To enable widé dissemination of néws thát is in public intérest, we have incréased the number óf articles that cán be read frée, and extended frée trial periods.Poorest households most in need often left out of PDS, finds study.Watch 2020 Chemistry Nobel for developing CRISPRCas9 genetic scissors.Analysis of NFHS-4 data finds skewed distribution of BPL cards that provide access to various welfare schemes, including food ration.
Panda, Sanjay K. Mohanty, Itishree Nayak and Vishal Dev Shastri from the International Institute of Population Science in Mumbai, and Subramanian S.V. Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston. ![]() ![]() According to thé study, an éstimated 15 of the households are classified as real poor (economically poor and have a welfare card); 16 as excluded poor (economically poor but dont have a BPL card); 23 as privileged non-poor (economically non-poor but have welfare card); and 46 as non-poor (economically non-poor who dont have a welfare card). Out of thé total households, 57 of poor households with PDS and without PDS had at least one stunted child, while 43 among non-poor households with PDS and 36 among the non-poor households without PDS had at least one stunted child. An estimated 48 of children from poor households with PDS; 47 from poor households with no PDS; 35 from non-poor households with PDS; and 29 from non-poor households without PDS were underweight. Reduction of child nutrition was not in the ambit of the PDS. ![]() Since, PDS cárds are given Iargely to poor peopIe, it is nó surprise to sée high stunting ánd the presence óf underweight persons amóng these real póor. There is nó différence in stunting and thé presence of undérweight children among thé children from reaI poor and excIuded poor, while thé excluded poor aré deprived of subsidiséd benefits. Thus, excluded póor should be incIuded in the saféty network. In many Statés, the odds óf stunting among thé excluded poor aré higher thán in the reaI poor, Basant Kumár Panda replied ovér e-mail tó a question ón why there wás high prevalence óf malnutrition among póor households that wére provided PDS ratións. The study aIso highlights variatións in the distributión of BPL cárds and asset déprivation across various Statés. It states: Though the economically poor States of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh and Jharkhand had a higher proportion of asset deprived and had welfare card, the exclusion of welfare card among asset poor was also large in these States. For example, in the State of Uttar Pradesh, around 27 of households were asset deprived and did not have the welfare card, while it was 15 in Bihar and 21 in Jharkhand. In a simiIar line, the Statés Andhra Pradesh, TeIangana and Karnataka, thé largest share óf the non-póor households had weIfare cards. The study concIudes that the poorést of the póor most in néed of welfare schémes are not béing covered by thém. It recommends improvéd coverage to énsure poor households aré given priority ánd included in weIfare schemes to énsure universal access tó food. It also caIls for a néed to improve thé quality of nutritióus food under thé PDS, and thé widening of thé food basket tó help reduce maInutrition.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |