The Determinants of Rural Household Food Security for Landless Households of the Punjab, Pakistan

Transcription

1 The Determnants of Rural Household Food Securty for Landless Households of the Punjab, Pakstan Muhammad Khald Bashr ab*, Steven Schlzz a, and Ram Pandt a a School of Agrcultural and Resource Economcs, The Unversty of Western Australa, Crawley, WA 6009, Australa b Unversty of Agrculture, Fasalabad, Pakstan *E-mal address: khald450@uaf.edu.pk June 2012 Workng Paper 1208 School of Agrcultural and Resource Economcs Ctaton: Bashr, M.K., Schlzz, S. and Pandt, R. (2012) The determnants of rural household food securty: The Case of Landless Households of the Punjab, Pakstan, Workng Paper 1208, School of Agrcultural and Resource Economcs, Unversty of Western Australa, Crawley, Australa. Copyrght remans wth the authors of ths document.

2 Abstract: The Determnants of Rural Household Food Securty for Landless Households of the Punjab, Pakstan Ths paper examnes the stuaton of food securty for the landless rural households of the Punjab provnce n Pakstan. Prmary data from 576 landless households were collected from 12 dstrcts of the provnce. About 27% of the sample households were measured to be food nsecure. Household s monthly ncome and household head s educaton levels of mddle and ntermedate were postvely mpactng household food securty. On the other hand, household heads age and famly sze were negatvely assocated wth household food securty. Rural household food securty can be mproved by focussng on educaton, creaton of ncome generatng opportuntes and famly plannng programs. Keywords: landless households, determnants, food securty, rural areas, Punjab, Pakstan JEL Classfcaton: I30, Q18 and R20. 1 Introducton Food nsecurty s ncreasng n the world where 925 mllon people are undernourshed. Out of them, about 900 mllon people are lvng n developng countres (FAO, 2010). More than 70% of these people lve n rural areas and depend, drectly or ndrectly, on agrculture for ther lvng. Usually, there are lmted number of markets and less dversty and avalablty of food tems n rural areas that affect food securty of rural households (Morrs et al., 1992). The majorty of the developng countres under-nvest n the agrcultural sector due to whch these households are more vulnerable to prce nstablty. A sharp declne was observed n the overall rate of growth n agrcultural research and development nvestment n developng countres, snce the late 1980s. The man focus of agrcultural nvestment remaned on exportable crops to generate foregn exchange that forced countres to rely on contnued low nternatonal food prces to meet natonal food demand. Ths approach faled to fulfl the desred results (IAASTD, 2008). In contrast, Pakstan acheved food self suffcency n the 1980s, (Gera, 2004) and mantans ts status of food self suffcent country (Bashr et al., 2007; and 2012). The economy of Pakstan, beng a transtory economy, depends manly on ts agrcultural sector. It adds about 22% towards the total GDP and employs about 45% of the workforce. Moreover, the rural areas of the country are provdng shelter to more than 65% of the populaton (GOP, 2011). Despte the fact that Pakstan s one of the largest producers of many agrcultural commodtes of the world (FAO, 2011) and havng the status of food self suffcency, 26% of the populaton s undernourshed (FAO, 2010). Punjab s the largest provnce, populaton wse, of the country. It s the home to more than 73 mllon people.e. 55% of Pakstan s populaton (GOP, 1998). The agrcultural sector of the provnce has the largest share n the country s agrcultural GDP.e. 57%. More than 70% of the households are landless n the provnce. To earn ther lvelhood, they are mostly engaged n nformal actvtes (Anwar et al., 2004). Such households are the most vulnerable ones to suffer from food nsecurty (Yasn, 2000). Ths study ams to examne food securty of the landless rural households of the Punjab provnce. Key research questons are;

