Final Report
on
Characterization of Food Systems for the
Indo-Gangetic Basin: IGP-5
Submitted by
IGP-5 Study Team
Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP)
IGP-5 Study Team
Ahsan Uddin Ahmed
Khandaker M. A. Munim
Md. Shaiful Alam
Sk. G. Hussain
Moazzam Hossain
2
Final Report
on
Characterization of Food Systems for the Indo-Gangetic Basin: IGP-5
1.
Background
In recent times, there have been growing concerns across the globe that Global Environmental
Change (GEC) will have detrimental effects on food production, and therefore, on food systems as
a whole. Scientists and policy makers alike have been expressing their concerns regarding the
implications of GEC on food systems of the Indo-Gangetic Plains (IGP), which is heavily
dependent on crop agiculture, while the latter being largely benefitted by natural endowment of
fertile lands, available water and suitable climate regimes. Unfortunately, however, all these aspects
will face the brunt of changing environmental conditions, while the livelihoods of over hundreds of
millions of poor farmers will continue to depend on these natural resources. Consequently, food
security of a very large population in the region will be at risk due to GEC (Aggarwal et al., 2004).
In an attempt to understand the implications of GEC on the food systems of IGP and to improve
food security in the IGP, a study has been launched under the ‘Global Environmental Change and
Food Systems (GECAFS)’ Project. Five Research Teams have been given the responsibility to
undertake sub-regional research in each of the IGP sub-regions. In its first phase, the research goal
has been set to increase water productivity, enhance livelihood opportunities and reduce the waterrelated vulnerability of IGP food systems to environmental change by improving policy
formulation capacity for water management at national and regional levels. The following have
been considered as specific objective of the First Phase of the Study:

Improved assesment of the spatial and temporal vulnerability of food provision systems
across the IGP to a changing environment and increasing non-farm demands for water;

Refined decision support systems to address stakeholders’ needs relating to potential policy
and technical interventions for improving water productivity and enhancing reliance of food
systems; and

Improved water governance from enhanced capacity of stakeholders to use different types
of decision support systems for analyzing socio-economic and environmental tradeoffs of
alternative policies and water management technologies.
This report summarizes the part of the study which has been carried out in the IGP-5 sub-region.
2.
Methodology
2.1
Conceptual Framework
3
2.2
Site Selection Process
IGP-5 represents the deltaic parts of the Ganges, characterised by almost flat floodplains of
tributaries and distributaries of the Ganges River system. Figure-1 provides a schematic overview
of the IGP sub-regions, including the IGP-5. In relation to ‘food systems’, the area can further be
characterised by the following aspects:

The lands are poorly drained and therefore highly vulnerable to climate variability. This
results in overall low productivity of the lands, which are mostly used for subsistence
agriculture. Rice (paddy) cultivation is the primary agricultural activity. On an average,
livelihoods of about 80% of all households in rural Bangladesh, living in the floodplains of
the IGP-5, depend primarily on agriculture. Since paddy cultivation frequently faces waterrelated hazards such as ‘too much water leading to floods’ and ‘too little water leading to
droughts and salinity intrusion’, the overall productivity of the IGP-5 lands is rather poor
compared to the rest of the IGP. As a consequence, the IGP-5 region is generally food
deficit.

In general, the level of capital input on vast paddy fields is quite low compared to western
IGP regions. Further, paddy cultivation hasn’t been complemented by adoption of high
levels of modern technologies, perhaps with only exception of wide-scale adoption of high
yielding variety seeds. Over 90% of Net Cultivable Area (NCA) has been brought under the
HYV seeds, while over 4.5 Mha land out of a potential 7.6 Mha land has been brought
under irrigation technologies. More than 900,000 shallow tube wells are now being used,
mostly in private sector. Due to non-existence of any limit to draw groundwater from
shallow aquifers, there have been apprehensions of gradual lowering of piezometric surface
of GW aquifer system in the western parts of the country. There are public-sector operated
large irrigation schemes, however their effectiveness has been under-achieved due to
corruption, poor management and bureaucratic hindrances. The available infrastructure is
rather inadequate to support modern agriculture in the IGP-5.

As mentioned earlier, the lands are highly vulnerable to natural hazards, some of which
frequently visit the land and a few ones assuming disastrous proportions. It is often
observed that the country faces moderate to high levels of food deficits following each high
intensity extreme weather event. Food production, indeed, is a hazardous affair in
Bangladesh due to high climate variability and recent research efforts on climate change
suggest that the region’s food self-sufficiency will be highly questionable in near future due
to compounding effects of global climate change and related phenomena.

