02 September, 2014 / Ziqa'ad 6, 1435

Food security

Published Nov 24, 2012 10:02pm

THE government’s decision to raise domestic wheat support price for the next harvest by 14 per cent to Rs1,200 per 40kg has its pros and cons. It will encourage farmers to grow more wheat to reap a record output of 26 million tons next spring. The hike in the cereal’s price will not only offset the surge in input costs but also increase the growers’ margins, which should help cut rural poverty. Additionally, it will make the country more food-secure than ever in the past in terms of availability and bring down the food import bill. But is higher crop production alone sufficient to reduce food insecurity? More than half the households, including subsistence farmers, in the country remain food-insecure despite a rapid increase in grain production during the last few years on higher-than-global domestic wheat prices. It means surging prices, especially of wheat, have put food out of the reach of most people. The new crop will be 80 per cent dearer than the one harvested in 2008, restricting the access of more people to enough food. Thus, while giving price incentives for increasing food production, the government should evolve a mechanism to feed everyone. Food inflation isn’t the only disadvantage of higher wheat price. It will put additional burden on the cash-strapped government that would be required to borrow greater funds from banks for its wheat procurement operations to keep the market from dipping, and pay heavier costs for the storage of grain. Moreover, the higher price may encourage farmers to bring more land under cultivation keeping them from becoming more efficient.

While the decision has its economic value, it will also help raise the ruling PPP’s stock in the rural areas of Punjab and Sindh in an election year. With a considerable number of people in rural Sindh angry with the PPP over the new local government law and many in south Punjab frustrated by its failure to create a new province for them, increasing support prices is perceived as a move to help the party win back a large chunk of its unhappy voters.


Do you have information you wish to share with Dawn.com? You can email our News Desk to share news tips, reports and general feedback. You can also email the Blog Desk if you have an opinion or narrative to share, or reach out to the Special Projects Desk to send us your Photos, or Videos.

More From This Section

Rock and a hard place

The reason why the police turned their ire on journalists as Islamabad descended into chaos is not hard to understand.

Endangered temple

The white stripe on the national flag designed to represent Pakistan’s numerous minority-religion groups is ignored.

Comments (3) (Closed)


Sue Sturgess
Nov 26, 2012 03:16am
@zulkifl ... needy people cannot afford anything anyway. They should be assisted by other methods, meawhile farmers deserve to erarn a decent return on their land, labour and investment
zulkifl
Nov 25, 2012 03:10pm
its helpful in both ways but it is always not about profit so i would say that this is a bad idea because the needy peope will not be able to afford this.
raika45
Nov 26, 2012 01:43pm
In most cases of food distribution is not the supply.It is the transportation shortage.In India thousands of tons of wheat rotted on the ground due to lack of storage and poor transportation to areas that needed the food.Price becomes a secondary factor if one cannot distribute the food where needed.Why pay for crops that you cannot deliver.The farmer gets a good price,admitted,but what about the undelivered food?That is the responsibility of the authorities.The question is this, do they deliver?