3 1. What levels of food securty are experenced by the landless households of the provnce? 2. Whch soco-economc factors correlate wth and best explan the levels of food securty of these households? Results of ths study are expected to provde useful nformaton both for polcy makers and researchers n ther efforts to mprove rural household food securty. Rest of the paper s organzed as follows: methodology s presented n secton 2; results are presented and dscussed n secton 3and secton 4 concludes the paper. 2 Methodology Data Collecton The provnce was sub-dvded nto three regons on the bass of homogenetes n geographcal characterstcs. The provnce has 36 dstrcts. The dstrcts stuated n the south of the Provnce and have desert and mxed characterstcs of desert and plans were kept together to formulate South Punjab regon. The dstrcts havng characterstcs of plans only were jontly termed as Central Punjab regon and those dstrcts that are stuated meters above the sea level formulated North Punjab regon. The regons were asymmetrc n terms of dstrct numbers.e. 11, 17 and 8 n South, Central and North Punjab, respectvely. It was decded to collect data from one thrd of the total dstrcts (.e. 12) to make t a representatve sample of the dstrcts. A proportonate samplng procedure was adopted to fnalze the number of dstrcts from each regon that came out wth 3, 6 and 3 dstrcts from each regon, respectvely. The dstrcts were selected on bass of homogenety n dstrct populaton, vllages (numbers) and avalablty of rrgaton water. Fgure 1: Sub-regons and dstrct selecton Selected dstrcts One percent of the total vllages were randomly selected from each dstrct. Ths came out to be 72 vllages (.e. 6*12). From each vllage, 8 landless households were selected, randomly. The total sample sze, thus, numbered 576 households (.e. 72*8). The requred nformaton was collected usng a well desgned ntervew schedule. Detaled nformaton on varous aspects relatng to food securty ncludng household sze, household type, household ncome, expendtures, ownershp of lvestock asset and food ntake were obtaned from the household heads. Data analyss

4 Data were analysed n two stages: stage one calculates the household food securty status; and stage two fnds out the determnants of food securty. Food securty status of the landless households was measured by calculatng ther per capta calore ntakes 1 usng a 7 days recall method. The calculated calores were converted nto per capta ntakes after adjustng to adult equvalent unts to cancel out the mpacts of age and gender dfferences (see Annex-II). The calculated per capta calore ntake was, then, compared to a threshold level defned by the Government of Pakstan for ts rural areas.e Kcal/capta/day (GOP, 2003). The households whose per capta calore ntake were equal to or above ths threshold level were consdered as food secure households. Mathematcally defned as: n ad Y 2450 (1) C Where; Y s the food securty status of th landless household (1 for food secure and 0 for food nsecure), ad C are the adjusted calore ntakes of th landless household, and n s the sample sze.e. 576 Despte the crtcsm on the detary ntake method, the selecton s justfed because the selected households belong to the lowest ncome group who often have to deal wth uncertanty ther food provsonng on a daly bass (Yasn, 2000). For them, fllng ther stomachs s more mportant than to choose from a taster food. To avod ambgutes due to lack of consensus on thresholds and to ensure maxmum precson, the threshold level defned by the Government of Pakstan for rural households s used. Determnants of rural household food securty for the selected household category were dentfed usng a bnary logstc regresson model. The bnary form of the dependent varable.e. 0 for food nsecure and 1 for food secure, guded us to use ths model (see for example Feleke et al., 2005; Babatunde et al., 2007 and Bashr et al., 2010). The probablty of the occurrence of an event for more than one explanatory varable s drectly estmated usng ths model (Halu, and Ngatu, 2007). Assumng a lnear relatonshp between food securty status and varous explanatory varables, the functon Y can be wrtten as: n Y X e (2) X represents the vector of soco- Where, represents the coeffcents of the model, economc factors, and e s the error term. As the dependent varable s n a bnary form, the model can be re-wrtten n terms of the probablty of a household becomng food secure as: ( Y 1 X x ) e (3) Where, s the probablty of th household becomng food secure, x s the vector of socoeconomc factors, and e s the error term. The general form of logt can be wrtten for equaton 3 as: 1 Calores were calculated from Annex-I