In general, there exists a surplus agricultural labour in IGP-5, owing high population density
in Bangladesh (also holds true for the Indian State of West Bengal, on the western side of
Bangladesh). In search of labour, a large number of people temporarily out migrate. On a
4
smaller scale, there have been gradual out migration from rural to urban areas, leading to
high rates of urban growth in South Asia.
Figure-1: Map of IGP Basins Region Showing IGP-5 Sub-region
Since the eastern IGP falls, in general terms, in the wetter region (pls. see the summary provided in
Annex-1), the study site should ideally represent an area which is generally flood vulnerable during
peak monsoon. The western parts of IGP-5 are generally dry, compared to the eastern parts of IGP5. The western parts of the Ganges Dependent Area (GDA) in Bangladesh represent the drier zone,
which exhibit moderate moisture stress and drought in the dry season. The same area is also subject
to low flow condition in winter and early summer months, which gives rise to salinity ingress.
However, the coastal region on the GDA, the entire southern belt, is subject to salinity ingress. In
an attempt to identify an ideal study site, the western and coastal regions within the GDA have been
avoided, which leaves the Greater District Faridpur (GDF) as the ideal candidate for the study site.
Figure-2 provides a graphical representation of the IGP-5 study site.
2.3
Site Description
Greater Faridpur District is a typical floodplain area which is vulnerable to seasonal floods. The
GDF comprises of five smaller districts1 namely Rajbari, Faridpur, Gopalganj, Madaripur and
Sharitpur. The GDF is located in central Bangladesh. Excepting Gopalganj, all the smaller Districts
under the GDF are aligned along the Ganges River and are subject to annual flooding due to
1
Before 1980s, Faridpur was one of 21 Districts, while all the other smaller Districts under the present day GDF were
sub-Districts under Faridpur.
5
overtopping by the river and its distributaries. It is flushed through the major distributaries of the
Ganges river: the Gorai system in the western side and Madhumati river system in the central parts,
while the eastern border is demarcated by the lower Mehna river. The confluence between the
Ganges and the Meghna is located at the north-eastern corner of the area. Due to its proximity to
great Rivers such as Ganges and lower Meghna, all the rivers flowing across the greater District
overtop their banks during the peak flood season, inundating most of the low lying areas. Annual
flooding not only disrupts people’s mobility, also destroys potential for high value agriculture.
Only the eastern fringes of the area, the eastern riverine parts of Shariatpur are influenced by the
tidal effects.
Gopalganj falls within a natural depression
area that offers habitats for a large wetland
ecosystem for most of the year. Since a large
majority of the area of Gopalganj is subject
to annual inundation for about six to seven
months, the low lands cannot be utilized as
paddy fields for the monsoon crop (i.e.,
Aman). Naturally, the area is generally food
deficit and food security of the people of
Gopalganj largely depends on dry season
(i.e., Rabi) paddy called ‘Boro’.
The people in the Greater Faridpur district
are generally poverty stricken, as elsewhere
in the country. Land productivity is generally
low: the best performing Boro rice having a
yield of 3.5t/ha, which is slightly higher than
the corresponding average yield of Boro
elsewhere in the country, however much
lower compared to average yield of food
grain in the western IGP (the corresponding
Figure-2: The IGP-5 Study site is shown in the
figure is about 5t/ha). Despite the fact that
map of Bangladesh (lower part of the red ring)
Boro performs well in comparison to the
national average yield, coverage of high yielding Boro (HYV Boro) could not be enhanced due to
fact that a large proportion of the net cultivable area in the Greater District is low land, not suitable
for HYV Boro. Aman constitutes about 30% of all food grains produced in the G. Faridpur, which
exhibits an average yield of about 1.5t/ha, much lower than the corresponding national average
yield of Aman (1.9 t/ha). Actually, the low lying lands are either remain fallow during the
monsoon, practically inaccessible for HYV Aman cultivation, or even if cultivated during
monsoon, farmers go for very low yielding broadcast Aman with an average yield of about 0.9 t/ha.
6
Wheat is becoming more and more popular in the Greater Faridpur District, as elsewhere in the
country. The yields are comparable compared to average yields elsewhere in the country (i.e., 2.1
t/ha).
Relatively higher proportion of rural population in the study area has their own cultivable land, as
compared to the country’s 58.44% rural population having own cultivable land. Although the
average land holding size is low and comparable with the rest of the country, the tendency of
having most of the land ownership by absentee land lords is relatively less in the study area. Only
about 2% of the farm holdings belong to large farm holding size, slightly lower than the national
average of 2.5% of all farm holdings.
The level of urbanization is much lower in the IGP-5 study area, compared to other areas in
Bangladesh. About 24% of the population in Bangladesh lives in urban areas, while that in the
Greater Faridpur is about 12%. Despite the fact that fewer people live in urban areas in G. Faridpur,
electrification there has reached to higher percentage of households compared to other parts of
Bangladesh. For example, electrification in urban households in all the five districts surpassed the
corresponding national figure of 31.45% coverage. Unfortunately, the deprivation for the rural
population for the same service is also distinct: as against 21.73% households in a national scale,
only about 11% rural population in the Greater Faridpur has received electricity services.
Agriculture is relatively less mechanised, compared to the rest of the country (extremely less
mechanised when compared to corresponding figures of western IGP). While only 1 shallow
tubewell is available for irrigation in about 6km2 area in greater Faridpur, the rest of the country
receives the benefit of having 2.36 shallow tube wells per km2 area. Availability of deep tubewells
in the study area is one third compared to the rest of the country. Compared to over 48% of the net
cultivable area being irrigated at national scale, the corresponding figure for the study area stands at
only 25%, which indicates reluctance of the farmers to invest in irrigation equipment due to high
vulnerability to floods.
In terms of communication and transportation, the study area has been gradually improving in
recent decades. Considering all types of road networks (paved, non-paved and others), the study
area enjoys 0.195km road per Km2 area, which is higher than the national average of 0.144km road
per Km2.
Labour out-migration is a common feature in the study area, especially when Aman growing season
is forfeited following a prolonged flood that does not allow cultivation of HYV Aman. Landless
farmers do not find employment at local level to eke out a living and are forced to out-migrate
temporarily. The common destination is Dhaka, the capital city, where they find alternative sources
of temporary employment. October to mid-November are generally the bad time of the year when
poor people face acute shortage in employment and income, and thereby face seasonal hunger.
Usually they take two meals instead of three meals a day during the vulnerable period.
7
2.4.
Methods for Characterising the Food Systems for IGP-5
The primary information regarding the characterisation of food system for the IGP-5 has been
collected from secondary sources (a complete list of secondary sources being sought is provided in
Annex-3). To achieve this, a detailed literature review has been carried out, based on published
reports/anthologies/books/articles as well as a few grey literature available in various academic
institutions in Bangladesh. A detailed literature review document has thus been produced, which
acted as the background document for this study. It is found that information on a number of
aspects of food systems were heavily biased towards only a few attributes of food systems, whereas
information on a few other attributes could not be made available from the literature. To fill in the
gaps in attributes of food systems for the IGP-5 region, it was decided to conduct a questionnaire
survey, which allowed collection of primary data with an emphasis on lesser defined attributes of
food systems.
A questionnaire survey has been conducted in the study area (i.e., Greater Faridpur District)
involving about 600 households (about 120 in each of the five sub-areas, distributed over the entire
sub-area). The questionnaire (Pls see Annex-4) was field tested first to check its relevance in
revealing various aspects (attributes) of food systems. SPSS computer package has been
extensively used for analysing the data sets thus obtained. The survey was complemented by
conducting a number of Participatory Rapid Appraisals (PRA) and Focus group Discussions
involving local farmers. A few Key Informants Interviews have also been conducted to reinforce
findings from the survey and the FGDs/PRAs.
In the study on characterizing food systems for the IGP-5 region, instead of performing the analysis
encompassing the whole data-set disregarding any existence of differentiation among the economic
realities of the respondents, it has rather been chosen to disaggregate the data-set according to
economic classes and has been opted to develop a comprehensive analysis with a view to vividly
eliciting the comparative scenario prevailing in our study area. Moreover, an attempt to develop
the analysis taking the whole data-set could not bring-forth results that would be representative
since the co-existence of people of different economic background carries along-with differences in
almost every aspect of the food system which needs to be revealed. And since there are marked
variations in the level of possession of resources/inputs and in the degree of vulnerability arising
out of the variability in environmental systems or shocks to such system, it seemed worth to run the
analysis on the basis of income classes.
3.
Charactiristics of Food Systems for IGP-5 Region
The food system of any area can be defined by nine elements of food security outcomes, as outlined
in the GECAFS Working Paper 2 entitled, “Conceptualizing Food Systems for Global
Environmental Change Research” (Ericksen, 2006). Figure-3 provides a schematic overview of
these nine elements of food security outcomes.
8
Figure-3: Schematic Overview of Various Elements of Food Systems
3.1
Food Utilisation
3.1.1 Nutritional Value
A significant determinant of secured food system of a region is the nutritional value of the food
being utilised by the people of the region. Nutritional Value of a food system can be determined by
considering diversity of food items made available in the region. From the questionnaire survey, an
account of food diversity has been revealed for IGP-5 region. It is found that all major types of food
are being consumed by the inhabitants of IGP-5 (Figure-4). Diet is found to be based primarily on
rice, fish, lentil, and vegetables. It is also found that intake of nutritious food varied significantly
among households.
9
120
100
97.3
97.1
83.2
80
54.5
40
13.8
0
t
ea
M
o
pr
s
ct
du
e
(V
s
le
ab
et
t.)
ro
P
g.
ilk
M
eg
V
il
nt
Le
h
is
e
ic
F
R
Figure -4: Large pe rce ntage of hous e holds
cons um ing m ajor food products on a re gular
bas is
Figure-5: Frequency of fish consumption (% HHs)
Percent household
120
96.4
100
The households with lower
economic status /strengths
(ultra poor and poor classes),
however, consume nutritious
food (high calory containing
food) much less frequently
66
60
51
compared to middle- (i.e.,
middle-class
and
lower
40
middle-class group) and rich20
income (i.e., higher middle0
class
and
rich
group)
All HHs
Poor hhs
Middle income
Rich hhs
households. Fish being the
hhs
Household type
most common animal protein
in an average diet in an IGP-5
One serving per day
Tw o servings per day
household, most of the rich
household consume fish at a rate of one serving per day, while the proportion of middle income and
poor households doing same is much less. This is graphically presented in Figure-5. Similar
inference can also be drawn by analyzing consumption behaviour of lentil, the other most
commonly utilized protein (vegetable protein). It is represented in Figure-6. It is intriguing to note
that, only 11% of the lentil consumed nationally has been produced within the country, while the
rest has been imported from outside. Although it has been widely used in almost all households
72.4
80
50
.5
29
.9
13
.6
24
irrespective of economic classes, its relative utilization in poor households has been on the decline
due to increasing market price. No wonder, only a meagre 3.9% of the poor income households
consume vegetable protein at a rate of two servings per day, as revealed by the survey.
10
Figure-6: Frequency of lentil consumption (% HHs)
Percent households
60
53.6
50
39.1
40
34.4
30
23.4
20
14.2
10.4
10
10.8
3.9
0
All HHs
Poor hhs
MI hhs
Rich hhs
Household type
One serving/day
Two servings/day
It is found from the survey that a large proportion of the poor income households (some 41.6%) do
not consume meat. The only explanation is the fact that meat is a highly priced commercial product
now a days and poor often have very limited access to it due to very low affordability. Historically,
people in IGP-5 have been dependent on capture fisheries, mostly independent of market
mechanisms. In recent decades, there have a gradual shift from capture fisheries to commercially
oriented culture fisheries, which responded to a hike in fish price consequent upon a gradual
decline in natural fish stock in the openwater bodies. The entire interaction has forced a discernable
change in consumption behaviour of the major animal protein among the poor income households.
As a consequence, nutritional value derived from protein intake by the poor living in IGP-5 has
been declining rapidly.
People do not tend to believe that commercial food processing enhances food quality and helps
maintain nutritional value of food being consumed. The locals of the study site believe that, if foods
are processed at their respective kitchens, the nutritional value is maintained. From FGD it
appeared evident that the elderly people do not tend to rely on commercially available processed
food, though they tend to agree that quality of a few food items (such as iodized salt) have been
enhanced through processing.
3.1.2 Social Value
From time immemorial food has been playing quite an important role in maintaining kinship
bonding or social relation (Ref). This has been reflected in the field study as well. About 87
percent of the total respondents have ascribed high to moderate level of importance to the role of
taking food altogether in a family or social gathering as a means of upholding kinship or social
11
bonding. Although the attachment of degree of importance of food varies depending on the ability
of the households, with 86% the rich attributing high importance whereas the proportion of the poor
ascribing the same level of importance stands as 42%.
Since the recognition of the importance of food in retaining kinship and social bonding has already
been ascertained from the assertion of the respondents as mentioned above, it may be worth
corroborating from the number of times people of the study area actually invite their kith and kins
at their homes, either during social and religious festivals or otherwise. Overall 82 percent of the
households usually invite their friends and relatives once or more in a year. It is found that about
13.6% of the hhs invite relatives and/or friends between 1 to 4 times per month. However, about
71% of the hhs invite relatives and/or friends somewhat less frequently: more than two times a
year. The frequency of invitation, of course, varies depending upon their financial ability. About 10
percent of the middle income group invite more than once a month, whereas the percentage appears
to be much higher for the rich (32 percent). Juxtaposing the scenario for the poor, it has been
recorded that the poor can never maintain that frequency. The reason remains obvious ─ it is the
very question of affordability not of willingness anyway.
Farmers’ self esteem from agricultural production has been erosing fast. The large farm holders,
often representing the rich classes, do not feel proud being associated with food production. They
rather feel like leasing out their lands mostly to sharecroppers and engage in non-farm activities.
From FGD it appears evident that most of the people are still engaged in crop agriculture because
they do not have much choice. Even the poorest farmers look for opportunity to engage in ‘other
activities’, even if it cost their productive lands! Social value attached to offerring self-produced
food in any social event to a nearest kin has also been erosing. Only 3.6% of the households
surveyed offer food elements from their own production system, while over 13% household rely
totally on commercial food when it comes to offer food to an invitee. It is also found that about
86% households procure over 50% of food from commercial sources while sharing with
relatives/friends.
3.1.3 Food Safety
In general, people of the study area have been found to have a reasonably high level of awareness
regarding some diseases, e.g. dysentery, diarrhea, hepatitis, cholera, typhoid, etc., and the root
cause of the outbreak of those diseases in epidemic form. About 71 percent of the overall
respondents consider the use of polluted water in cooking or washing dishes to bring-forth diarrhea
as the most likely disease.
In addition, the study reveals that there is a remarkable difference in the level of awareness among
people of different economic classes; the percentages are only 56 in the case of the poor, 78 for the
middle income group, and 96 for the rich. The outcome is in accordance with the a priori idea that
12
there is likely to be a high degree of positive correlation between the economic background and
level of awareness. However, about 17 percent of the people, of whom no individual of the affluent
class, have been recorded not to be aware at all about any occurrence of disease due to the use of
polluted water.
There exists a high level of awareness regarding safe drinking water. Two-thirds of the households
interviewed report whether the source of drinking water is pollution-free. However, people are
facing increasing difficulties in finding sources of arsenic-free safe drinking water. There are two
major sources of drinking water which include: a) shallow tube wells (56.8%), and b) deep tube
wells (41.2%). Water fetched from deep tube wells are found to be free from arsenic hazard.
However, access to safe drinking and cokking water has been found to depend on economic
classes: the majority of the poor households (i.e., 69.4%) are forced to collect drinking water from
shallow tube wells, despite the knowledge that the wells might be contaminated with arsenic. On
the contrary, the majority of the rich households (i.e., 78.6%) find drinking water from deep tube
wells, apparently non-contaminated sources of drinking water in the locality. Only 28.2% of poor
households find non-contaminated water from deep tube wells and ensure safety, which may be
attributed to the social bondage with the rich households having safer sources.
In the field survey, an overwhelming majority of people, irrespective of their financial background,
have been found to keep their food covered─ cooked food in particular, as a precautionary measure
in order to avoid contact with any germ-carrying insects.
About 56 percent of the overall
respondents have admitted that food is not usually being re-heated before meal at their homes.
Here again, there is a marked difference between that percentage among the rich (46 percent) and
the poor (67 percent). As an obvious result to this phenomenon, three-fourths (75 percent) of the
people from low-income group are being compelled to take stale food, whereas the percentage is
strikingly low (32 percent) for the people of higher income group. This perhaps reflects the fact
that the poor in general have relatively less energy security than the rich, which eventually is
translated into lesser food safety amongst the poor households.
The general awareness regarding food safety and seasonal climate variability is found to be rather
high. The quality of food fluctuates with climatic condition, i.e. with heat and cold, is found to be a
common knowledge to everybody brought under the present study. Almost all the respondents,
irrespective of the economic class they belong to, have the common perception that the quality of
food deteriorates with the onset of heat and remains intact for long with that of cold.
The survey data indicates poor in-house storage/ preservation condition of food prevailing in the
study area. A modern preservation facility using refrigerator is absolutely absent in a low-income
household.
For the middle-income and higher-income groups, only a small percentage of
households ─ 2 percent and 11 percent, respectively, has the ability to afford refrigerators at their
13
homes. Whereas 29 percent and 20 percent of the study households have, respectively, reported to
reheat their cooked food before serving and to cook food before every meal, an enormous 85
percent of all the respondents ─ ranges from 82 percent in case of the poor and 100 percent in case
of the rich, admitted that they just cover their food as a simultaneous or alternative method of
preservation.
Among all the people brought under the study, about 61 percent claim to have perception about the
presence of all required ingredients in the food they eat. But the percentages substantially vary
among three major economic classes ─ 96 percent for the well-to-do class, 72 percent for the
middle income group, and a mere 39 percent for the poor, reflecting a direct relationship between
‘perception of a balanced diet’ and ‘economic background of the respondent’.
3.2
Food Access
3.2.1 Affordability of Food
The main source of income for the people residing in the rural portion of the Greater Faridpur
district is predominantly agriculture and agriculture related activities.
Incomes received by
households, being selected quite randomly, in the study area have been found to be low in general,
being commensurate with the prior idea, with having 36 percent (209 out of a total of 585) of all the
respondents identified themselves as poor, 60 percent as belonging to middle income group, and
only a tiny portion constituting 5 percent of the total as being people of higher income class.
In the study area, for slightly more than one-fourth (27 percent) of the total households, remittances
have been found to play quite an important role in augmenting household incomes. Of the
households belonging to higher income group, 57 percent have been recorded to receive
remittances, whereas the percentage is quite (15 percent) low in the case of the poor which happens
to be in line with prior expectation. Of course, about 78 percent of the households who receive
remittances have opined that the money they receive as remittances is not being used in purchasing
food for consumption, the rest 22 percent have admitted that remittances play an important role, to
varying extents, in their purchase of food.
Since it is not possible in reality on the part of an individual who is engaged in agricultural
production to produce everything he or she might need, prices of commodities deems crucial in
maintaining daily living. For rice ─ the staple food item, about 61 percent of the respondents said
they have to go for purchasing although there lies a remarkable difference in the need (85 percent
of the poor as opposed to only 7 percent of the rich, the middle class remaining in the middle with
52 percent).
14
In the field survey, when asked to rank three food items in precedence of importance, the majority
of respondents mentioned rice to be the most important one followed by salt and edible oil. In
citing three food items which the consumers are compelled to purchase almost at the same amount
in the wake of any price hike, the respondents (85 percent of them) named salt as the most price
insensitive item they keep on purchasing, followed by edible oil (77 percent) and rice (52 percent).
That, given the list of the food items the households of the study area are used to purchasing, the
price elasticities of demand for salt, edible oil, and rice turn out to be lower than others again
propound empirical evidences to the theory of demand in the study of Economics.
Income stream of the households, irrespective of the income classes, do not remain at the same
level throughout the year. People of the study area, with slight differences among the income
groups, suffer from a marked decline in the income level for some designated months of the year.
About 41 percent of the respondents cited the Bengali month of ‘Choitra’ (mid-March to midApril) as being the toughest month where the crisis for any means of earning looms large, followed
be ‘Falgoon’ (mid-February to mid-March: 39 percent), ‘Srabon’ (mid-July to mid-August: 39
percent), ‘Ashar’ (mid-June to mid-July: 36 percent), and ‘Vadro’ (mid- August to mid-September:
36 percent). It is worth noticing that the first two months, when the rural people suffer from
significant reduction in income, are the months when usually a seasonal drought takes place and the
rest three months of the year are the usual time of rainy season which may be aggravated with the
onset of flood. Figures-7a and 7b provides a graphical explanation of the seasonal fluctuation of
income and climate variability observed in the IGP-5. Only an insignificant portion (6 percent) of
the respondents, however, has claimed that their income remain at a certain level all the year round.
Prices of commodities, however, do not remain the same in the market all the year round and are
subject to seasonal variation. According to the respondents, they particularly experience price
exorbitance during, respectively, the Bengali months of ‘Choitra’, ‘Falgoon’, ‘Boishakh’, and
‘Magh' ─ the time of the year which is regarded as the ‘dry season’ in Bangladesh. To majority of
the responding households, the timing for lowering hh income and increasing prices of food items
are superimposed (Figure-8a and 8b). The poor households face the maximum difficulty towards
purchasing food items.
15
Figure-7a: Months when hh income gets reduced
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Baishakh
Srabon
Kartik
Magh
Bangla calendar Months
Figure-7b: Crop calendar and sensitivity of crops with climate variability
16
Figure-8a: Months when hh income gets reduced
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Baishakh
Srabon
Kartik
Magh
Bangla calendar Months
Figure-8b:Months when price of food items increases
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Baishakh
Ashaar
Vadhro
Kartik
Poush
Falgun
The study reveals that almost all the households (95 percent or above) have to resort to purchasing,
with little or no difference for their economic background, food items like fish, meat, salt, spices,
edible oil, and sugar/ sweetener. For lentil, vegetable, egg, and milk the proportion of purchase in
consumption is relatively low for the rich than the poor or people of the middle income group,
indicating a higher contribution of own production in case of consumption for the rich.
Figure-9: Food items needs to be purchased
about 63 percent of the sample
94.7 96.6 94.2
88.7
100
households have to purchase
78.2
90
over 75 percent of their total
80
70
For the food items in general,
61.7
need from the market.
50.1
60
This
percentage, however, varies
50
40
le
ib
Ed
t
ea
M
sh
Fi
i lk
M
e
ic
il
nt
Le
at
he
W
R
across the income groups with
il
O
the
percentage
of
rich
Food types
17
amounting to 25 percent, with the middle income people to stand as 52 percent, and the poor people
to strike over 85 percent. Among the poor, around 20 percent of the households are required to
purchase almost the total amount of food they consume.
The findings regarding food being purchased from the market challenge the popular understanding
that Bangladesh is currently enjoying near food self sufficiency. In reality, a significant proportion
of all food being consumed is purchased from the market and the burden is disproportionate on the
poor households. It is clear from the findings that the poor do not enjoy nationally coveted ‘selfsufficiency’ in food, and over 80% of the poor households are forced to purchase rice from market
as against only about 7.4% of the rich households. Rice, salt and edible oil are the three most
important food items which people need to purchase from market. It is intriguing to note that, the
food items which are mostly available on commerciual basis, the households dependent on
purchase are comparable among social classes, as evident from Figure-10.
Fig-10: Food items need to be purchased by class
120
120
100
100
80
80
60
60
40
40
20
20
0
0
Rice
Wheat
Poor
Lentil
Milk
Fish
Meat
MI group
Edible Oil
Rich
The proportion of expenditure in the purchase of food to the overall family expenses is another
indicator of measuring affordability of households.
Although for 66 percent of the total
households, the expenditure on food constitutes at least 75 percent of the total living expenses, the
proportions turn out to be strikingly different for various economic classes. While for around 90
percent and 57 percent of the poor and the middle class, respectively, have to incur that
proportionate costs on food, the percentage of the rich incurring the same is just 11, reflecting the
consumption pattern for all three classes of people with the poor struggling to maintain bare
subsistence and, on the contrary, the rich have a wide range of options to allocate their income
18
other than spending on food in everyday living. Figure-11 provides a comparison of expenditure on
food procurement for all and only the poor households.
Comparison of hh expenditure going for food purchase
97.6
99.5
Within 25% expenses
95.7
90.1
Up to 50% expenses
Up to 75% expenses
All expenses
66.3
4.8
85.2
20.1
Proportion of hhs
All households
Poor households
Figure-11: Comparison of household expenditure on purchase of food items in all hhs as
against only the poor hhs
A good number of previous studies have discussed about the existing policy support towards the
agricultural sector provided by the government of Bangladesh. In the field survey, there has been a
bid to elicit the perception of the people of the study area about any initiatives of the government
towards keeping the prices of commodities in the market within reasonable limit. In that move,
about 72 percent of the respondents think there happens to be no governmental role in this regard,
the rest have opined in favour of existence of low or inadequate level of support from the
government. This is perhaps because of the fact that for the agricultural sector government mainly
19
extends some supports in the form of providing subsidies for some agricultural inputs, especially
diesel used for irrigation and fertilizer. Such subsidies, although not that substantial in amount, help
keep those input prices somewhat lower than otherwise would have been. But the end-users of
those inputs, the respondents in our case, can hardly fathom the very pricing mechanism and
become disgruntled over the seemingly exorbitant prices of agricultural inputs.
Apart from the low level of consciousness, lack of efforts regarding dissemination of information
from the government side may also be responsible for them to remain unaware.
Moreover,
government does not have any specific policy, like the distant past of open market operations, of
keeping the prices of essential food items low, the onslaught of which is being experienced by the
common people in their day-to-day lives. In this context, they especially remain aggrieved of the
pace of price increase which hardly parallels the increase in their income levels.
Although the government has certain policy in terms of supporting the people by providing food
(e.g. VGD program) and some other essential items in times of natural disasters which help
increase their access to food to some extent, they hardly intend to recognize these since they
consider such attempts to be occasional and not to be regular phenomena of supporting their usual
livelihood.
3.2.2 Food Allocation
Since households engaged in agricultural production do not own whole of the agricultural land they
plough and since they have to enter into various types of share-cropping arrangements, they can not
have overall control over their produce. In the study, only about 57 percent of the households of all
type have found to have control
Fig-12:
Proportion of hhs having control over own
production
over 75 percent or more of their
own production. The percentage
of households even varies much
18.7
Above 95%
depending on their financial
36.4
35.9
Up to 75%
background.
While only 36
percent of the poor class can
58.1
have three-fourth or more of
75.6
Up to 50%
Up to 25%
38.3
3.8
own
production
under
their
possession an astounding 89
9.4
percent of the high income
All households Poor households
20
group do have that control, conspicuously reflecting the economic vulnerability of the poor in sharp
contrast to the rich. Figure-12 graphically represents a comparative analysis of control over own
production between all households and only the poor households.
After the sharing of crops that are being produced, the households cannot retain whole of the takehome quantity of output for their own consumption, rather they need to sell a portion of that
quantity in the market. But selling in the market can depict either of the two different situations:
selling of agricultural produce can become necessary even at the cost of partial consumption
foregone, which is likely to be the case of the poor or selling can of the surplus production
indicating the financial strength of the producer, the probable case of the rich. About 28 percent of
the study households have been found to sell half or more portion of their production; the
percentage varies from 22 percent in the case of the poor to a maximum of 46 percent for the rich.
The influence of the market, in terms of determining price in particular, on the allocation aspect of
the access to food is quite obvious. About 77 percent of the respondents have opined that the
supply of food in the market do not remain the same throughout the year. In order of precedence,
the Bengali months of ‘Choitra’, ‘Falgoon’, ‘Boishakh’, and ‘Asshin’ are the critical months when
there appears a shortage of supply in the market. Theoretically, since it is obvious that any shortage
in supply poses an upward bid on prices, it turns out to be in line with our prior observation that the
households in the study experience a price hike in all those months of the year. For those critical
time, exorbitant prices along with the reduction in household income brings-forth a decrease in
household consumption, so to say a reduction in allocation of food.
Given the notion that there may be differences in the intra-house allocation of prepared food among
the family members in respect of age or gender, the survey households have been asked a number
of relevant questions. The data reveals that the intra-house allocation/ distribution of food among
the members of the family are unequal in general, which stands valid irrespective of the financial
background of the households.
An overwhelming majority of 86 percent respondents have
provided such information. That the intra-house allocation of food is ‘biased towards male’ is
viewed by 84 percent people under study (Figure-13). The percentages across different economic
classes appear to be almost the same, with the middle class slightly below average. Only 11
percent of the respondents argued that food is equitably allocated among members in their
households.
21
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
That
Figure-13: Gender bias in intra-hh food
allocation (% hh)
87.1
82.2
13.2
12
10
6.2
Poor
7.1
8
6
4.3
MI Group
Male
Female
Economic
classes Equal
intra-house
food allocation is age14
89.3
6.7
the
as
well
is
viewed by 81 percent
people
under
study.
(Of those who have
4
kept such observation),
2
about 43 percent think
0
it is biased towards
0
Rich
biased
younger ones, about 33
percent
towards
middle-aged members, and about 20 percent opines that the distribution is skewed towards elderly
people. Although a vast majority of people under study have corroborated the notion that there lies
an age-bias in the intra-house allocation/distribution of food, there appears to be marked differences
of opinions among people of different economic class. While only a tiny portion of the poor (3.3
percent) hold the view that there exists no age-bias, a staggering 68 percent argued in favour of ‘no
age-bias’ in the allocation of food in their households. Hence it is observed that gender sensitivity
in the allocation of food is pervasive across the social classes and is perhaps ingrained in the long
nurtured social practice, but ‘age-bias’ gradually has withered while moving from the lower
economic class towards the upper class.
In Bangladesh, Government has certain policy, although may not be adequate, towards the
distribution of food among the distressed and vulnerable community especially during the periods
of natural disasters. The efficacy and success/failure of the food distribution program as Vulnerable
Group Feeding (VGF), Vulnerable Group Development (VGD), etc., have been critically examined
in a number of studies done so far. In the current study, the data reveals that although majority of
the people (78.1 percent) are aware of government initiatives regarding food distribution, the rest
are still in the dark about the programs indicating some sort of inefficiency of the information
dissemination mechanism. It has been found that only about one-fourth (24.4 percent) have ever
received food aid in times of crises, whereas a large portion of them (53.7 percent) although aware
but never received any aid so far. As can be perceived, while about 41 percent of the poor have
ever received food aid only a tiny section (7.1 percent) of the people of higher income group and
middle income group (16.1 percent) have ever done so, indicating the relative extent of
vulnerability of people of different social classes even in the wake of natural disasters.
22
3.2.2 Food Preference
In the geographic region of Bangladesh as well as the contiguous Indian state of West Bengal, rice
has culturally been the predominant source of carbohydrate from time immemorial. It has again
been corroborated by the evidence from the survey data of the current study. About 87 percent of
the respondents, whichever social class they belong to, mentioned rice as their preferred
carbohydrate source, followed by wheat and potato which have achieved only some insignificant
positions in their preference for carbohydrate (Figure-14).
Figure-14: Preference
for Carbohydrates
0.2
0.7
7.7
4.6
86.8
Rice
Wheat
Potato
Maize
Others
For the overall households of the survey area, an interesting feature about their preference towards
the source of protein has been revealed, depicting the fact that preference can always be something
different from what is actually being consumed. A little higher percentage of the people, in
general, under study has voted in favour of meat (47 percent) as against fish (46.2 percent) as their
most preferred source of protein. A slightly different scenario has emerged in case of in-depth
investigation of preference across economic classes. For the poor, Fish (48.3 percent) has turned
out to be the preferred one as compared to meat (46.9 percent), whereas in cases of the rich and the
middle class the preference for meat (50 percent and 46.8 percent, respectively) has superceded that
for fish (42.9 percent and 45.1 percent); preference for lentil and egg to occupy a relatively
insignificant position in their list of sources of protein. Thus the survey outcome encompassing
preference for protein has appeared in contrast with the food habit of the households of the study
area. Moreover, preferences of the poor households do not necessarily mean a lot to them, even if
they prefer high value nutritious food items, they do not have means to purchase it and have it.
23
Unlike the urban areas, advertising for commercially prepared and packaged food has not been
ubiquitous in rural Bangladesh. Since rural people are yet to develop any special predilection for
and dependence on the so-called commercially processed food, advertising for these products is yet
to highly influence their choice and stir their decision to purchase. Only 36.9 percent of the
respondents have admitted that advertisements, particularly through radio and television, do have
high influence on their choice and purchase of packaged products. Again this phenomenon is
mainly prevalent, to a certain extent, among the rich (67.9 percent) and the middle class (41.1
percent) as compared to the poor (25.8 percent). For the rest 60.1 percent of the people under the
study, advertising either have very low level of influence or nothing at all.
Figure-15: Level of preference for commercially
processed foods
7.7
7.2
4.2
3.1
45
32.8
High
3.3
Moderate
Moderate to low
Low
No preference
Others
Food Availability
As highlighted in Figure-3, aspects of food availability is better understood by three determinants:
(a) Food Production, (b) Food Distribution, and (c) Food Exchange. For the IGP-5 sub-region,
characteristics of each of these determinants are identified, primarily based on secondary data, and
highlighted below.
3.3.1 Food Production
Perhaps food production is the most important elements of the Food Systems for the IGP-5 region
which already, to some extent, is facing consequences due to variability in environmental
24
conditions and will continue to face grave consequences due to global environmental change in the
days to come. There have been a few studies on food security of Bangladesh as a whole. Very little
has been known about the food security aspect of a particular region such as the Greater Faridpur
District. Karim et. al. (1997), while analyzing food security of future decades for the whole of
Bangladesh, has stressed the need for maintaining considerable increase in food production,
keeping pace with the population growth rate, to meet the energy requirement of 2301 Kcal/day for
every adult. The cereal food production that registered an increase, mainly being that of rice, from
14.48 metric tons in 1984-85 to 19.0 metric tons in 1995-96 resulted mainly from the development
of modern varieties (HYV) of rice and that of management technologies. Still there remain wide
gaps between the potential and achieved crop yields, and technologies are yet to be developed to
deal with the onset of unfavourable environmental conditions.
Keeping in mind the population growth, poverty situation, nutritional status, production
possibilities, agronomic factors, availability of production inputs, etc., attempts have been made to
project the requirement of various food items under different possible income growth scenarios for
the year 2000, 2010, 2020, and 2030 (Karim et al., 1997). According to them, given the limited
land resources enhanced production must come from vertical increase in yield in the pursuit of
ensuring sustainable food security. They have recommended that the existing gap between potential
and actual yields can be narrowed down through adequate crop husbandry and soil, fertilizer and
water management practices, and extending modern irrigation facilities to potentially irrigable
areas.
In section 2.3, a number of indicators regarding food production have been discussed in relation to
the study site. The land holdings are generally small in size. Small farm households occupy about
80% of the land holdings (BBS, 2004). Only 13% of all holdings appear to be cultivating on
tenancy agreements. The distribution of tenant holdings are not even throughout the IGP-5 areas: in
Shariatpur, one in every four households appears to be cultivating on rental basis, whereas in the
proportion of tenant holdings are less than 10%.
The poor farmers are never self-sufficient, as appears evident from the discussions in earlier
sections. The majority of the frmers only grow paddy, the main sourece of carbohydrate. The
Greater District faridpur has been known as the major centre to grow cash crops such as the best
quality jute. However, tendency to grow cash crops has long been replaced by growing paddy, the
latter crop ensuring supply of carbohydrate which is perceived to be the major element of selfreliance for the poor farmers. The farmers believe that they are better off if they have adequate
supply of rice, the staple food item, and they are less vulnerable to any shock produced by the free
market economy.
25
It is intriguing to note that, the poor farmers need to borrow money from various sources in the
process of producing rice. At times, the interest rates are very high, often taking advantage of the
distorted credit market. Often, the farmers are forced to sell their produce soon after the harvest at a
cost much lower than the market price to pay back the borrowed amount quickly. However, in
doing so, they tend to lose control over their produce. In lean season (when there is no rice in the
household and the farmers are waiting for the next harvest), they need to purchase rice and they fall
victim to the market by paying much higher cost than what they had received during selling out.
Such a process often puts them in a vicious cycle of pauperization, especially when they face
climatic extremes and require increased borrowings to cope up with the adverse conditions.
Since the study area is generally low-lying, the livestock density is lower than rest of the country.
Although livestock is extremely important for an average farming household, adverse
environmental condition (prolonged period of inundation in each monsoon) force the poor farmers
not to have good number of livestock. In a bid to fight against hunger, the importance of cash crop
has also been fading rapidly, especially amongst the poor farming households.
As indicated in section 2.3, the average yield of both Boro and Aman paddy varities are rather low
compared to the rest of the country. The cause for such low productivity stems from high
vulnerability to inundation during the monsoon cropping season and low level of adoption of
modern agricultural equipments – the latter again is a function of high susceptibility of lands to
annual inundation and prolonged floods.
Since the locality is dominated by low-lying lands, which often remain submerged during an
average monsoon, the potential for crop diversification is rather low. Practically, people tend to
take advantage of the wetland ecosystem (from inundated lands) and gather natural food items
during the peak flood season. These traditional and naturally occurring food items are generally for
anyone to collect from natural wetlands, which are valuable sources of minerals and vitamines.
These food items supplement the diet of most of the poor farming households during each
monsoon, while the fish caught in the wetlands supply animal protein. In a sense, low-lying lands
provide lesser amounts of rice during monsoon season, however compensate well by supplying
other forms of agricultural products to a poor household. Seasonality, therefore, play a crucial role
in shaping up food consumption behaviour in the locality, especially among the poorer section of
the society.
3.3.2 Food Distribution
A general description of physical infrastructure in relation to food production and distribution has
been given in section 2.3 above. It is intriguing to note that, the intensity of national highways (i.e.,
26
km/km2 area) is relatively higher in the study area with respect to national average, while the
