also discussed. Section 5.4 outlines the pattern of inclusion and exclusion of households in TPDS based on the estimates of NSSO 61st quinquennial round report in rural Assam. This section shows that large proportion of households in the state is excluded from TPDS and the village data further validates the NSSO findings. Section 5.5 concludes the chapter.