5 log t( ) x (4) Equaton (4) can be re-wrtten for the explanatory varables as: ( Y ) HHMI Edu 8 Where: P o Edu 9 1 M Edu I o AHHH 10 2 Edu 11 HHS TEHH 3 G 4 HHT OL 5 (5) 6 L OL ) = Probablty of the th household to become food secure (dummy 0/1) ( Y 0 = Constant term 1 11 = Coeffcents of the explanatory varables HHMI = Monthly ncome of the th household (Pak Rs) AHHH = Age of the th household head (years) TEHH = Total number of earners n the th household (numbers) HHT = Household type (dummy 0 = nuclear and 1 = jont) OL L = Ownershp large lvestock (cows and buffalos) anmals by the th household (numbers) OL S = Ownershp small lvestock (goats and sheep) anmals by the th household (numbers) Edu P = Educatonal level of the th household s head, (dummy, 0 = otherwse and 1 = prmary.e. completed fve schoolng years = grade 5) Edu M = Educatonal level of the th household s head (dummy, 0 = otherwse and 1 = mddle.e. completed eght schoolng years = grade 8) Edu I = Educatonal level of the th household s head (dummy, 0 = otherwse and 1 = up to ntermedate.e. completed ten or twelve schoolng years = grade 10 and/or 12 Edu G = Educatonal level of the th household s head (dummy, 0 = otherwse and 1 = graduaton or above 7 S 3 Results and Dscusson Table 1 shows the results for food securty stuaton of the selected landless households of the Punjab provnce. Accordng to the results, more than 27% of the sample households are measured to be food nsecure. Ths s alarmngly hgh compared to an earler study for Fasalabad dstrct of the same provnce. About 20% the sample sem-rural households (.e. landless households lvng n sem-rural (per-urban) areas) were measured to be food nsecure (Bashr et al., 2010). Ths mples that the stuaton has worsened for the landless household durng one year s tme perod. The ncdence of food nsecurty s hgher than the average undernourshment n the country.e.26% (FAO, 2010). Table 1. Food securty status Frequency Percent Food nsecure

6 Food secure Total Data source: Feld survey, Descrptve statstcs The results of descrptve statstcs are presented n Table 2. It s evdent from these results that the lowest calore ntake of these households was as low as 590 Kcal/capta/day whch s very low. On the other hand, the hghest calores ntake was about 5000 Kcal/capta/day suggestng a great dversty n food ntake. The average calore ntake was about 3000 Kcal/capta/day whch s above the threshold level. The mnmum household monthly ncome was Rs 3000 whch s far less than government s announced mnmum wage rate of Rs The average monthly ncome was slghtly above Rs wth the hghest ncome of Rs The age of household head ranged from 23 to 75 years wth an average of 45 years. Average household sze of selected households was 6 persons per household wth mnmum of 2 and maxmum of 18 members. Numbers of earners n a household, ownershp of both lvestock assets (large and small anmals) ranged from 1 to 5, 0 to 15 and 0 to 10, respectvely. Table 2: Descrptve Statstcs Mn Max Mean Per capta calore ntake (879.1) Income (6424.1) Age (10.4) famly sze (2.3) Earners (0.6) Lvestock (large anmals) (2.3) Lvestock (small anmals) (1.6) Data source: Feld survey, Determnants of household food securty for landless households The results of the bnary logstc regresson are presented n Table 3. Accordng to the results 5 varables are statstcally sgnfcant. In terms of predctve effcency, the model predcted wth about 80% accuracy (see Table 3 above). The result of Hosmer and Lemeshow (H-L) test s non-sgnfcant at p>0.05, suggestng the acceptance of the null hypothess that the model fts to the data well. On the other hand, the values of Cox & Snell and Nagelkerke R 2 explan that the model explans 27 and 39% varatons n the data, respectvely. These measures are also known as pseudo R 2 and ther results cannot be tested n an nferental framework (Menard, 2000) hence are not a good measure of goodness of ft (Hosmer and Lemeshow, 2000). The estmates of the probabltes, n bnary regresson, are explaned n terms of the oddsratos (ORs) 2. The results of sgnfcant varables are explaned below: Household s monthly ncome s the total monthly ncome of the household from all sources. The coeffcent of ths varable s postvely sgnfcant mplyng a postve relatonshp between food securty and monthly ncome. The magntude of coeffcent s small suggestng that the mpact of monthly ncome must be explaned for an ncrease of Rs 1000 nstead of a one rupee ncrease. Ths can be done by convertng the value of the coeffcent nto OR for an ncrease of Rs 1000 as; exp *1000 = An ncrease of Rs 1000 n monthly ncome of a 2 Ths s the rato of the odds of an event occurrng n one group to the odds of t occurrng n another group (Grmes and Schulz, 2008).

7 household ncreases the chances of food securty by tmes or by 10.5% 3. Earler, Bashr et al., (2012) found that an ncrease of Rs ncreases the chances of rural households to become food secure by 5%. Smlarly, usng categorcal varables, Bashr et al. (2010) also found a postve mpact of ncome on food securty. They found that the households belongng to the ncome group of Rs , had 15 tmes more chances of achevng food securty compared to the households who belonged to the ncome group of Rs ($0 55). For Inda, Sndhu et al. (2008) usng the same analytcal technque for Inda, found that the chances of food securty ncreases by 30% wth an ncrease of 1000 Indan Rupees n monthly ncomes. In a dfferent context, Onanwa and Wheelock (2006) found that chances of a household to become food secure ncreases by 5% wth an ncrease of households annual ncome by $1000 for a famly wthout chldren n the USA. These ncome effects on food securty are relatvely hgh compared to our fndng perhaps due to the soco-economc dfferences of the study areas. The age of the household head has a negatve sgn showng an nverse relatonshp between the age of household head and food securty. It ndcates that an ncrease of age year n the age of household head decreases the chances food securty by 4.5%. The younger people are stronger than the elders and can perform tougher jobs n feld. Moreover, households wth older heads are the multgeneratonal households havng more retred and/ or older persons to feed. Ths may explan the negatve effect of ths varable on household food securty. In a related study, Bashr et al. (2012) found that an ncrease of one year n the age of household head decreases the chances of a household to become food secure by 3%. Smlar relatonshp was observed by Ttus and Adetokunbo (2007) for Ngera usng a dfferent statstcally technque. On the contrary, for USA, t was found that one year ncrease n the age of household head decreases the chances of a household to become food nsecure by 2% (Onanwa and Wheelock, 2006). Household sze also has a negatve sgn explanng the negatve mpact on food securty. An ncrease of an addtonal member decreases the chances of food securty by tmes.e. 41.8%. A fndng smlar what Bashr et al. (2012) found n an earler study. They found that an ncrease of an addtonal famly member decreases the chances of a household to become food secure by 31%. Earler n 2010, for an adjacent dstrct to our study area Bashr et al., found that households wth large famles of up to 9 members n the household were about half food nsecure compared to the household wth smaller famly sze of 4 to 6 members. In Inda, Sndhu et al. (2008) found that an ncrease n one famly member ncreases the chances of a household becomng food nsecure by 49%. It was found that household heads havng educaton levels of mddle (8 years of schoolng.e. grade 8) and up to ntermedate (10-12 years of schoolng.e. grade 10 or 12) has postve mpacts on household food securty. Havng these educaton levels the chances of a household ncreases by 99.9 and 177.1%, respectvely. Ths mples that at least ntermedate level of educaton s a necessary condton to assure food securty to the selected household category. Smlar effect of educaton level of up to ntermedate was found by Bashr et al. (2012). They found that havng ths partcular educaton level ncreases the chances of a household by 99%. Smlarly, Bashr et al., (2010) found usng categorcal varables that graduaton level of educaton ncreases the odds of a household to become food secure by 21 tmes compared to havng no educaton. Other studes have also ponted out the postve effect of hgher educaton on decreasng chances of household food nsecurty (.e. mprovng chances of food securty) by tmes (59%) n Ngera (Amaza et al., 2006) and tmes (29%) n the USA (Kaser et al., 2003). The dfference of the magntudes n earler 3 Percentage = (OR-1)*100 ( )*100 = 10.5%