intensity of feeder roads and non-metalic rural road network is relatively less compared to national
intensity. In one hand, somewhat increased intensity of national highways allows distribution of
food items even during disastrous conditions, while on the other hand railway tracks are virtually
absent in the study area with an exception in Rajbari District. Low topography and high
susceptibility to prolonged inundation are two detrimental factors that restrict expansion of railway
tracks. The study area has always been endowed with large number of regional and national Rivers,
which allow year-round distribution of food items through the waterways.
For distribution of food, transportation appears to be a major concern. Jaim et al. revealed that
among different modes of transportation, transport cost by rail and river appears to be cheaper as
compared to that by trucks, but the handling costs for rail and river transportation are expensive due
to the provision of payments of various types of legal and illegal fees. For long-distance trading of
foodgrain, trucking cost per quintal decreases with the increase of distance. Traders’ margin at the
wholesale market in the capital city is found to be higher in comparison with other selected
markets.
Public food distribution may be greatly facilitated by having adequate storage capacity in the area
in question. Unfortunately, throughout the IGP-5 and elsewhere in Bangladesh (other than in
Dhaka, the Capital City), storage capacity appears to be below par in terms of both quantity and
quality. It is an irony that government food storage facilities, which have been deliberately created
to provide adequate support following the onset of a disastrous event, often fall victim to the event,
resulting into huge damages to stored foods. The private sector food storages are much smaller in
size and their management systems are relatively better. However, the collective food storage
capacity among the private sector is much bigger than the public sector storage capacities.
Food distribution is skewed, which is manifested in routinely developing of ‘monga’ (semi-famine
like condition, generally observed in Greater Rangpur District) during Autumn. Within the study
area, the distribution is observed to be somewhat skewed as compared to the macro scenario. The
attempts of distribution of food are often stymied mainly by the relative inaccessibility of a
significant portion of our study area i.e. the Greater Faridpur District (GDF), especially of
Gopalganj [low-lying beel (wetland) areas] and of Shariatpur districts [low-lying char (alluvium)
areas] both in normal time due to poor condition of the road network, and, of course, in flood time
due to overall inundation caused mostly by the Ganges and its distributaries, and by tidal effects in
the eastern riverine parts of Shariatpur [depicted in Figure-2]. The skewness in distribution can
also be attributed to the inadequate storage facilities found in the study area. The snapshot of the
fact that only four cold-storage installations are situated in GDF, of which 3 are in Faridpur and 1 in
27
Madaripur districts (BBS, 2005) with no such facilities in the remote Gopalganj and Madaripur
districts, further corroborates the reality.
The Government of Bangladesh has considered a policy of providing public safety net for the
poorest and disadvantaged. A number of programmes have been taken so far. Vulnerable Group
Development (VGD) and Rural Development Programme (RDP) (of WFP) are two of such PSN
programmes, which have been implemented with an objective of increasing the income and the
consumption of grain of the intended beneficiaries. Dorosh and Shahabuddin (2001) examined the
efficiency of these two large targeted food programmes. The indicative results suggests that these
programmes are not efficient in delivering food transfers since the leakages in both cases are
positive and sizable. The main source of these leakages turned out to be the underestimation of the
amount of work done and the overestimation of resources needed and used in carrying out the
intended work (Dorosh and Sahabuddin, 2001).
Follwoing a disastrus extreme natural event (such as the flood of 2004), the Government of
Bangladesh issued Vulnerable Group Feeding (VGF) cards as a means of extending its public
safety net for the poorest of the poor. Army has been deployed in abid to find out the households
with the highest needs for such ‘food aid’. Ninno and Dorosh (2001) analyzed such a programme
which has been implemented following the deluge of 1998. They revealed that providing VGF
cards has increased poor’s access to food. They also inferred that foreign ‘food-aid’ helps manage
food scarce situation, however its contribution to total availability of food may seem to be
minimum under a liberalized trade regime where private provision of imports is effectively present.
3.3.3 Food Exchange
Since the study area is deficit in food production, trade (intra-regional as well as international)
plays a significant role in household food consumption. Luckly, the Government allows free flow
of food items within the country. No wonder, intra-regional imports of rice is found in periods
when there is food deficit in local markets. Consequently, food exchange stabilizes food price in
local markets, even during lean periods, and thereby influences affordability of food. Since the
country as a whole has been striving for attaining self-sufficiency in food, unless it suffers heavily
due to natural calamities, food exchange is generally internal. External food exchanges appear to
have increased importance following a disastrous climate event, especially when it is associated
with high levels of crop loss (del Ninno and Dorosh, 2001).
It is interesting to note that the study area has been known for fish export. The wetlands of
Gopalganj are breeding grounds of large varieties of freshwater fisheries, which are caught in large
quantities and exported to urban areas. A significant proportion of fish demand of Dhaka is met by
28
the catch in Greater Faridpur District. Shariatpur District still harvests a large quantity of riverrine
fisheries, especially the national favourite, Hilsa (Hilsa Illisha) and export it both nationally and
internationally. Sugarcane based molasses is another noteworthy export item, while the GFD
imports salt (almost entirely), edible oil, dried foods, lentil and spices. The area is yet to become
self sufficient in milk products and it meets its demand through imports.
4.0
Implications of Climate Variability on Food Systems of Bangladesh
The climate system of Bangladesh is diverse. Therefore, it experiences acute distribution of water
resources in both temporal and spatial scales (Rahman et al., 1990; Ahmad et al., 1994).
Variability observed in terms of water availability often has profound implications primarily on
food production system, it also has significant influence towards defining cultural behaviour of
Bangladeshi population living in the vast floodplains and their food habits. It is intriguing to note
that climate variability also influences country-wide food distribution, forces food exchange both
within the country and outside, even guides food preferences among people living along the
proximity of wetlands. The following provides a brief account of ways and means how various
elements of food security outcomes are influenced by climate and hydrological variability in the
country.
4.1
Food Availability
In general, all three aspects of food availability are significantly influenced by climate and
hydrological variability. However, food production is most significantly affected by either a late
occurring flood, or by a moisture-stress-induced drought (phonological), or by lack of freshwater
flows along the coastal rivers leading to ingress of salinity. In all these cases, food production gets
affected depending on the specific location of the country.
4.1.1 Food production: A number of indicators may be employed to understand specific adverse
effects of climate variability on food production. For example, the principle crop of Bangladesh as
well as that of the study area has always been paddy (Faruquee, 1994). Paddy provides rice, which
has always been regarded as the staple food for the entire population, as has been revealed by the
field survey. However, paddy is genetically a water loving plant and production of paddy is highly
sensitive to water availability: both in terms of absolute quantum as well as timing of its availability
(Alim, 1981). In one hand, scanty availability of water on the top soil can jeopardize puddling and
transplantation of paddy seedlings, while on the other hand too much of water beyond the threshold
29
transplantation date of 15th of August for the main paddy variety, Aman (the monsoon season
paddy variety), can be detrimental for its yield. Similarly, for the increasingly important Boro
variety (the dry season paddy variety) a little rainfall in February can boost yield significantly,
while early flash flood along the Haor basins (Central and north-eastern parts of Bangkladesh) can
cause huge losses of standing crops. No wonder, the poor farmers of the country are forced to apply
irrigation, at a cost as high as upto 25% of in a bid to combat moisture stress and reduce loss burden
during the dry season.
As indicated above, there is spatial variability in availability of water, which creates suitable
conditions for growing rainfed paddy. However, there are sub-regions within the country where
efforts for food production can be affected easily by hydrological conditions. For example, the
central parts of Bangladesh, including areas under the Greater Faridpur District (i,e., the study area)
are subject to early low-level flooding (inundation) which allows Aman paddy to grow, whereas in
the north-eastern Haor basin (natural depression area) the same paddy variety cannot be grown due
to much higher levels of inundation compared to the study area. Production of food is therefore
varies significantly from area to area as a consequence of their relative sensitivity to availability of
water resources.
Since hydrological variability often dictates which types of crops could be suitable in a particular
area, the potential for crop diversification is also sensitive to water regime for that area. However,
improved management of water resources by the application of modern water management
techniques could enhance crop diversification in some parts of the country.
As indicated in the introduction section, the level of adoption of modern technology for crop
production in the study area is rather low compared to many other parts of the country, which may
be attributed to high water-susceptibility of the area. People do not feel like investing more on
modern agricultural technologies with an apprehension that their investment could also be adverse
affected by a high flood. It is observed from the field that, the higher the susceptibility of an area to
flood, the lower is the level of adoption of modern agricultural technologies.
It is observed in the field that people value cash crops. However, they also consider their high
levels of susceptibility to floods and therefore do not rely much on cash crops alone. Since many of
the cash crops varieties (viz. high value vegetables, sugarcane, spices, jute etc.) are moderate to
highly susceptible to inundation, the poor farmers try to optimize agricultural returns from staple
food production (i.e., paddy) and ensure micro-level food self-sufficiency. Whereas, after ensuring
that their food self-sufficiency would be maintained by growing sufficient paddy, only a few
wealthy farming households actually opt for cash crops with a notion that even if these are totally
30
destroyed by a flood, their food self-sufficiency is guaranteed. Livelihoods of poor farmers are
highly sensitive to variability in water resources.
4.1.2 Food Distribution: Food distribution is a function of infrastructure and storage capacity.
Since both these factors are moderately sensitive to variability in water resources, food distribution
is also moderate to slightly affected by these factors.
Good quality infrastructure generally determines how quickly food may be transported from a
surplus area to a food deficit area. However, when a high intensity flood hits an area, it is often
found that the road network gets severely affected, which in turn affect food distribution. It is
intriguing to note that, traditionally food transportation has been arranged through riverine routes
(inland water navigation routes), which becomes a common means of alternative transportation
during a high flood in Bangladesh. Therefore, inundated road network poses little risks to disturb
food distribution.
In a floodplain the issue of storage for food appears a relatively major problem associated with food
distribution. Storage capacity, both at community level as well as at household level in flood plains
gets deteriorated with increasing water levels in an area. The density of public storage facility is
rather poor, which often becomes inaccessible under flood conditions. The household based storage
capacities of poor families in rural Bangladesh are generally in poor conditions, not suitable for
keeping the food items for a long period. In case of a high intensity flood, people suffer
considerable damages to stored food items, which in turn affect both community-wide and intrahousehold distribution of food.
4.1.3 Food Exchange: In general, food exchange does not show sensitivity to variability in water
resources. However, it is often observed following a disastrous extreme event (such as the floods of
1988 and 1998) that large scale food exchange takes place following the event, which in turn
increases overall food availability in an area. Almost simultaneously, remittance from abroad
registers a significant increase following such as event, which creates markets and induces
increased exchange of food in the locality.
4.2
Food Utilization
Both nutritional value of food and quality of food are sensitive climate (weather) variability. Even
higher levels of humidity in air can be detrimental for food safety and maintaining food quality in
rural households of Bangladesh. However, it is to be borne in mind that, the extent of sensitivity of
31
food utilization to variability in climate and water resources is much less than that for food
availability. A high intensity flood can totally jeopardize food availability if exchange and
distribution can me deliberately distorted (which actually took place in 1974), whereas the same
event may not totally disturb food utilization if the basic cooking norms are maintained and
adequate food is made available.
4.2.1 Nutritional Value: As found in the preceding section, the basic Bangladeshi diet is based on
rice, fish, lentil, and vegetables. However, the degree of intake of high value proteins (fish, meat,
eggs and lentils) depend on economic ability of a household. Fish, as the most preferred and widely
used source of protein, is produced in abundance in the vast flood plains of the country. However,
due to high market price, the poor do not eat fish and prefer to sell it in the market. They mostly
depend on lentil as the primary source of protein.
It is unfortunate that in recent decades, only an insignificant proportion of the total lentil demand
for the country is produced locally, mostly during the early Rabi season (winter to pre-summer).
However, the season also faces moderate to acute moisture stress on top soils and therefore, the
production of the vegetable protein is sensitive to variability in water resources. Production of eggs
are predominantly dependent now a days on poultry farming practices, which is only moderately
affected under a severe form of flood. Therefore, availability of other proteins is only slightly to
moderately sensitive to variability in water resources.
Although quality of food can effectively be enhanced by means of food processing (practiced all
over the world), if the storage conditions are not conducive quality of the processed food could also
be deteriorated by high humidity and available moisture in air. However, it is a basic management
issue and does not affect nutritional value too much for processed food.
The status of uptaking nutritional value from consumed food in Bangladesh is rather poor. During
monsoon months, in majority of the flood vulnerable areas in Bangladesh food is generally cooked
with contaminated water, which in turn poses threats of incidence of water borne diseases.
4.2.2 Social Value: Social value of food utilization does not show considerable sensitivity to
variability in water resources and weather patterns. The only exception might be higher tendency to
visit nearest kins by taking a boat ride and have meals together, which is often observed in rural
Bangladesh during the monsoon months. This traditional social behaviour is most suited to farming
households due to the fact that most of the crop fields are inundated and non-operable in any case
during the peak monsoon months and people tend to spend their time leisurely. therefore, people
attach high social value to taking meals together, which is often facilitated by vast water courses.
32
4.2.3 Food Supply: Food supply is generally moderate to highly sensitive to variability in water
resources. Chances of contamination of tubewells increase during peak monsoon season, when
large areas in the flood plains are generally inundated for prolonged periods. Such a high
probability of contamination of water sources may be attributed to high presence of pathogens in
drinking water. As indicated here, this is highly seasonal, because in dry winter months, such
contamination cannot take place. Intra-household food supply also gets disrupted if inundation
occurs within the household, affecting the homestead based storage facilities. The latter is quite
common throughout the study area.
4.3
Food Access
In addition to food production and availability, food access is also highly sensitive to variability in
water resources. People’s, especially poors’ ability to afford quality food (i.e., proteins etc.)
diminishes with increasing hardships influenced by either too much water or too little of it. A high
intensity weather-related event often reduces self-allocation and control over own production, as
extra money needs to be diverted for rehabilitation and recovery following the event.
4.3.1 Food Affordability: It is clearly demonstrated from the survey results that affordability of
food varies significantly among members of different economic classes. Poor are the most sufferer.
Prices for common food items are often increased during and after any high intensity water-related
event, which significantly reduces affordability of food for the poor people (del Ninno and Roy,
2001). In rural Bangladesh, the seasonal fluctuation of affordability is high, which may be
attributed to timing of crop harvests as well as timing of occurrence of high intensity events.
4.3.2 Food Allocation: Water-related disasters often demands immediate mobilization of
additional cash to initiate rehabilitation/recovery activities (Choudhury et al., 2004). In order to
manage cash, as a general coping measure, people tend to compromise self-allocation of food items
and sell the extra amount of food items. High intensity events significantly reduces poor farmers’
control over own production, as they tend to sell their produce in advance in a bid to raise some
funds to satisfy their immediate needs. This in turn increases their economic vulnerability, which
increases susceptibility to pauperization. High-intensity water-related events such as cyclonic storm
surge and floods often diminishes market efficiency in terms of deteriorating storage capacities,
which in turn affects food allocation for the inhabitants.
33
4.3.3 Food Preference: As indicated in the discussion of survey results, preferred carbohydrate
and protein are rice and fish – production and affordability of both being sensitive to variability in
water resources.
Preparation preference is also climate sensitive. A particular type of desert dish (vapa peetha) is
preferred during winter time, which is not generally eaten during summer or monsoon. On the other
hand, many other types of similar dishes are preferred during monsoon, which does not suit
culinary culture of the people in winter months. In the wetlands, a large variety of seasonal spinach
and herbs are grown in monsoon months, which suit the eating habits of people living along the
wetlands. For some of these varieties, people might not prepare the same food even if these were
found in winter. Therefore, there is an element of seasonality in preparation preference of food
throughout Bangladesh.
34
Annex-1
FOOD SYSTEM
COMPONENTS
Food Utilisation
Nutritional
Value
Greater Faridpur, BD
Food diversity
Mode of Data
collection
PDC
Primary protein
PDC
pulses
Other protein
Effect of food processing on
food quality
Disease incidence
PDC
PDC
fish & poultry
decreases quality
FGD, less
priority
Disease incidence due to
food utilisation is low to
moderate
Social Value
Social bonding/celebrations
Role of food in kinship
Esteem from agricultural
production/ farmer identity
Qualitative data
through FGD
important but weakening
weakening
Food Safety
Public awareness re hygiene
Presence of pathogens
contamination
Contamination of drinking water
Changes with seasonality
Storage conditions
Ingredients of food
PDC
Less important
PDC
PDC/FGD
Low
PDC
PDC
Poor
household incomes (including
remittances)
Pricing
proportion of food purchased
season fluctuation?
PDC
Generally low
PDC
PDC
FGD
Policy support?
Policy study
Overpriced (excptn: rice)
60% self-sufficient in rice
Seasonal affordability for
the ultra poor?
Conducive govt. policy but
inadequate institutional
support
Ability allocate production to
own consumption rather than
sell
Control over own production
Degree of market influence
(price)
household indebtedness
Household needs (how allocate
cash)
Age or gender differences?
Government intervention re
markets
Government food distribution
policy
PDC
forced to sell large amount
PDC
FGD+KII
sharcroppers get small share
market-driven
Food Access
Affordability
Key Determinant
Low
Arsenic in drinking water
Allocation
PDC
Policy Study
Inadequate
35
Preference
Food Availability
Production
Market efficiency (storage
capacity, integration…) for
staple foods or perishables
FGD+KII
low or poor
Preferred carbohydrate
preferred protein
role of advertising
PDC
PDC
FGD
Rice dominates culturally
Fish but expensive
Advertisement is not yet
important
preparation preferences
changes in consumption patterns
FGD
PDC OR
secondary data
Socio-cultural values
Seasonality of preference
FGD
FGD
Size of land holdings
Land: Dominance of small
holdings
Share-cropping system
exists, however not so
important
low
Tenancy arrangements
Degree of self-sufficiency
(household)
Principal crop?
importance of cash crops and
livestock
spatial variation in production
Rice, rice
High value crops reduced
over time
Production is susceptible to
land types
Less-suitable for crop
diversification because of
dominance of low lands
Uptake of improved
technologies are in progress
High seasonality
Potential for crop diversification
Use of improved technologies
Distribution
Exchange
changing towards more
commercially processed
food
Degree of seasonality
Labor available or constrained
Other biophysical constraints
Infrastructure
Relatively poor
infrastructure;
Public safety net
Storage facilities
Policy analysis
Secondary data
Is distribution skewed or
balanced? How?
PDC
Importance of exchange for hh
food consumption
Trade more external or internal
(to district?
Chief exports (quantify if you
can)
Chief imports ?? State or district
level?
PDC
KII
FGD+KII
FGD+KII
Govt. Storage capacity is
low
Skewed, uneven
distribution;
Trade is important, no
embargo in-country trade
external
Fish; pulses, sugar & spices
exported;
cereals and edible oils
Notes: PDC stands for Primary Data Collection (through questionnaire survey from the field).
36
Annex-2
A Review of the Existing Literature on Facets of Food System in Bangladesh
(Food Security: Production)

In their paper entitled “Towards Sustainable Food Security in Bangladesh”, Z. Karim et. al.
(1997) has stressed the need for maintaining considerable increase in food production, keeping pace
with the population growth rate, to meet the energy requirement of 2301 Kcal/day for every adult.
The cereal food production that registered an increase, mainly being that of rice, from 14.48 metric
tons in 1984-85 to 19.0 metric tons in 1995-96 resulted mainly from the development of modern
varieties (HYV) of rice and that of management technologies. Still, they consider, there remain
wide gaps between the potential and achieved crop yields, and technologies are yet to be developed
to deal with the onset of unfavourable environmental conditions.
Keeping in mind the population growth, poverty situation, nutritional status, production
possibilities, agronomic factors, availability of production inputs, etc., they have attempted to
project the requirement of various food items under different possible income growth scenarios for
the year 2000, 2010, 2020, and 2030.
According to them, given the limited land resources
enhanced production must come from vertical increase in yield in the pursuit of ensuring
sustainable food security. They have recommended that the existing gap between potential and
actual yields can be narrowed down through adequate crop husbandry and soil, fertilizer and water
management practices, and extending modern irrigation facilities to potentially irrigable areas.
(Distribution, Public Safety Net; Private Imports)

Ninno, C.D. and Dorosh, P.A. (2001) in the working paper “Averting A Food Crisis: Private
Imports and Public Targeted Distribution in Bangladesh after the 1998 Flood” prepared under
FMRSP program of IFPRI, have analyzed the effects of 1998 flood on domestic production that
posed an ominous threat to food security for a vast majority of people and
have highlighted the
role of public and private sector imports in augmenting supply and stabilizing prices. The have kept
their observation that trade liberalization of the early 1990s allowed private imports which
eventually rendered remarkably positive results in stabilizing market prices and in ensuring
37
supplies. Side by side with private efforts, the food distribution program of the government in the
forms of immediate relief efforts and Vulnerable Group Feeding (VGF) and efforts of NGOs
increased poor peoples’ access to food as well. They came up with a stunning inference that
although foreign assistance in kind or as cash can provide resources for the government to run food
distribution program, the contribution of food-aid to total availability of food may seem to be
minimum under a liberalized trade regime where private provision of imports is effectively present.
(Exchange: Rice Exports from BD)

In a working paper published by IFPRI (2000) ─ “Rationale and Mechanics of Rice Exports
from Bangladesh” M. Rahman made an attempt to explore the possibility for Bangladesh to become
an exporter of rice to international markets, reverting the role of a recent importer, on the ground of
rapidly rising production of rice along with liberalized market policies, following the instance of
India and China. The technology of the ‘green revolution’─ sowing of High Yielding Variety
(HYV) seeds, enhanced use of irrigation, fertilizer, pesticides, etc. augmented the production of
rice. Yet their lies ample scope to increase average yield of 2.7 MT per hectare, which is less than
half of the per hectare yields exists in many developed countries, and to reach somewhere near
potential level of output.
An enhanced production and development of super-fine, aromatic, organic, and other highvalue varieties of rice may offer the best comparative advantage while considering export to a much
wider international market in this regard. The possibility of export of medium to coarse parboiled
rice also remains high. Thus under a favourable governmental policy that recourse to a trade-based
stabilization policy of import in case of any shortage caused by natural disasters, and exports at
times of high production, rice prices may be kept within a narrow band of import-export parity
prices as an instrument of price stabilization. The possible surplus from increased earning arising
out of exports of special varieties of rice can contribute to ensuring food security for the poor,
opines the author.
(Distribution: Public Food Distribution System)

It is a known fact that the public food distribution system (PFDS) can serve, other than
stabilizing prices, both as a mechanism of increasing access to food by poor households and as a
means to provide relief to households affected by natural disasters.
38
D.C. Ninno in an IFPRI working paper (2000), “An investigation of the VGD and RD Programs”
attempted to estimate the actual value of the PFDS to producers and consumers i.e. to estimate the
costs and benefits of the PFDS and alternative stock options.
He tried to analyze various
combinations of stocks and distribution levels by estimating financial costs to government and
overall benefits to producers and consumers, without considering the possible effects on market
price stabilization.
Although a reduction in the level of PFDS and liberalization of trade in the early 1990s
diminished the government’s control over the share of total food-grain sales and supply of foodgrains through imports, and the government’s influence on domestic market prices, the domestic
procurement program has retained its importance. Since the issue of price stabilization especially
the upswings of prices of food-grains, prices of rice in particular, are viewed as crisis and a failure
of the government to ensure food security, the need for government intervention, particularly for
increased public stock appears high.
It is revealed in the analysis of the study that current stock
levels are broadly consistent with the current level of PFDS distribution, given the available stock
rotation options. Whereas holding higher stocks, keeping the level of distribution unchanged, can
result in quality losses, and holding lower stocks, on the other hand, may pose the emergency
distribution needs at stake, small changes in the stock levels have relatively small effects on the
costs and benefits of the PFDS.
(Distribution: PFDS)

Given the fact that production of rice in the 80’s has experienced growth and gas been more
stable than in the 70’s, Goletti, F. and Ahmed, R. in their food policy research paper entitled,
“Foodgrains in Bangladesh: Past Trends and Projections to Year 2000”, have examined the
behaviour of rice yields across regions of the country and over time i.e. whether the yields of rice
differ widely across regions, and have tested the hypothesis of increasing the productivity gap
between regions. The findings indicate that productivity growth and initial levels of productivity
are not associated, implying the fact that the gap between more productive and less productive
regions is neither diverging nor converging. The results also suggests that adoption of technological
change─ use of high yielding varieties (HYV) and irrigation in particular, plays a major role in
explaining the growth in productivity as well as production.
39
(Distribution: Public Safety Nets)

Dorosh, P. and Shahabuddin, Q. (2001) in their paper entitled, “Price Stabilization and the
Cost of Food Stocks”, they analyzed the results of an field-level investigation, conducting a series
of structured interviews─ both with and without using questionnaires, into the efficiency of two
large targeted food programs which are considered safety net measures, namely Vulnerable Group
Development (VGD) and Rural Development (RD) program (of WFP) in increasing the income and
the consumption of grain of the intended beneficiaries. The main focus of their work was on
measuring the effectiveness of food delivery i.e. the extent of leakage, if any, and the food
consumption ratio in the case of the VGD program, and on finding the effectiveness of food
delivery (leakage) and the food transfer ratio for the RD program. For each of the program, they
intended to look at the fund delivery system and attempted to analyze possible sources of
inefficiencies and to identify the steps required to check those.
Since the investigation was carried out in only a few locations, they might not have
produced statistically significant estimates of the efficiencies of the system. But the findings could
be regarded as being indicative, they opined. The results suggested that those programs were not
efficient in delivering food transfers since the leakages in both cases were positive and sizable. The
main source of those leakages turned out to be the underestimation of the amount of work done and
the overestimation of resources needed and used in carrying out that work.
(Exchange: Prospects of Imports from India)

In the backdrop of the notion that Bangladesh can achieve/ maintain food security in times
of crises by exploring import of rice from its next-door neighbour India under the liberalized
regime of foodgrain trade, S.R. Osmani (1998) in the IFPRI working paper, “Aspects of India’s
Food Economy and their Implications for Rice Trade between India and Bangladesh” has addressed
the potential for continued exports of Indian rice to Bangladesh in the context of several aspects of
Indian economy as well as food policy. Analyzing the growth in rice production, the level of
adoption of HYV technology, governmental support by providing subsidy on agricultural inputs,
domestic demand for and per capita consumption of cereals, likely situation of domestic food
security in the wake of exports, and the level of efficiency of Targeted Food Distribution Program,
the author has drawn the inference that India is likely to harness the comparative advantage of trade
while safeguarding its own food security and continue to export rice. According to him, as
40
compared to the traditional and expensive methods of holding buffer stocks and to use the
inefficient bureaucratic machinery to import food at the time of need, such private trade with India
in times of crises may provide a relatively less expensive way of strengthening the food security of
Bangladesh.
(Exchange: Transpotation)

Jaim, W.M., Baulch, B. and Sabur, S.A. in their project report, “The Spatial Integration and
Pricing Efficiency of The Private Sector Grain Trade in Bangladesh: The Long-distance Foodgrain
Traders’ Survey”, they attempted to elicit the supply chain, to find-out the varieties and grades of
foodgrain traded, to estimate the transport costs, handling costs and profit margin, to identify the
associated problems and constraints. Administering a field-level survey using structured
questionnaires and key informants interview, they analyzed the data and came up with the finding
that among different modes of transportation, transport cost by rail and river were cheaper as
compared to that by trucks, but the handling cost for rail and river transportation were expensive
due to the provision of payments of various types of legal and illegal fees. For long-distance trading
of foodgrain , trucking cost per quintal decreases with the increase of distance. Traders’ margin at
Dhaka wholesale market was found to be higher in comparison with other selected markets. Profit
margin in relation to total transfer cost varied within reasonable range of 15% to 25% for the
majority of the rice wholesale markets, whereas in the case of wheat the corresponding percentage
was strikingly low.
(Food Aid, Pricing, PFDS)

Given the background that food aid has contributed over the last three decades to foodgrain
availability at the national level, has increased poor peoples’ excess to food at the household level,
has helped successful development projects and programs, and, by and large, historically played an
important role in the government’s efforts to increase food security in Bangladesh, the study “Food
Aid and Producer Price Incentives”, conducted by Dorosh, P.A. et. al. (2001), has thoroughly
examined the role of food aid in food security in Bangladesh, ascribing special emphasis on the
implications of changes in the level of food aid inflows for domestic food production, incomes,
market prices, imports, and government expenditures. Potentially food aid can adversely affect the
country’s food production and incomes of farmers by reducing domestic prices and farmers’
41
incentives for domestic production, by distorting local labour markets, by enabling a country to
neglect its domestic agriculture.
The authors found that food aid did not lead to price disincentive effects for wheat farmers
of Bangladesh, for the period 1998-2000 which includes the devastating flood of 1998, as domestic
prices remained close to estimated import parity prices and large amounts of wheat were imported
by the private sector. The higher the import parity price of wheat, the smaller the amount of net
public distribution of wheat that can be distributed without depressing domestic wheat market
prices below import parity. Elasticity of demand for and supply of wheat have negative impact (i.e.
more elastic demand and supply reduces the level) and prices of rice have positive impact (with low
rice prices, wheat demand falls) on the ‘safe level’ (defined as the maximum amount of food aid
that can be distributed without having an adverse impact on wheat prices) of food aid. Since cuts in
food aid could potentially cost Bangladesh millions of dollars per year in resources and could
decrease access to food by poor households, they concluded with the recommendation that donors
should not cut resources (they may provide resources in form of cash instead of food) devoted for
food security in Bangladesh, even if the need for food aid to increase availability of foodgrains
diminishes.
(Economic growth, poverty reduction, changes in consumption pattern)

The objective of the paper entitled, “Poverty Trends and Agricultural Growth Linkages”
written by M.K. Mujeri (2000), has been to identify emerging challenges and to suggest future
directions of agricultural growth for promoting an enabling environment for poverty alleviating
growth in Bangladesh. He has assessed the poverty situation, poverty characteristics and, growth
rates of the country since 1980s, and tried to establish some links between growth and poverty. He
has found that declining poverty is associated with relatively high GDP growth originating in
agriculture. A high agricultural growth has positive impact on rural wages and creates synergies
for diversification of the rural economy and development of rural non-farm sector having greater
impact on poverty reduction.
Changes have occurred, over the period, in consumption patterns─ shift in consumption
from cereals to non-cereals within food and from food to non-food in overall consumption, and in
per capita intake of food between the poor and the non-poor in both rural and urban areas. With
declining rate of population growth and higher growth in per capita income, an income-induced
42
pattern of demand for agricultural output is likely to emerge as the major determinant of future food
consumption, implying a lower growth in demand for cereals and a strong market demand for noncereal crops and non-crop agriculture which necessitates significant adjustments and resource
reallocation. In order to meet the challenges, he has emphasized on the necessity of actions in the
following areas: intensification of production of existing crops (e.g. rice), diversification to high
return crops having comparative advantage, acceleration of investment in agriculture embodying
technological innovations, and improvements in non-crop agriculture.
(PFDS and Consumption & Nutritional Status)

In the paper entitled “The Public Food Distribution System in Bangladesh: A Review of
Past Impact Studies and a Plan for Further Analysis”, J. Alwang (1991) intended to provide a
detailed study of the impacts of various Public Food Distribution System (PFDS) programs on
consumption and nutrition of rural poor. A review of a number of studies on the effectiveness of
PFDS and of nutritional status in Bangladesh, and an outline of a plan of work for the IFPRI
consumption/ nutrition study in Bangladesh have been presented in the paper.
It has been reflected in the review of studies that nutritional status is very poor in general,
especially in rural Bangladesh. Since there is a nexus between malnutrition, inadequate food
consumption and poverty, PFDS can turn out to be an important means of addressing the problem.
Although a number of PFDS programs aimed at improving nutritional status of the vulnerable
groups, those were found to be poorly administered and very leaky. A connection between program
participation and improved consumption and nutritional status has not been established in any of
the studies. The work plan, provided in the IFPRI study conducted by the author, has been designed
to investigate these links.
(Food Exchange: Food Aid)

Against the backdrop of the trend that Bangladesh was increasingly becoming dependent on
external sources for food, Mahmood, R.A. and Islam, A.B.M.S. (1994) in their paper entitled
“Bangladesh’s External Dependence for Food: Food Gap or Domestic Resource Gap” attempted to
analyze the relative importance of two possible variants of food import:
i)
there could be a food deficit in the country─ domestic production falling short of
food requirements as based on population growth, and
43
ii)
the external dependence for food may be due to the flow of external resources into
the country in the form of food rather than due to domestic food deficit.
The hypothesis they tested was that the country’s external dependence for food was a part of her
dependence on external resources to finance various development related activities with very little
bearing on country’s food deficit as due to population growth. They made an attempt to analyze the
possible relationships between change in population and food requirement, to elicit interlinkages
between food import and economic development, and to numerically ascertain the relative
importance of the alternative factors underlying external dependence on food.
(Addressing Food Security issues)

