Contents - Previous - Next

This is the old United Nations University website. Visit the new site at http://unu.edu

SUMMARY

Satisfaction from food, including palatability, is in part purely subjective, independent of social approval or disapproval; it is also partly objective and dependent on the approval of others. Households deficient in calories placed greater emphasis on taste, represented in the first instance by the cost of calories, than they did on nutrition represented in terms of calories. For households that were not deficient in calories, we found the opposite relationship between nutrition and calories. We also found that these differences were not dependent on the income levels of the two groups, represented by total expenditure per capita per year. Calorie intake level was closely related to the intake of other nutrients: households deficient in calories were largely deficient in other nutrients as well).

TABLE 25. Preference component: demand function calorie deficient households (semi-log inverse). Dependent variable: expenditure on (status food less nutrient worth) preference component.

a. Figures in parentheses refer to standard errors of coefficients.
* Significant at 5 per cent level.
** Significant at 1 per cent level.

We devised a method to measure two components of food expenditure: the total nutrient-worth component and the nonnutrient component (preference or taste). Using shadow prices of nutrients obtained through a linear programming exercise, we found that the D group had a lower level of nutritional efficiency for their food expenditures than the ND group. These results would suggest that the higher cost paid by the D group households for the calories they consumed was not compensated for by relatively higher levels of intake of other nutrients. Further, our analysis revealed that deficiency in calories was related neither to family size nor to a large proportion of children in the D group of households.

The behavioural patterns of D and ND groups among the poor, the middle class, and the rich were observed through regression analysis, MPCs, and elasticities with respect to levels of total expenditure per capita. Of every additional rupee of total expenditure, a relatively greater portion was found to be spent on the taste component: basic and low-status foods gradually gave way to medium and highly preferred foods.

Deficient and non-deficient households were present among the poor, who were 40 per cent of the sample; the middle-expenditure class, 30 per cent of the sample; and the rich, the remaining 30 per cent of the sample. For D households, food expenditure elasticity tended to increase, and calorie-elasticity with reference to total expenditure per capita tended on the whole to decline. Deficient households seemed to indulge in taste more as incomes increased.

Our analysis suggested that the differences between the D and ND households in terms of calories, calorie costs, nutritional efficiency, and the taste component were part of a general phenomenon. We observed this phenomenon using a matrix of per capita expenditure deciles and deciles based on calorie intake per capita. The matrix revealed that, for a given expenditure level, calorie levels and calorie costs moved in opposite directions. But when expenditure level increased, i.e. when we moved from lower to higher expenditure deciles, both calorie intake level and calorie costs increased. The spectrum of inverse relationship between calorie intake level and calorie costs obtained for all expenditure deciles; the spectrum as a whole moved to higher levels as expenditure level increased. The convergence one would expect on the basis of known laws of demand, like Engel's Law, did not obtain in our analysis. This finding would suggest that the percentage of calorie-deficient households relative to the total number of households in any society would tend to decline as incomes rose, but the process would be painfully slow, as taste would persist to limit calorie intake level for a hard core of deficient households.

On the basis of the LP exercise, we observed that shadow prices of foods were closely related to their market prices. Shadow prices, however, were not closely related to the nutrient worth of these commodities. Thus, the market sorts out foods on the basis of taste or preference, not on the basis of their nutrient content. In any society, therefore, attempts to improve nutritional status using prices as a lever are less likely to succeed.

The analysis was innovative in terms of identifying what we have called a basic food. The LP exercise, without taste constraints and with nutrient constraints, was used to identify the basket of food that would meet nutritional needs at the lowest cost. We found that this basket contained mainly traditionally consumed items. Other food articles were ranked according to the magnitude of the taste component contained in them. Those ranking highest in taste component but with low nutrient content were called "status" foods (highly preferred foods). The low preference foods were closer to basic foods in calorie content.

TABLE 26. Preference component: demand function calorie non-deficient households (semi-log inverse). Dependent variable: expenditure on preference (Status F) (rupees)

a. Figures in parentheses refer to standard errors of coefficients.
* Significant at 5 per cent level.
** Significant at 1 per cent level.

The elasticity of expenditure on food with reference to total expenditure was close to unity for the D group; for the ND group it was low at low-income levels, but tended to increase with increases in expenditure level. A food acquires the status of a "superior" good as demand for the preference component in it becomes increasingly prominent.

The D and ND groups showed distinct differences in demand for status foods and preference components. For the ND group, expenditure elasticities were low for the poor, both for different categories of status food as well as for the preference component in them. The D group showed a predominant preference for the taste component. The poor among them had a higher elasticity for the taste component than for the status food as such, and the high expenditure elasticity among the poor matched the elasticities observed for the middle-income class and the rich. Once again we identified a hard core of households who were at a very high income level and still retained their preference for taste while calorie intake level was below the average energy requirement.

An investigation of the influence of factors other than income levels revealed that on the whole D households came from better endowed villages and had better production profiles, better housing conditions, and higher durable assets scores than their counterparts. On the other hand, the demand for status food and the preference component among households in this group suggested that easier access to transport improved emphasis on nutritional worth as it discouraged the preference component. An improvement in the production profile level encouraged the demand for status food. Although the D group came from villages with greater access to retail market outlets for consumer goods, the level of outlets did not seem related to the level of expenditure on the preference component.

TABLE 27. Marginal propensities to consume foods in different status categories and basic foods

a. Based on per capita expenditure level.
b. Excludes tea, coffee, spices, and the category of "other foods."

TABLE 28. MPCs nutritional worth and preference or taste components

a. Represents percentages of expenditure on status foods (from one additional rupee available for expenditure).
b. Represents percentage for expenditures on food (including basic foods, but not including expenditures on tea, coffee, spices, and the "other foods" category) if one additional rupee is available for expenditure.

TABLE 29. Marginal propensities of expenditure

a. These figures refer to the results of regressions run separately.

TABLE 30. Demand elasticities with respect to total expenditure^a

a. Elasticities are the ratios of two percentages: the numerator is the percentage increase in expenditure on respective food categories, and the denominator is the percentage increase in total household expenditure.

On the whole the influence of the expenditure level on both food and the preference component was far more important than the influence of other factors. The durable assets score, the size of the family, and the food habit score had significant coefficients, but their influence was not pervasive and consistent. The only exception worth noting was that for the D group there was a positive influence of durable assets score on the high status food preference component.

For developing economies, the demand for food poses the difficult problem of creating supplies of the preference component in food that match the rising demand for it. Because nutritional value is less important in the demand for food, nutritional status will have to be encouraged independently. Increasing incomes is a poor instrument for achieving the goal of high nutritional status in the short run.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Mr. N. C. Shah, Associate Professor, Sardar Patel Institute of Economic and Social Research, Ahmedabad, India, provided invaluable help with data processing. The Director of the Gujarat Institute of Area Planning, Ahmedabad, provided data processing and office facilities for this project.

Because it was necessary to shorten this article, certain sections have been omitted, including those dealing with (a) the individual regressions for calories of the 18 main variables, (b) the results of regressions to assess the relationships between macro- and micro-variables and preference foods, and (c) regressions on food expenditure and calorie elasticities. Additional information can be obtained directly from the author.

APPENDIX. DEFINITIONS OF ABBREVIATIONS OF VARIABLES USED IN REGRESSIONS

Dependent Variables

T. Exp. = expenditure per capita per year (rupees)
Exp. (F), Exp. F. = expenditure per capita per year on food (rupees)
D = calorie-deficient household
ND = calorie non-deficient household
Exp. F. (D) = expenditure on food by D household (rupees)
Exp. F. (ND) = expenditure on food by ND household (rupees)
Cal. Intake = calorie intake per adult unit
Exp. Stat. F. = expenditure on status food, i.e. all categories of status food together (rupees)
Exp. H. Stat. F. = expenditure on high-preference food (rupees)
Exp. M. Stat. F. = expenditure on medium-preference food (rupees)
Exp. L. Stat. F. = expenditure on low-preference food (rupees)
Exp. Bas. F. = expenditure on basic food (rupees)
Nut. W. = nutrition worth (rupees)
Exp Pref. (Stat.) = Exp Stat F.-Nut.. W. = preference component (rupees)
Exp. Pref (H. Stat.) = preference component in Exp H. Stat. F
Exp Pref. (M Stat.) = preference component in Exp. M. Stat. F.
Exp. Pref. (L. Stat.) = preference component in Exp L. Stat. F.

Macro-variables (Village-level)

V₁ (Eco. 1) = production profile
V₂ (Eco. 2) = housing conditions
V₃ (En. 1.1) = education facilities location
V₄ (En. 1.2) = health facilities location
V₅ (En. 2.1) = transport, communication information
V₆ (En 2.2) = market exposure, i.e. retail outlets for consumer goods (level and location)
V₇ (Education) = literacy level
V₈ (Social, cultural) = level of social and cultural events
V₉ (Size) = population of village (no.)

(All variables for years 1974, in terms of score or index. Methodology given in Appendix V₉ for 1971.)

Micro-variables ( Household-level)

H.H. Size = household size (no. of members)
Dur. Assets = durable assets (score)
Curr. Borr. = current year borrowings (rupees)
Literacy = literacy (percentage of literates to total members)
F. Habit = food habit (score)
NW/W = ratio of non-working to working members
Home suppl. = supply of food from home production
Child ratio = ratio of children (percentage to total members)
Dummy (L) = dummy for agricultural labourers' households
Dummy (NF) = dummy for non-farm households
Dummy (ND) = dummy for ND

BIBLIOGRAPHY¹

Chernichovsky, D. V., and C. A. Mecook. "Patterns of Food Consumption and Nutrition in Indonesia: An Analysis of the National Socio-economic Survey, 1978 " World Bank Staff Paper no. 670. World Bank, Washington, D.C., 1984. Food and Agriculture Organization. Fourth World Food Survey. Food and Nutrition Survey Series, no 10. Rome, FAO, 1977.

Gopalan, C., B. V. Ramashastri, and S. C. Balasubramanian, Nutritive Value of Indian Foods .National Institute of Nutrition, Indians " ICMR Report Series, no. 60. National Institute of Gopalan, C., and B. S. Narasing Rao. "Dietary Allowances for Indians, ICMR Report Series, no. 60. National Institute of Nutrition, Indian Council of Medical Research, Hyderabad, India, 1971.

Horton, S. "Labour Use, Nutrition and Household Behaviour: Results from Western India." Ph.D. thesis. Department of Economics, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., 1982.

Kumar, S. Impact of Subsidized Rice on Food Consumption and Nutrition in Kerala. Research Report, no, 5 International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, D.C., 1979.

Marshall, A. Principles of Economics, An Introductory Volume. 8th ed. Macmillan, New York, 1948.

Murty, G. V. S. N., and N. Shah. "Poverty, Inequality and Levels of Living in Gujarat." In D. T. Lakdawala, ea., Gujarat Economy: Problems and Prospects. Sardar Patel Institute of Economic and Social Research, Ahmedabad, India, 1982.

Muthaiah, C. Consumption of Cereals and Substitution of Inferior Cereals by Superior Cereals. Agro-economic Research Centre for Madhya Pradesh, India, 1964.

Panikar, P. G. K. "Economics of Nutrition." Economic and Political Weekly, 7:416-430 (1972).

Pinstrup-Andersen, P., A. Berg, and M. Forman, eds. International Agricultural Research and Nutrition. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, UN Administrative Committee on Coordination, Sub-committee on Nutrition, Rome, 1984.

Radhakrishna, R., and N. Shah. "Calorie-demand Function, Price Indices, and Some Distribution Implications." Anvesak, XI (1-2): 177-202 (1981).

Reutlinger, S., and M. Selowsky. "Malnutrition and Poverty: Magnitude and Policy Options." World Bank Staff Occasional Paper, no. 23. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Md,, 1976.

Ryan, J. G., P. D. Bidinger, N. Prahlad Rao, and P. Puspamma. "The Determinants of Individual Diets and Nutritional Status in Six Villages of Southern India." Research Bulletin, no. 7, International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-arid Tropics, ICRISAT, Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh, India, 1984.

Shah, C. H. "Food Preferences and Nutrition: A Perspective on Poverty in Less Developed Countries." Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, XXXV (1): 1-3911980).

——. "High Cost Calories: Food Preferences and Poverty." Transaction/Society, 17(6): 58-61 (1980).

Shah, C. H., S. D. Sawanti, and B. T. Sanghavi. Nutrition Gap: An Economic Analysis. Himalayan Publishing House, Bombay, India, 1983.

Shah, C. H., and N. C. Shah. "In Search of Demand for Nutrition." Anvesak, X(2) (1980).

Smith, P. E. "Linear Programming Models for the Determination of Palatable Human Diets." Journal of Form Economics, 41(2): 272-283 (1959).

Sukhatme, P. V. "Measuring Incidence of Under-nutrition: A Comment." Economic and Political Weekly, 16(23): 1034-1036 (1981).

Theil, H. "Quantities, Prices and Budget Enquiries." Review of Economic Studies, 19(3): 129-214 (1952).

Timmer, P. C. "The Impact of Indonesian Price Policy on the Distribution of Protein-calorie-intake by Income Class and Commodity." Mimeo. Ford Foundation, Jakarta,

Timmer, P. C., W. T. Falcon and S. R. Pearson. Food Policy Analysis. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Md., 1983.

1. A long annotated bibliography was submitted with this manuscript and is available from the author. As an exception to our policy of requiring all references to be cited in the text, this shortened reference list has been included.

Continue

Contents - Previous - Next