8 studes and the current study may be due to the soco-geographcal stuatons of the study areas. Table 3. Results of Bnary Regresson Varables β SE OR Household Monthly ncome (HHMI ) *** Age of Household Head (AHHH ) *** Household Sze (HHS ) *** Total Earnng Household Members (TEHH ) Household Type (HHT ) Ownershp of Lvestock (large anmals) (OL L ) Ownershp of Lvestock (large anmals) (OL S ) Educaton Level of Household Head (prmary) (Edu P ) Educaton Level of Household Head (mddle) (Edu M ) 0.693* Educaton Level of Household Head (up to ntermedate) (Edu I ) 1.019** Educaton Level of Household Head (Graduaton +) (Edu G ) Constant 5.217*** N/A Model Predcton success 79.9% Log-lkelhood rato test statstcs H-L model sgnfcance test results (df = 8) (p-value = 0.471) Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R *** sgnfcant at < 1 %; ** sgnfcant at < 5 %; * sgnfcant at <10% Data source: Feld survey, Relatve mportance of the factors to food securty of landless households The relatve mportance of the factors dentfed above wth food securty of landless households can be explaned n terms of the comparson of the magntudes of ther coeffcents (Omotesho et al., 2007; Mengstu et al., 2009; and Bashr et al., 2012). Ths compared these factors n terms of the effects they have created on the food securty of landless household. We can rank them for ther relatve mportance wth food securty as: 1. Educaton level (up to ntermedate) ncreases the chances for a household to become food secure by 177%. 2. Educaton level (mddle) ncreases the chances for a household to become food secure by 99.9%. 3. Increase of Rs 1000 n monthly ncome ncreases the chances of a household to become food secure by 10.5%. For negatve mpacts the mportant factors can be grouped together as: 4. Increasng household sze decreases the chances of a household to become food secure by 42%. 5. Increasng age of household heads decreases the chances of a household to become food secure by 4.5%. Earler, educaton topped the ranks (for postve rankngs)n the rankng by Bashr et al., (2012) for rural households of the Punjab followed n order by lvestock assets and monthly ncome. On the contrary, for Ngera, Omotesho et al., (2007) found household sze to be the most mportant factor to effect household food securty. Accordng to them, expendtures on

9 food and access to health facltes were the 2 nd and 3 rd most mportant factors, respectvely. The relatve mportance of factors, however, s expected to vary for varyng socogeographcal condtons. 4 Concluson From the above dscusson t may be concluded that food nsecurty s on the rse n rural areas of the Punjab provnce of Pakstan.e. 27% food nsecure households compared to an earler measurement of 20%. Households monthly ncome and household heads educaton levels of mddle and ntermedate were sgnfcantly mprovng food securty. On the other hand, household heads age and household sze were deteroratng food securty. The study s one of the ntal studes to rank the factors for ther relatve mportance wth food securty. Educaton level of ntermedate (10 to 12 years of schoolng) was at the top of the lst followed n order by educaton level of mddle (8 years of schoolng) and monthly ncome. Smlarly, a negatve mpact ranks were also created and household sze was at the top of ths lst followed by the age of household head. The rankng of the factors for ther relatve mportance to food securty provdes an mportant to do lst to the government and polcy makers n order to mprove household food securty. The ranks are expected to vary wth regons and household categores. The rankng of the factors for ther relatve mportance to food securty s relatvely a new dea n food securty subject area and needs further refnement. To mprove household food securty of the selected household category, followng suggestons can be made from the above results: 1. Reforms must be ntroduced n educaton system to make t productve n terms of food securty. Specal emphass must be gven to educaton for every member of the household. 2. Improvements n ncome earnng opportuntes should also be made; for ths purpose the dea of cottage ndustres may serve as a base pont. 3. Famly plannng programs should be made effectve as to slow down the pace of populaton growth