In his paper entitled, “Towards Ensuring Food Security in Bangladesh” Q.K. Ahmed (2001)
has been concerned with various key issues relating to food insecurity. In addition to moral and
ethical issues, the author considers that a fundamental development challenge the country faces is
when a significant portion of country’s population is constrained to have less than adequate food.
He has recognized that the longer the challenge remains unresolved, the more entrenched it may
become, adversely impacting on the poverty alleviation and nation-building initiatives to a large
extent. Within the purview of the paper the author has discussed and analyzed a wide range issues
related to food insecurity in Bangladesh that include the nature and magnitude of the problem,
possible way of approaching its resolution, the constraints encountered and the ways of addressing
those, and the role of social mobilization and community empowerment. He concluded with
stressing the need for effective governance, strong political and social commitment for resolving
the problem.
44
Annex-3
Bibliography
Aziz, M.A. 1993. Production and consumption of wheat in Bangladesh. Canadian High
Commission, Dhaka. Photocopy.
Abdullah, A and Quazi Shahabuddin, 1996, "Recent Development in Bangladesh
Agriculture: Crop Sector" in Growth or Stagnation: A Review of Bangladesh's
Development 1996, CPD and UP, Dhaka
Abdullah, A. A. (1984), The Fertilizer Subsidy, Cost and Returns, in Bangladesh
Development Studies, vol. 13, no. 3/4, pp.141-146.
Abdullah, A. A. and Murshid, K. A. S. (1986).”The Distribution of Benefits from the Public Food
Distribution System", Research Report No.60, Bangladesh Institute of Development
Studies, Dhaka.
Abdullah, T. “Report on Homestead Agricultural production in Rural BD, Dhaka, The Ford
Foundation, 1983.
Choudhury, Abu Yusuf; Banu, Laila Agjuman; Islam, A.K.M. Mainal; Chowdhury, A.M.R. and
Faisel, A.J., December, 1990; PRE and Post NATAL food HABITS and birth practices in
Rural Bangladesh. Program for the Introduction and Adaptation of Contraceptive
Technology, Bangladesh.
Ahmad, K. and Hassan, N. ends, (1983), Nutrition Survey of Rural Bangladesh, 1981-82. Institute
of Nutrition and Food Science, university of Dhaka, Dhaka.
Ahmad, K.U. 1967. New techniques for the propagation of mango, EPAI Annual Magazine.
Ahmad. Q. K. and Hossain. Mahabub (1984) "Rural Poverty Alleviation in Bangladesh:
Experences and Policies”. FAO, Rome.
Ahmed, A, U., D. Puetz, S. Zohir, and N. Hassan. 1996. Joint evaluation of European Union
Programme Food Aid Stage Two. Bangladesh: An extended study. Revised report prepared
for the European Development Council Working Group of Heads of Evaluation.
International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, D.C. Photocopy.
Ahmed, A. U. 1990. Food policy in Bangladesh: An analysis of economic efficiency and
distributive justice. Ph.D. thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colo., U.S.A.
Ahmed, A. U. 1992. Operational performance of the rural rationing program in Bangladesh.
Working paper on Bangladesh No. 5. Washington, D. C.: International Food Policy Research
Institute.
Ahmed, A. U. 1993. Food consumption and nutritional effects of targeted food interventions in
Bangladesh. Bangladesh Food Policy Project Working Paper 31. Dhaka: International Food
Policy Research Institute.
Ahmed, A. U. and Y. Shams. 1994. Nutritional Effects of Cash versus Commodity-based
Public Works Programs. Bangladesh Food Policy Project Manuscript Number 63.
Dhaka. International Food Policy Research Institute.
45
Ahmed, A. U., and K. Billah. 1994. Food for education program in Bangladesh: An early
assessment. Bangladesh Food Policy Project 62. Dhaka: International Food Policy Research
Institute.
Ahmed, A. U., D. Puetz, S. Zohir, and N. Hassan. 1996. Joint evaluation of European Union
Programme Food Aid Stage Two. Bangladesh: An extended study. Revised report
prepared for the European Development Council Working Group of Heads of
Evaluation. International Food Policy Research Institute. Washington, D.C. Photocopy.
Ahmed, A. U., S. Zohir, S. K. Kumar, and O. H. Chowdhury. 1995. Bangladesh's Food-for-Work
program and alternatives to improve food security. In Employment for poverty reduction
and food security, ed. J. von Braun. Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy Research
Institute.
Ahmed, A.U. (Forthcoming): "Trends in Consumption, Nutrition and Poverty"; Coming Out of The
Shadow of Famine: Evolving Food Markets and Food Policy in Bangladesh. International
Food Policy Research Institute, Washington D. C..
Ahmed, K,. and Hassan N: Nutrition Survey of Rural Bangladesh, 1981-82. Institute of Nutrition
and Food Science, Dhaka, 1983.
Ahmed, M. and Ahmed, I. (1987) "Socio-Economic Survey on the Beneficiaries of the IDAassisted HTW Project", mimeo, Dhaka.
Ahmed, R. 1979. Foodgrain supply, distribution, and consumption policies within a dual pricing
mechanism: A case study of Bangladesh. Research Report 8. Washington, D.C.:
International Food Policy Research Institute.
Ahmed, R. and A. Bernard. (1989), Rice Price Fluctuations and an Approach to Price
Stabilization in Bangladesh, IFPRI Research Report 72, Washington D.C.: International
Food Policy Research Institute.
Ahmed, R.U. (1989), Longterm Food Problems of Bangladesh: Options and Policy
Direction in Bangladesh Planning Commission, Food Strategies in Bangladesh,
University Press Ltd., Dhaka.
Ahmed, Rais Uddin (1979) “'Foodgrain Supply, Distribution and Consumption Policies Within a
Dual Pricing Mechanism: A Case Study of Bangladesh”, Research Report No. 8
International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington D.C.
Ahmed, Rais Uddin (1981) Agricultural Price Policies Under Complex Socio-Economic and
Natural Constraints: The Case of Bangladesh”, Research Report No. 27, International Food
Policy Research Institute, Washington D.C.
Ahmed, Rais Uddin (1988). “Public Foodgrain Distribution System and Food Price Policies in
Bangladesh: A Program of Research and Advisory Services", A Report Prepared for
USAID and the Food Ministry, Government of Bangladesh, Dhaka.
Ahmed, Rais Uddin and Bernard, A. (1987) “Seasonality of Rice Prices, Effect of New Technology
and an Approach to Rice Price Stabilization in Bangladesh", mimeo, International Food
Policy Research Institute, Washington D.C.
Ahmed, Rais Uddin and Hossain, Mahabub (1988) "Infrastructure and Development of the Rural
Economy of Bangladesh", mimeo, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington
D.C.
46
Ahmed, Raisuddin and Andrew Bernard (1989): "Rice Price Fluctuations and an Approach to Price
Stabilization in Bangladesh"; Research report 72, Washington, D.C: International Food
Policy Research Institute.
Ahmed, Raisuddin, and Andrew Bernard, Forthcoming. Seasonality of rice prices, effect of new
technology, and an approach to rice price stabilization in Bangladesh. Washington D. C.:
IFPRI.
Ahmed, Raisuddin. 1979. Food grain supply, distribution, and consumption policies within a dual
pricing mechanism: A case study of Bangladesh. Research Report 8. Washington, D. C.:
IFPRI.
Ahmed, S. M. 1992. A survey of Bangladesh wheat area and production for 1992/93. international
Maize and Wheat Improvement Center, Dhaka. Photocopy.
Alamgir Mohiuddin and Berlage, L.J.J.B. ‘Food grain (Rice and Wheat ) Demand, import and price
policy for Bangladesh .’ The Bangladesh economic review, vol-I, no-1, January 1973.
Dhaka, BIDS.
Alamgir, Mohiuddin and Lodewijk J. J. B. Berlage (1973): "Foodgrain (Rice and wheat) Demand,
Import and Price Policy for Bangladesh"; The Bangladesh Economic Review, 1973, Vol. I,
No. 1, January 1973.
Alauddin, M. and Tisdell, C. (1987). ‘Trends and projections for Bangladeshi Food production: An
Alternative viewpoint”, Food Policy, 12:318-31.
Alwang, J. 1991. A literature review of Public Food Distribution In Bangladesh. Working paper 1.
Washington, D.C: IFPRI. Mimeo.
Amin, Nurul (1986) "Urban Unemployment and Underemployment", in Islam, R. and Muqtada, M.
(Eds.) (1986) Bangladesh: Selected Issues and Employment and Development, ILO/
ARTEP, New Delhi.
Asaduzzaman, M. (1979), “Adoption of HYV Rice in Bangladesh", Bangladesh Development
Studies, Vol. 7 (3) pp. 23-49.
Asaduzzaman, M. (1987) “Coastal Area Development, Environmental Change and their SocioEconomic implications in Bangladesh”. mimeo, Dhaka.
Asaduzzaman, M. (1988) “Access of Urban Poor to Food and Energy in Bangladesh”, United
Nations University, Tokyo.
Asaduzzaman, M. and B. Huddleston. 1983. ‘An Evaluation of Management of Food for
Work Programme’ in The Bangladesh Development Studies Volume XI (Numbers 1&
2). Dhaka. Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies.
Aziz, M.A., 1994. Reform in Public Food Distribution System in Bangladesh.
Bangladesh Academy for Rural Development (1983) The Works of Akhter Hameed Khan, (Vol.
III), Comilla.
Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (1985) Fertilizer Recommendation Guide for Most
Bangladesh Crops, BARC, Dhaka.
Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC), 1995. Strategic Plan for the National
Agricultural Research System to the Year 2010 and Beyond.
Bangladesh Agriculture Sector Review (1988) “Selected Issues in Agricultural Development: A
Second Preliminary Report”, Prepared by an Independent Group and Sponsored by UNDP,
Dhaka.
Bangladesh Agriculture Sector Review (1989) "Main Report-Bangladesh Agriculture: Policies and
47
Performance”, Prepared by an Independent Group and Sponsored by UNDP, Dhaka.
Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (1978). Land Occupancy Survey, Government of Bangladesh,
Dhaka.
Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (1984) The Bangladesh Population Census, 1981, Government of
Bangladesh, Dhaka.
Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (1985) Statistical Yearbook of Bangladesh, 1985. Government of
Bangladesh, Dhaka.
Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (1986a) The Bangladesh Census of Agriculture and livestock:
1983-84, Government of Bangladesh, Dhaka.
Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (1986b) Final Report: Labour Force Survey 1983-84, Government
of Bangladesh, Dhaka.
Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (1986c) Report of the Household Expenditure Survey, 1981-82,
Government of Bangladesh, Dhaka.
Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (1987a) Report of the Child Nutrition Status Module, Government
of Bangladesh, Dhaka.
Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (1987b) Yearbook of Agricultural Statistics of Bangladesh, 198586, Government of Bangladesh, Dhaka.
Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (1988a) Report of the Household Expenditure Survey, 1983-84,
Government of Bangladesh, Dhaka.
Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (2005). Compendium of Environment Statistics of Bangladesh.
Government of Bangladesh, Dhaka.
Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS): Report on the Household Expenditure 1988/89. Ministry of
Planning. Government of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh, Dhaka, 1991.
Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. Various issues. Statistical yearbook of Bangladesh. Dhaka: BBS.
Bangladesh Ministry of Food, Food Planning and Monitoring Unit. Various years. Food situation
report. Dhaka: Ministry of Food.
Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee (1987) “Rural Development Programme: Annual
Report”, Dhaka.
Bangladesh, Master Plan Organization. 1986. National Water plan, vol. 1.Dhaka: MPO
Bangladesh, Ministry of Agriculture. 1985, Fertilizer pricing policies and food grain production
strategy. IFPRI and BIDS joint report. Dhaka: IFPRI and IDS.
Bautista. Romeo (1983) “Industrial Policy and Development in the ASEAN Countries”,
Monograph No. 2, Philippine Institute for Development. Manila.
BBS (Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies). 1997. An evaluation of the food for education
program: Enhancing accessibility to and retention in primary education for the rural poor in
Bangladesh. Dhaka.
BBS, ‘Report of child nutrition status module’. Bangladesh household expenditure survey 1985-86.
Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, January 1987.
Begum, S. 1997. “Food grain Marketing Review”, South Asian Countries and BD. Department of
Agricultural Marketing, Dhaka.
Berlage, L.J.J.B (1972), Foodgrain demand, supply and policies in Bangladesh, unpublished Ph.D.
Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, U.S.A.
Bhagwati, J. N. (1988) "Poverty and Public Policy", World Development, Vol. 16(5) pp. 539-556.
Binswanger, H., Shahidur, K., and Rosenswig, M. (1988) "The Impact of Infrastructure and
48
Financial Institutions on Agricultural Output and Investment in India" (Draft Report),
World Bank, Washington D.C.
Biswas, M. R. et al. (Eds.) (1987) Water Market in Bangladesh, Department of Irrigation and Water
Management, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh.
Blair, H. (1978) "Rural Development, Class Structure and Bureaucracy in Bangladesh", World
Development, Vol. 6 (1) pp. 65-82.
Bose, S. (1987), Agrarian Bengal, Orient Longman Limited, Bombay.
Bouis, Howarth E. 1983. Seasonal rice price variation in the Philippines: Measuring the effects of
government intervention. Food Research Institute Studies 19 (1): 81-92.
Boyce, J. K. (1986) "Water Control and Agricultural Performance in Bangladesh” Bangladesh
Development Studies, Vol. 14 (4), pp. 1-36.
Boyce, J. K. (1987), Agrarian Impasse in Bengal : Agricultural Growth in Bangladesh and
West Bengal 1949-1980, Oxford University Press, New York.
Brammer, H. (1987) "Drought in Bangladesh: Lessons for Planners and Administrators” Disasters,
Vol. 11 (1) pp. 21-29.
Braun, Joachin Von and et al, 1992, Improving Food Security of the Poor; Concept,
Policy and Programs, Mimeo, IFPRI, Washington, D.C.
Bruno, M. 1967. The optimal selection of export-promoting and import-substituting projects.
Planning Ihe exlernal seclor: Techniques. problems, and policies. Re- port on the First
Interregional Seminar on Development Planning, Ankara, Tur- key, 6-17 September, 1965,
Document ST/TAO/SER.c/91: 88-135. New York: United Nations.
Byerlee, D., and J. longmire. 1986. Comparative advantage and policy incentives for rainfed and
irrigated wheat in Mexico. Economics Program Working Paper 01/86. Mexico, D.F.:
International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center.
Byerlee, D., and M. L. Morris. 1993. Calculating levels of protection: Is it always appropriate to
use world reference prices based on current trading patterns? World Development 21 (no.5):
805-815.
Centre for International Economics, 1997. ‘Economic effects of grain food aid on the
production of wheat in Bangladesh’, Centre for International Economics, Canberra &
Sydney.
Chen, L.C. (1975), “An Analysis of per capita foodgrain availability, consumption and
requirements in Bangladesh: A systematic approach to food planning”. The Bangladesh
Development Studies, 3:93-126.
Choudhury, Nurn Nabi and Aziz, Abdul M., "Feasibility of Rice Exports from
Bangladesh" Ministry of Food, Government of Bangladesh. (Mimeo)
Chowdhllry, N. (1988a) "Rangladesh’s Handloom Economy in Transition: A Case of Structural
Adjustment and Economic Mobility Amid Laissez-Faire Markets-a Synthesis”. Report
Prepared for the Ministry of Textiles, Government of Bangladesh and the World Bank,
Dhaka.
Chowdhury, A. M., Rice policy in Bangladesh, 1947-77: M. A. Thesis, Faculty of
Economics,Thammasat University , Bankok , August 1978.
Chowdhury, Abdul Hamid, 1997. Development Cooperation in Food Security of Bangladesh.
Chowdhury, N. (1986) "Public Foodgrain Distribution System in Bangladesh in the Post-liberation
Period: A Historical Profile", Bangladesh Development Studies, Vol. 14 (3) pp.67-95.
49
Chowdhury, N. (1987a) "Seasonality of Foodgrain Prices and the Public Procurement Programme
in Bangladesh Since Liberation: An Exploratory Study", Bangladesh Development Studies,
Vol. 15 (1) pp. 105-128.
Chowdhury, N. (1987b) "Urban Rationing in Bangladesh in the 1980s: The Distribution of its
Benefits" Bangladesh Development Studies. Vol. 15 (4) pp. 53-84.
Chowdhury, N. (1988b) "Where the Poor Come Last: The Case of Modified Rationing in
Bangladesh", Bangladesh Development Studies, Vol. 16 (1) pp. 27-54.
Chowdhury, N. (1989), The Changing Food System: Storage, Transport, Marketing and
Distribution Issues in Food Strategies in Bangladesh, Bangladesh Planning Commission,
University Press Ltd., Dhaka.
Chowdhury, N. 1988. Where the poor come last: The case of modified rationing in Bangladesh. The
Bangladesh Development Studies 16: 27-51.
Chowdhury, N. and Rushdi, A.A. (1988) "Modified Rationing in Bangladesh: An Exercise in
Reform to Increase its Effectiveness", A Report Prepared for the Ministry of Food,
Government of Bangladesh, Beacon Consultants, Dhaka.
Chowdhury, N. Shahabuddin, Q. and Chowdhury, O.H. (1986) "The Existing System of Public
Foodgrain Distribution in Bangladesh and Proposal for Restructuring". A Report Prepared
for the Ministry of Food, Government of Bangladesh, Beacon Consultants, Dhaka.
Chowdhury, N., and N. Farid. 1994. Access to non-cereal food and household food security:
Concepts, evidence, and implications for food policy. Paper presented to the Seminar on
Emerging Food Markets and Food Policy, jointly sponsored by the Government of
Bangladesh, International Food Policy Research Institute, and the U. S. Agency for
International Development, Dhaka, May 2-4.
Chowdhury, N., Q. Shahabuddin, and O. H. Chowdhury. 1986. Report on the existing system of
public food grain distribution in Bangladesh and proposal for restructuring. Bangladesh
Ministry of Food/Beacon Consultant. Mimeo.
Chowdhury, O.H. (1983) "Profile of Workers in the FFWP in Bangladesh", Bangladesh
Development Studies, Vol. 11 (1/2) pp. 111-134.
CIMMYT (International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center). 1991. 1990-91 CIMMYT world
wheat facts and trend: Wheat and barley production in rainfed marginal environments of
the developing world. Mexico, D.F.: CIMMYT.
Clay, E. et. al. (1989), in the Introduction of Food Strategies in Bangladesh, Bangladesh Planning
Commission, University Press Ltd. Dhaka.
Clay, E.J. (1981), Poverty, Food insecurity and public policy in Bangladesh, in Clay, E.J. et Al
(1981). Food policy issues in low income countries, World Bank staff working paper No.
473, Washington D.C.: 48-84.
Clay, Edward J., “Bangladesh’s third food system crisis”. Paper produced for conference on
Bangladesh, prospects for broader development studies, University of Sussex, July 1979.
Dainik Khabar (newspaper). 29 June 1992. Dhaka.
del Ninno, Carlo and Dilip Roy. 1999. Impact of the 1998 Flood on Labor Markets and Food
Security and Effectiveness of Relief Operations. FMRSP Working Paper No. 8. IFPRI,
Dhaka.
del Ninno, Carlo and Dilip Roy. 1999. The 1998 Flood and Household Food Security: Evidence
fr-om Rural Bangladesh. FMRSP Working Paper No. 9. IFPRI, Dhaka.
50
del Ninno, Carlo and Dilip Roy. 2001. Recovering from the Shock of the 1998 Flood:
Household Food Security and Nutritional Status One Year Later. FMRSP Working
Paper No. 23. IFPRI, Dhaka
Del Ninno, Carlo and Dorosh, Paul, 1998 "Government Policy, Markets and Food
del Ninno, Carlo and Paul Dorosh. 2000. In-Kind Transfers and Household food Consumption:
Implication for Targeted Food Programs in Bangladesh. FMRSP Working Paper No.
17. IFPRI, Dhaka.
del Ninno, Carlo and Paul Dorosh. 2001 Averting Food Crisis: Private Imports and Public
Targeted Distribution in Bangladesh after the 1998 Flood. FMRSP Working Paper No.
18. IFPRI, Dhaka.
Del Nino, C. and P. Dorosh. 1998. Govt. policy, markets and food security in Bangladesh. Food
Management and Research support project, IFPRI, Dhaka, Bangladesh, Mimeo.
Dorosh, P. and S. Haggblade. 1995. Shifting Sands: The Changing Case for Monetizing
Project Food Aid in Bangladesh. Ithaca, N.Y. Cornell University.
Dorosh, P., and S. Haggblade. 1996. Shifting sands: The changing case for monetizing project food
aid in Bangladesh. Cornell Food and Nutrition Policy Program, Ithaca, N.Y. Photocopy.
Dorosh, P., and S. Haggblade. 1997. Shifting Sands: The Changing case for monetizing project
food aid in Bangladesh. World Development 25, no. 12: 2093-2104.
Dorosh, Paul A and Haggblade, S., 1995. ‘Filling the Gaps: Consolidating Evidence on the
Design of Alternative Targeted Food Programmes in Bangladesh’, The Bangladesh
Development Studies, Vol. XX11, Sep-Dec, Nos. 3 & 4.
Dorosh, Paul A., 2000, ‘Foodgrain production and imports: Towards self -sufficiency in
rice’, Out of the shadow of famine: Evolving food markets and food policy in
Bangladesh, International Food policy Research Institute, Washington D. C.
Dorosh. Paul A, (1999b), Food Grain Markets and Policy in the Aftermath of the 1998 Flood.
FMRSP Working Paper No. 08
Ericksen, P.J., 2006. Conceptualizing Food Systems for Global Environmental Change (GEC)
Research. GECAFS Working Paper 2., Wallingford, UK.
Etienne, G., 1984, Food grain production and population in Asia: China, India, and Bangladesh.
New York: September, 1984.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 1995. FAO Agrostat-PC, V.3.0.
Crop production domain. Rome. Computer disk.
Farid, M. Naser, 1997. Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture: Effects and Implications on
Food Grains of Bangladesh, November 1997.
Food and Agriculture Organisation and United Nations Development Programme (1988) Mid-Term
Evaluation on RD-II Project, Dhaka.
Food Planning and Monitoring Unit, 1998. Bangladesh Food Situation Report, March 1998,
Dhaka.
Food planning and Monitoring Unit, Ministry of Government of Bangladesh, ‘ Food situation
Report Review of 1990- 91.
Foster, P., 1992. The World Food: Tackling the causes of Under-nutrition in the Third World,
Lynne Rienner, Boulder, U.S.A.
George, P.S. 1994 “Food Security in South -asia: Performance and Prospects”, Ind.
Jn. of Agri. Economics, Vo1.29(13)
51
GOB (1990), Fourth Five Year Plan (1990-95), Bangladesh Planning Commission, Dhaka.
GOB, Sustainable Food Security in Bangladesh, Working Document (BGD/56/ 02T),
1997
Goletti, F. 1994. The changing public role in a rice economy approaching se/f- sufficiency: The
case of Bangladesh, Research Report 98, Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy
Research Institute.
Goletti, F., and R. Ahmed. 1990. Projection of foodgrain supply, demand, and gap, year 2000,
Bangladesh. Working Paper. Bangladesh Food Policy Project, International Food Policy
Research Institute, Washington, D.C. Mimeo.
Goletti, Francesco (1993): "Food Consumption Parameters in Bangladesh"; International Food
Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Bangladesh Food Policy Project. April 1993.
Goletti, Francesco et al, 1995, "Prospects of Rice Ex ports in Bangladesh", IFPRI,
Washington D.C. USA. ( Mimeo)
Government of Bangladesh (1973) First Five Year Plan (1973-78), Planning Commission, Dhaka.
Government of Bangladesh (1978) The Two-Year Plan (1978-80), Planning Commission, Dhaka.
Government of Bangladesh (1980) Second Five Year Plan (1980-85), Planning Commission,
Dhaka.
Government of Bangladesh (1983) Thoughts About Perspective Plan, Planning Commission,
Dhaka.
Government of Bangladesh (1985a) Third Five Year Plan (1985-90), Planning Commission,
Dhaka.
Government of Bangladesh (1985b) Poverty Alleviation Measures, General Economics Division,
Planning Commission, Dhaka.
Government of Bangladesh (1987) Medium Term Flood Recovery Programme, Ministry of
Agriculture, Dhaka.
Government of Bangladesh (1988) Report of the Task Force on Attaining Self-sufficiency in
Foodgrain by 1990, Ministry of Agriculture, Dhaka.
Government of Bangladesh (1989) Joint Government Donor Task Force on Strengthening the
Institutions for Food Assisted Development: Final Report, Dhaka.
Government of Bangladesh (GOB) (1985), Third Five Year Plan (1985-90), Bangladesh Planning
Commission, Dhaka.
Government of Bangladesh and World Bank (1980) Joint Study on IRDP Co-operatives, Dhaka.
Government of Bangladesh and World Bank (1988) Report of the Seminar on Food Aid for Human
and Infrastructure Development in Bangladesh, Dhaka.
Greene, W. 1993. Econometric analysis, 2nd ed. New York: MacMillan.
Guisselquist, D. 1992. Empowering farmers in Bangladesh: Trade reforms open door to new
technology. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Association for Economic
Development Studies on Bangladesh, November 21-22, World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Haggblade, S. 1994. Emerging foodgrain markets and food policy. Keynote paper for the Seminar
on Emerging Food Markets and Food Policy, jointly sponsored by the Government of
Bangladesh, International Food Policy Research Institute, and U.S. Agency for International
Development. Dhaka, May 2-4.
Haggblade, S., and M. Rahman. 1993. The laws of gravity: A review of rice price movements
during the boro season of 1992. Bangladesh Food Policy Project, Dhaka. Photocopy.
52
Haggblade, Steven and Rahman, Mahfoozur, 1999. " Laws of Gravity" IFPRI,
Dhaka.(Mimeo)
