X hits on this document

56 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

19 / 21

Nutrition Index rank (1994)1

State

India State Hunger Index rank (2008)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Haryana Kerala Rajasthan Punjab Orissa Andhra Pradesh West Bengal Uttar Pradesh Karnataka Gujarat Madhya Pradesh Tamil Nadu Maharashtra Assam Bihar

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

16 17

Table 5. Changes in state rankings from the Nutrition Index 1994 to the India State Hunger Index 2008.

1

Nutrition Index 1994 results are from Wiesmann (2004).

State

Punjab Kerala Andhra Pradesh Assam Haryana Tamil Nadu Rajasthan West Bengal Uttar Pradesh Maharashtra Karnataka Orissa Gujarat Chhattisgarh Bihar Jharkhand

Madhya Pradesh

SUMMARY AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS

The India State Hunger Index 2008 findings highlight the continued overall severity of the hunger situation in India, while revealing the variability in hunger across states within India. It is indeed alarming that not a single state in India is either low or moderate in terms of their hunger index scores; most states have a “serious” hunger problem, and one state, Madhya Pradesh, has an extremely alarming hunger problem.

The positions of Indian states visàvis the Global Hunger Index 2008 show that even though there is variability in the scores, and hence the ranking of Indian states in relation to other countries, there are few states that perform well in relation to the GHI. Even the best performing Indian state, Punjab, lies below 33 other developing countries ranked by GHI. Even more alarming is the fact that the worstperforming states in India – Bihar, Jharkhand, and Madhya Pradesh – rank most closely with countries that are precariously positioned on the GHI 2008 rankings. For instance, Bihar and Jharkhand rank lower than Zimbabwe and Haiti, while Madhya Pradesh falls between Ethiopia and Chad.

Our analysis of the associations between the ISHI 2008 and state economic indicators shows that the relationship between poverty and hunger is largely as expected – greater ISHI 2008 scores are seen in poorer states, with a few exceptions. Outliers like Punjab and Orissa and Kerala perform better on the ISHI 2008 than might be expected given their poverty levels, while Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat and

17

Document info
Document views56
Page views56
Page last viewedFri Dec 09 20:19:39 UTC 2016
Pages21
Paragraphs637
Words5654

Comments