10 References AIOU, Food composton table for Pakstan. Allama Iqbal Open Unversty, Islamabad, Pakstan. Amaza, P.S., J.C. Umeh, J. Helsen and A.O. Adejob Determnants and measurement of food nsecurty n Ngera: some emprcal polcy gude. Presented at nternatonal assocaton of agrcultural economsts annual meetng, August 12-18, Queensland, Australa, onlne avalable at Anwar, T., S.K. Quresh and H. Al Landlessness and Rural Poverty n Pakstan. The Pakstan Development Revew, 43: Babatunde, R.O., O.A. Omotesho and O.S. Sholotan, Soco-economc characterstcs and food securty status of farmng households n Kwara State, North-Central Ngera. Pak J Nut, 6: Bashr, M.K., M.K. Naeem and S.A.K. Naz, Rural and per-urban food securty: a case of dstrct Fasalabad of Pakstan. WASJ, 9: Bashr,M.K., Z.N. Bajwa, K. Bakhsh, A. Maqbool and M.W.A. Chattha, Food securty perspectves n Pakstan. Proceedngs of the Internatonal Conference on Productvty and Growth n Agrculture: Strateges and Interventons. Unversty of Agrculture, Fasalabad, Pakstan. pp.150. Bashr M.K., S. Steven and R. Pandt The determnants of rural household food securty n the Punjab, Pakstan: an econometrc analyss. Workng paper 1203, School of Agrcultural and Resource Economcs, Unversty of Western Australa, Crawley, Australa onlne avalable at ` Che, J. and J. Chen, Food nsecurty n Canadan households. Health Reports, 12: FAO, The state of food nsecurty n the world: addressng food nsecurty n protracted crses. Food and Agrculture Organzaton of the Unted Natons, Rome. FAO, Country rank n the world, by commodty. Food and Agrculture Organzaton of Unted Natons, Statstcs Dvson. Avalable from: [Accessed 03 January 2012]. Feleke, S., R.L. Klmer and C. Gladwn, Determnants of food securty n Southern Ethopa. Agr Econ 33: Gera, N., Food securty under structural adjustment n Pakstan. Asan Survey, 44: GOP, Populaton census of Pakstan. Populaton Census Organzaton, Statstcs Dvson, Government of Pakstan. GOP, Economc survey of Pakstan Fnance Dvson, Mnstry of Fnance, Government of Pakstan. GOP, 2010, Economc survey of Pakstan Fnance Dvson, Mnstry of Fnance, Government of Pakstan. GOP, 2011, Economc survey of Pakstan Fnance Dvson, Mnstry of Fnance, Government of Pakstan.

11 Halu, A. and R. Ngatu. 2007, Correlates of household food securty n densely populated areas of southern Ethopa: does the household structure matter? Stud. Home Comm. Sc., Vol. 1: Hosmer, D.W. and S. Lemeshow, Appled logstc regresson. John Wley and Sons, New York, USA. IAASTD, Food securty n a volatle world. Internatonal Assessment of Agrcultural Knowledge, Scence and Technology for Knowledge. Avalable from: [Accessed 08 January 2012]. Kaser, L.L., H.M. Quñonez, M. Townsend, Y. Ncholson, M.L. Fuj, A.C. Martn and C.L. Lamp, Food nsecurty and food supples n Latno households wth young chldren. J Nut Educ and Beh, 35: Menard, S., 2000, Coeffcents of determnaton for multple logstc regresson analyss. The Amercan Statstcan, 54: Mengstu, E., N. Regassa and A. Yusufe, The levels, determnants and copng mechansms of food nsecure households n Southern Ethopa: case study of Sdama, Wolata and Guraghe Zones. DCG Report No. 55, the Drylands Coordnaton Group. Morrs, P.M., L. Neuhauser and C.C. Campbell, Food securty n rural Amerca: a study of the avalablty and costs of food. J Nut Educ, 24: NSSO, Measurement of poverty n Sr Lanka. Natonal Sample Survey Organzaton of Inda. Onlne avalable at: accessed on 04/01/2012. Ojogho, O., Determnants of food nsecurty among arable farmers n Edo State, Ngera. Agrcultural Journal, 5: Omotesho, O.A., M.O. Adewum and K.S. Fadmula, Food securty and poverty of the rural households n Kwarwa State, Ngera. AAAE Conference Proceedngs: Onanwa, O.O. and G.C. Wheelock, An analyss of the determnants of food nsecurty wth severe hunger n selected southern states. Southern Rural Socology, 21: Sndhu, R.S., I. Kaur and K. Vatta, Food and nutrtonal nsecurty and ts determnants n food surplus areas: the case study of Punjab state. Agrcultural Economcs Research Revew, 21: Ttus, O.B. and A.G. Adetokunbo, An analyss of food securty stuaton among Ngeran urban households: evdence from Lagos State, Ngera. Journal of Central European Agrculture, 8(3), Yasn MA (2000) An nvestgaton nto food securty stuaton n ran-fed areas of dstrct Rawalpnd. M.Sc. (Hons.) Thess (Unpublshed), Department of Agrcultural Economcs. Unversty of Agrculture Fasalabad, Pakstan.

12 Annex-I Food Composton Table for Pakstan (Revsed 2001) Amount n 100g of edble porton No Name of Food kcal No Name of Food kcal A) Cereal and Cereal Products F) Fruts 1 Corn Whole gran flour Apple 57 2 Rce Polshed Fred Banana Rpe 96 3 Vermcell Dates Dred Wheat Whole gran flour Dates Fresh Wheat flour Granular Guava Whole 73 6 Wheat Bread Lemon 30 7 Wheat Bread Lch 62 8 Wheat Bread Mango Rpe 64 9 Wheat Bread Melon Water Wheat Bread Mandarn Wheat Flour Orange Sweet 43 B) Legumes 46 Peach Broad Bean Cooked Pomegranate Chckpea Cooked Zzyphus Lentl Cooked 178 G) Dary Products 15 Mung Bean Cooked Butter Mlk Mash Cooked Curd 52 C) Vegetables 51 Cream Bath Sponge Mlk Buffalo Flud Whole Bottle Gourd Mlk Cow Flud Whole Brngal Mlk Goat Flud Whole Caulflower Yogurt Cocumber Ice-cream Lady Fnger 35 H) Meat & Products 23 Spnach Beef Tnda Buffalo Meat 123 D) Roots & Tubers 59 Chcken Meat Carrots Goat Meat Onon Sheep Meat Potato 83 I) Eggs 28 Reddsh Chken Egg Whte Turnp Duck Egg Whte (Raw) 895 E) Spces & Condments J) Fats & Ols 30 Cumn Seed Butter Lquorce Root Ghee Clove Ghee (Buffalo) Turmerc Lard (Raw) Pepper Black Dalda (Hydrogenated Ol) Corn Ol Jaleebe Soybean Koa (Whole Buffalo Mlk) 401 K) Sugar, Sweets & Beverages 77 Halwa Sohen Sugar Carbonated Beverages Peps, Coke, etc Gur Lemon Juce Honey Mango Juce Barf 384 Source: AIOU, 2001

13 Adult Equvalent Unts Annex-II Age groups (years) Male Female < Source: NSSO, 1995