Hall, D. W., 1980. Handling and Storage of Food Grains in Tropical and Subtropical
Countries. FAO, ROME, Italy.
Hamid, M. A. 1991. A data base on agriculture and food grains in Bangladesh. (194718-1989/90),
Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Hamid, M.A. (1980), “Food Demand and Supply Projections: Bangladesh 1978-2000 Bangladesh
Development Studies 8: 169-85.
Hamid, Mohammad Abdul, Ph.D (1991): A Data Base on Agriculture and Food grains in
Bangladesh (1947-1990); August, 1991.
Hasan, Nazmul, and Ahmad, Kamaluddin, “Studies on food and Nutrient Intake by Rural Pop of
Bangladesh”, Ecology of food and Nutrition 15 (No.12, 1984): PP. 143-158.
Hossain, 1980., Hossain, M.: “Food grain production in Bangladesh performance; potential and
1980 constraints”, A paper read of the special seminar organized by the Bangladesh
Economic Association, held in Dhaka, March 1980.
Hossain, and Mahabub. 1984. Food strategy review: increasing food availability in Bangladesh --Constraints and possibilities. Dhaka: Ministry of Agriculture and ILO.
Hossain, M, 1990, "Natural Calamities, Instab ility in Production and Food Policy in
Bangladesh”, The BDS, Vol. 18 No. 4
Hossain, M. (1988), Nature and Impact of the Green Revolution in Bangladesh, International Food
Policy Research Institute, Washington, D. C., USA.
Hossain, M. (1989), Food Aid, Development and Food Security in Food Strategies in Bangladesh,
Bangladesh Planning Commission, University Press Ltd., Dhaka.
Hossain, M. 1987, Fertilizer consumption, pricing and Food grain Production in BD. In Fertilizer
Pricing Policy in BD, Ed. B. Stone Dhaka. International Food Policy Research Institute and
BD Institute of Development Studies.
Hossain, M. M. (1988), A Study on the Current Status of the Pilot Programme on Extension - BRDB
Linkage, Special studies No. 2. BGD/79/034, Khamarbari, Dhaka.
Hossain, M., M. A. Quasem, M. M. Akash, and M. A. Jabbar. 1990. Differential impact of highyielding varieties in Bangladesh. Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies, Dhaka.
Mimeo.
Hossain, M.S. 2003. “Living with the Food Insecurity: Coping Strategies of the Livelihoods of the
Extreme poor. Proshika: A Centre for human Development, Mirpur, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Hossain, Mahabub (1985) “Efficiency in Fertilizer Use in Bangladesh” Paper presented at the Fifth
Annual National Conference of the Bangladesh Agriculture Economists Association,
Dhaka.
Hossain, Mahabub (1987c) “Green Revolution in Bangladesh: Its Nature and Impact on Incomes
and Distribution”, Working Paper No. 4, Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies,
Dhaka.
Hossain, Mahabub (1988c) “Nature and Impact of Green Revolution in Bangladesh”. Research
Report No. 67, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington D.C.
Hossain, Mosharaff (1987b) “Poor But Capable: Small and Marginal Peasants in the Agricultural
Development of Bangladesh”, Address given at the Biannual Bangladesh Economic
Association Meeting, Dhaka.
53
Hossain, R. et. al. “Women’s Contribution in Homestead, Comilla, BARD, 1987.
Hossain, S. (1990), Group Activities for Rural Development in Bangladesh (Mimeo), BARD, Kotbari,
Comilla, Bangladesh.
Hossain. Mosharaff, et al. (1986) “Rural Poverty in Bangladesh: A Report to the Like-Minded
Group”, North-South Institute, Ottawa and Universities Research Centre, Dhaka.
Hosssain, M. 1989, "Food Security, Agriculture and the Economy: Th e Next 25
years" in Food Strategies in Bangladesh; Medium and Long -term
Perspectives, UPL, Dhaka.
Huddleston, B. (1990), FAO's Overall Approach and Methodology for Formulating National
Food Security Programmes in Developing Countries in IDS Bulletin, vol. 21, no. 3, p.72.
Hye, H. A. (1989), 'Shaping the Agrarian Future: Institutional Frameworks for Rural
Development' in Food Strategies in Bangladesh: Medium and Longterm Perspectives,
Bangladesh Planning Commission, University Press Ltd., Dhaka.
IFPRI (International Food Policy Research Institute). 1991. Policy Brief No.1. Dhaka: IFPRI,
Bangladesh Food Policy Project.
IFPRI. BIDS, and INFS 1998. Commercial vegetable and polyculture fish production in
Bangladesh: The impacts on income, household allocation, and nutrition. Draft report.
Washington, D.C., and Dhaka. Mimeo.
IFPRI/BIDS. Fertilizer pricing policy and Food grain production strategy in Bangladesh, Technical
Annex. Washington, D.C.: IFPRI, 1985.
INFS (1977): Nutrition Value of Indigenous Food in (Bengali): INFS, Dhaka University.
Institute of Nutrition and Food Science, ‘Economic and Nutritional effects of food for relief work
projects.’ University of Dacca. March 1977.
International Labour Organization (1987) “Bangladesh: Food Strategy Review Exercise-Project
Findings and Recommendations”, ILO, Geneva.
IPHN (Institute of Public Health Nutrition)/UNICEF (1989). Night Blindness Prevention Program
Evaluation Report. Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Islam, Meherunnessa , ‘Food preservation in Bangladesh.; Women’s Development programme.’’
UNICEF, Dacca, 1977.
Islam, N. (1978), Development Strategy of Bangladesh, Pergamon Press, Oxford.
Jahan, K., 1997. Nutrition Survey of Bangladesh, 1995-96, INFS, Dhaka.
Jha. Dayanatha. 1997. "Diversification of Agriculture and Food Security ill the Context of New
Economic Policy", Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 52, No, 1.
Jones, S. (1982), Rural Development Policy in Bangladesh in S. Jones, P.C. Joshi and M. Murmis
(Eds), Rural Poverty and Agrarian Reform, Allied Publishers, New Delhi.
Kabeer, N. (1989), Monitoring Poverty as if Gender Mattered: a Methodology for Rural Bangladesh,
Discussion Paper No. 255, Institute of Development Studies, Sussex.
Karim ,Rezaul and Levinsion , F. James ; ‘Addressing socio- economic constraints to improving
Nutritional status in Bangladesh.’ Paper presented at the third Bangladesh Nutrition
seminar, Dacca, March 1979.
Karim, R. and Hassan, N.: Changes in food consumption in Bangladesh. Bangladesh Journal of
Nutrition, Vol. 2, June 1989. INFS, D.U.
Karim, Z., 1998. "Overview on the Problems and Prospects of Bangladesh Agriculture", paper
presented at a Symposium on Vision for Agricultural Research and Development held at
54
BARC, 16 April 1998, Dhaka.
Kaul, A. K. Khan, M. R. I., Munir K. M., 1982: “Consumer’s quality and nutritional value of rice”
in Rice quality. A survey of Bangladesh germplasm. BRRI, Joydeppur, P. 9-59.
Kaur, Rajbans, Agricultural price policy in Economic Development. Kalyani publishers, Delhi,
1975.
Khandker, S. R. 1996. Education achievements and school efficiency in rural Bangladesh. World
Bank Discussion Paper 319, Washington, D. C.: World Bank.
Krishna, Raj, and Ajay Chibber. Policy modeling of a dual grain market: The case of wheat in
India. IFPRI Research Report 38. Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy Research
Institute.
Krueger, A. O. 1966. Some economic costs of exchange control: The Turkish case. Journal of
Political Economy 74: 466-480.
Little, I., and J. Mirrlees. 1974. Project appraisal and planning for developing countries. London:
Heinemann.
Mahmud, W ., S. H. Rahman, and S. Zohir. 1994. Agricultural growth through crop diversification
in Bangladesh. Working Papers on Food Policy in Bangladesh 7. Washington, D.C.:
International Food Policy Research Institute.
Marsh R. 1998: Building on traditional gardening to improve household food security. Food,
Nutrition and agriculture. 1998, No.22, 4-14; 16 ref.
Marten, R. 1993. Final report: Alternative commodity system. Report prepared for the U.S. Agency
for International Development, Dhaka. Photocopy.
Masters, W., and A. Winter-Nelson. 1995. Measuring the comparative advantage of agricultural
activities: Domestic resource costs and the social cost-benefit ratio. American Journal of
Agricultural Economics 77 (no.2): 243-250.
Maxwell, Daniel G., 1996. "Measuring Food insecurity: the Frequency and Severity of Coping
Strategies", Food Policy, Vol. 1.3, No.3.
Maxwell, S., and T. Frankenberger, 1992. Househo1d Food Security, Concepts, Indicators,
Measurements, a technical review by the United Nations Children’s Fund, New York, and
the International Fund for Agricultural Development, Rome.
McHENRY, D. F. and BIRD , K. ; ‘Food bungle in Bangladesh’. Foreign policy, No-29, summer
1977.
Mellor, J. W., and R. Ahmed. 1988. Agricultural price policy for developing countries. Baltimore,
Md., U.S.A.: John Hopkins University Press for the International Food Policy Research
Institute.
Mellor, John W., and Raisuddin Ahmed, eds. 1987. Agricultural price policy for developing
countries. Baltimore, Md., USA: John Hopkins University Press for International Food
Policy Research Institute.
Miah, Muslem Uddin, 1997, Sustainable Agricultural development Strategies, A
Paper presented at Regional Workshop on Sustainable Agricultu ral
Development Strategies for least Developed Countries of the Asian and Pacific
Region, Bangkok.
Ministry of Agriculture (MoA): Bangladesh Food and Agriculture. Country Position Paper. World
food Summit, 13-17 Nov. 1996. Italy. Government of the People's Republic or Bangladesh.
Ministry of Agriculture, 1996. Strategies and Programme Framework for Agricultural
55
Development in Bangladesh, Dhaka.
Ministry of Agriculture, 1998. National Report on the Implementation of the World Food Summit
Plan of Action until the end of 1997.
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MoHFW), Government of the People's Republic of
Bangaldesh and the Bangladesh National Nutrition Council (1995). Bangladesh Country
Paper on Nutrition; Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh and
the Bangladesh National Nutrition Council (1997). Bangladesh National Plan of Action for
Nutrition: Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Monke, E. A., and S. R. Pearson. 1989. The policy analysis matrix for agricultural development.
Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
Montgomery, R. 1985. Statutory rationing and modified rationing: Causes and effects. Bangladesh
Development Studies 13 (1): 109- 116.
Montgomery, Roger. 1983. Open-market grain sales as a public policy instrument for moderating
food price fluctuation in Bangladesh. Dacca: U.S. Agency for International Development.
Ninno, Carlo del and Pau] Dorosh, 1998. “Development Policy, Markets and Food Security in
Bangladesh”, 2 March 1998.
Nuimiddin, Chowdhary, Habibur Rahman and Sajjad Zahir, 1996. "Bangladesh Agriculture and the
Uruguay Round: Policies, Commitments and Prospects", paper presented to WTO and
Uruguay Round Agreement on Implications for the South Asia Region Agriculture, 22-24
April 1996, Kathmandu.
Osman, S. R., and M. A. Quasam. 1990. Pricing and subsidy policy for Bangladesh agriculture.
Research Monograph 11. Dhaka: Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies.
Osmani, M.R. (1984), Pricing and Distribution Policies for Agricultural Development in
Bangladesh in The Bangladesh Development Studies, Vol. 13, No. 3&4, pp. 1-40.
Osmani, S. R. and Quasem, M. A. (1985) “Pricing and Subsidy Policy for Bangladesh
Agriculture”, A Report for Planning Commission, Bangladesh Institute of Development
Studies, Dhaka.
Osmani, S. R., and A. Quasem. 1985. Agricultural price polices in Bangladesh. Dhaka: Bangladesh
Institute of Development Studies.
Osmani, S.R. (1987) “The Food Problems of Bangladesh”, Working Paper No. 29, World Institute
for Development Economics Research of the United Nations University, Helsinki.
Osmani, S.R. (1990), Structural Change and Poverty in Bangladesh: The Case of a False
Turning Point in The Bangladesh Development Studies, Vol. XVIII, No. 3, pp, 55-74.
Pitt, M. 1983. Food preferences and nutrition in rural Bangladesh. Review of Economics and
Statistics 65 (February): 105-114.
Planning Commission, 1989, Food Strategies in Bangladesh Medium and Long Term
Perspectives, UPL, Dhaka.
Qsmani S.R. (1980) Poverty, Inequality and the problem of Nutrition in Bangladesh. The
Bangladesh Development Studies, 8 -121-42.
Quasem, M. A., 1997. "Interventions Towards Attaining Food Security in Bangladesh", paper
submitted to a seminar at BAFRC on Food Day.
Rab, A. 1984. Shadow wages of urban and rural unskilled labor in Bangladesh: A preliminary set or
estimates. Trade and Industry Reform Project, Dhaka. Photocopy.
56
Radhakrishna, R., 1996. "Food Trends, Public Distribution System and Food Security Concerns",
Indian In. of Agr. Econ., Vol. 51, No.122, BARCI.
Rahman, M. 1992. Avajlable procedure and open-tender mechanjsm of procurement. Bangladesh
Food Policy Project, International Food Policy Research Institute, Dhaka. Mimeo.
Rahman, Mahfoozur, 1988, "Problems and Prospects of Rice Process ing Technology in
Bangladesh" Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka
Rahman, Mahfoozur, 1994, “Liberalization of Credit for Growth: Food Grains Marketing
in Bangladesh”. IFPRI, Dhaka (Mimeo)
Rahman, S. H. 1994. The impact of trade and exchange rate policies in economic incentives in
Bangladesh agriculture. Working Papers on Food Policy in Bangladesh 8. Washington,
D.C.: International Food Policy Research Institute.
Ralmesh. Sharma. Panos Konandreas and Jim Greenfield, 1995. “An Overview of Assessments of
the Impact of Uruguay Round on Agricultural Prices and Income", Food Policy, Vol. 21
No. 4/5, pp. 351-363.
Ravallion, M. 1987. Markets and famine. Oxford, U.K.: Clarendon Press.
Ravallion, Martin, 1990. "The Challenging Arithmetic of Poverty in Bangladesh", the BDS, Vol.
18, No. 3.
Rezaul Karim Talukder, July 1990: “Food pricing polices and Nutrition in Bangladesh – A Welfare
analysis”, School of Agriculture La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia, P-304.
Rosegrant. W. M., M. Agcaoili-Sombilla., N. D. Perez 1995. Global Food Projections to 2020:
Implications for Investment. Food, agriculture, and the Environment Discussion Paper 5.
International Food Policy Research Institute.
Rothschild, Constantine Sotilios and Mahmud Simeen. “Women’s Role in Agriculture: Present
Trends and potential for Growth”, UNDP and UNIFEM. 1989.
Sarma, J. S. 1988. Determination of administered prices of foodgrains in India. In Agricultural
price policy for developing countries, ed. J. W. Mellor and R. Ahmed. Baltimore, Md.,
U.S.A.: Johns Hopkins University Press for the International Food Policy Research
Institute.
Scandizzo, P. L. and C. Bruce. 1980. Methodologies for measuring agricultural price interventions
effects. World Bank Staff Working Paper No.394. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
Security in Bangladesh, World Bank, Dhaka (Mimeo)
Sen, A. K. 1981. Poverty and famines. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sen, Binayak, 1996. "Poverty and Policy in Growth or Stagnation: Review of Bangladesh's
Development, 1996", CPD and UPL, Dhaka.
Shahabuddin, Q. 1987a. Factors affecting stocking decisions of rice traders in Dhaka City –
Findings of a sample survey. Bangladesh Journal of Agricultural Economics 10 (1): 51-62.
Shahabuddin, Q. 1990. A disaggregated model for stabilization of rice prices in Bangladesh.
Working Paper on Food Policy in Bangladesh. No. 3. Washington, D.C.: International Food
Policy Research Institute.
Shahabuddin, Q., 1996. "Public Intervention in Food Grain Markets in Bangladesh—an Appraisal
in State Market and Development", essays in honor of Rehman Sobhan, edited by Abu
Abdullah and Azizur Rahman Khan, UPL, Dhaka.
Shahabuddin, Q., and K. M. Rahman. 1992. Estimation of economic prices of selected commodities
for use in flood action plan studies. Dhaka: Water Development Board.
57
Shahabuddin, Quazi and Sajjad Zohir (1995): "Medium and Long Term Projections of
Foodgrain Demand, Supply and Trade Balance in Bangladesh" ; The Bangladesh
Development Studies. Vol. XXIII, Sept.-Dec. 1995, Nos. 3 &4.
Shahadat Ullah. A. H. (1987) “Food grain Self-Sufficiency as a Goal of National Policy”,
Proceedings the Seminar on Food Security and Food Situation Monitoring. Government of
Bangladesh, Ministry of Food and the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation,
Dhaka.
Shawkat Ali. A.M.M. (1987a) “Changes in Agrarian Structure and Agricultural Development
Policy Measures”, Journal of Asiatic Society of Bangladesh, Vol. 32 (1).
Siamwalla, A (1988) “Public Stock Management” in Mellor., J.W. and Rais Uddin Ahmed, (Eds.)
Agricultural Price Policy for Development Countries, Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore.
Singh, I. 1988. Land and labor ill South Asia. World Bank Discussion Paper 33. Washington, D.C.:
World Bank.
Sobhan, Rehaman, ‘Politics of Food and Famine in Bangladesh’. Economic and Political weeky,
vol-XIV, No 48, December 1, 1979.
Srinivasan, T. N., and J. N. Bhagwati, 1978. Shadow prices for project selection in the presence of
distortions: Effective rates of protection and domestic resource costs. Journal of Political
Economy 86: 97-116.
Swaminthan, M.S.1966, "Science and Technology for Sustainable Food Security",
Ind. Jn. of agril. Economics, Vol.51, Nos 1 & 2
Talukdar R.K (1990): "Food Consumption Parameters in Bangladesh - Implications for Food
Policy". Bangladesh Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. XIII, 1 and 2, December
1990.
Timmer, C.P. (1981) “Food Policy, Food Consumption and Nutrition”, Discussion Paper No. 124,
Harvard Institute for International Development, Cambridge, Mass.
Tsakok, I. 1990. Agricultural price policy: A practitioner's guide to partial equilibrium analysis.
Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell University Press.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service. 1991. World grain situation.
Uddin, T., R. K. Talukder, and M. S. Alam. 1994. Optimum cropping plan for a sample of farms in
a farming system research area of Bangladesh. Bangladesh Journal of Agricultural
Economics 27 (nos.1 and 2): 85-96.
UN, FAO, Perspective study for agricultural development in Bangladesh: Working paper on
agricultural employment. Rome, 1974.
UNICEF. 1991. State of the World's Children. New York: UNICEF
Uniconsult. 1992. Study of seed, feed, and wastage in food grains. Dhaka. Photocopy.
Wennergren, E. B., C. H. Anhalt, and M. D. Whitaker. 1984. Agricultural development in
Bangladesh. Boulder, Colo., U.S.A.: Westview Press.
WGTFI. (Working Group on Targeted Food Interventions). 1994. Options for targeting food
interventions in Bangladesh. Washington, D. C.: International Food Policy Research
Institute.
World Food Programme (1983) “Profiles on Poverty : Assessment of Vulnerable Group Feeding
Programme in Bangladesh,” Mimeo, Dhaka
World Bank (1981) Report of the World Bank Mission on the Food Policy of Bangladesh.
58
World Bank (1982a) Bangladesh: Food grain Self-sufficiency and Crop Diversification, Report No.
3953-BD, World Bank, Washington D.C.
World Bank (1986), Poverty and Hunger. Issues and options for food security in developing countries,
A World Bank Policy Study, Washington D. C.
World Bank (1990), World Development Report: Poverty, Oxford, Oxford University Press/World
Bank.
World Bank (1992): World Bank, Bangladesh Food Policy Review: Adjusting to Green
Revolution; Washington, D.C.
World Bank, 1982, Bangladesh Food and Nutrition Sector Review (Draft) Report No: 4974-BD,
Washington D. C: WB, 1982.
World Bank, 1986. Poverty and Hunger Issues and Options for Food Security in Developing
Countries, Washington, D.C.
World Bank, Bangladesh: Food policy Issues, Washington, December 19, 1979.
World Bank. 1979. Bangladesh food policy issues. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
World Bank. 1992. Bangladesh: Food policy review. Adjusting to the Green Revolution.
Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
World Bank. Technical notes on the proposed Bangladesh Nutritional project. December 1992, pp.
1-3.
World Food Programme, various dates. Bangladesh Food Grain Digest.
Yusuf.H.K.M., Q. Salamatullah, M.N.Islam, T. Haque, and C.S.Pandav (1993). Report of the
National iodine. Deficiency Disorder Survey in Bangladesh, UNICEF.
Zaman, S. M. H. (1987) “Agronomic and Environmental Constraints on Fertilizer Effectiveness”,
in Stone, B. (Ed.) “Fertilizer Pricing Policy and Food grain Productivity in Bangladesh,”
International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington D.C.
Zaman. H. M. S. 1994. Implication of Achieving Food Self Sufficiency in Bangladesh. JICA.
Dhaka. Bangladesh. Chowdhury, A.M.A. and Chen, Lincoln C.; The interaction of
nutrition, infection and mortality during recent food crises in Bangladesh. Food Research
Institute Studies, vol. XVI, No- 2, 1977.
59
Annex-4
Food Systems Survey 2006
1. About the respondent:
1. Male
2. Female
2. Name________________________________________________
Village_________________
Union_________________ Thana/P.S.________________ District_________________
3. Occupation
1. Agriculture 2. Business
3. Service
4. Others (__________________)
4. Educational Qualification
1. Illiterate 2.Upto class V 3. Class V to below class VIII 4. Class VIII to below class X 5.
S.S.C. to below BA or equivalent 6. Graduation and above
5. Is the respondent head of the household?
1. Yes
2. No
6. Number of members of the household (including the respondent) __________
7. Age, education and service-related information:
Name Age Male/
female
Relationship with Education Primary
the respondent
Occupation
Secondary
Occupation
Address
8. What are the foods taken/served in your household every week?
1. Rice 2. Fish 3. Lentil 4. Vegetable 5. Milk and milk products 6. Meat
60
7. Egg 8. Others ________________.
9. Of the following protein items, how many servings do you have in your household every week?
1. Fish___________2. Lentil__________ 3. Egg__________
4. Others ___________
10. How do you rate the importance of having food altogether in maintaining kinship?
1. Very important
2. Important
3. Less important
4. Not important at all
11. How frequently do you invite your relatives and friends?
1. More than once a year 2. Once a year 3. Once in two years 4. Once in three years 5.
Once a month 6. More than once in a month 7.Once a week 8. Never
12. What percentage do commercially procured food constitute in the food you serve during
festivals/ invitations?
1. 12.5%
2. 25%
3. 37.5%
4. 50%
5. 62.5%
6. 75%
7. 100%
8. Not applicable
13. Of the following, which foods do you need to buy for your household?
1. Rice
2. Wheat
3. Lentil
6. Meat
7. Edible Oil 8. Egg
11. Sweetmeat 12. Spices
13. Salt
15. Others _________________.
4. Milk
9. Biscuits
14. Sugar
5. Fish
10. Sweet
14. Vegetables
14. Which three food items do you need to buy in an equal amount even after price hike?
1. Rice
2. Wheat
3. Lentil
6. Meat
7. Edible Oil 8. Egg
11. Sweetmeat 12. Spices
13. Salt
15. Others _________________.
4. Milk
9. Biscuits
14. Sugar
5. Fish
10. Sweet
14. Vegetables
15. What are the sources of drinking water you use?
1. River
Deep tube-well
2. Canal
7. PSF
3. Pond
4. Well
8. Others _________.
5. Shallow tube-well
6.
16 A. Is the water you drink free from pollution?
1. Yes
2. No
3. Do not know/ Do not Understand
16 B. If not polluted, what are the probable sources of drinking water pollution?
1. Pesticide 2. Arsenic
3. Wastes from industries
4. Pathogens
_______________.
5. Others
17. What, according to you, are the diseases caused by cooking with using polluted water?
61
1. Dysentery 2. Diarrhea
Others 7. Disease does not occur
3. Hepatitis 4. Cholera
8. No such idea
5. Typhoid
6.
18. Awareness about hygienic food:
A. Do you keep the food covered in your household?
1. Yes
2. No
B. Do you take food in hot condition in your household?
1. Yes
2. No
C. Do you consume stale food?
1. Yes
2. No
D. Do you understand the presence of pathogen in your food?
1. Yes
2. No
E. Do you know about the presence of arsenic in your tube-well?
1. Yes
2. No
F. Do you know about the presence of vitamins and minerals in your food?
1. Yes
2. No
G. Do you know that in summer time food is rotten early?
1. Yes
2. No
H. Do you know that the quality of food is retained longer-hours in winter?
1. Yes
2. No
19. What storage measures do you follow in your household?
1. Food is preserved in refrigerators
3. Cooked food is kept covered
measures ________________
2. Cooked food is taken after heating
4. Food is cooked before every meal 5. Other
20. How do you consider your economic condition to be?
1. Very poor 2. Poor
3. lower middle class
Higher middle class
6. Rich
4. Middle class
5.
21. In which months/ time your income becomes lower? (Bangla months)
1. Baishakh 2. Jaishtha
3. Ashar
4. Srabon
5. Vadro
6. Asshin
7.
Kartik 8. Agrahayan 9. Poush
10. Magh
11. Falgun
12. Chaitro 13. income remain
the same all the year round
22. In which time of the year the price of food is higher you think? (Bangla months)
1. Baishakh 2. Jaishtha
3. Ashar
4. Srabon
5. Vadro
6. Asshin
7.
Kartik 8. Agrahayan 9. Poush
10. Magh
11. Falgun
12. Chaitro 13. Not applicable
23. A. Do your family receive any remittance from cities/ abroad?
1. Yes
2. No
62
23. B. If the answer is yes, how much the remittance contribute to the purchase of food?
1. 6.25%
2. 12.5%
3. 25%
4. 37.5%
5. 50%
6. 62.5%
7. 75%
8. 100%
9. No contribution
24. How much food do you need to buy for your household from the shop?
1. 6.25%
2. 12.5%
3. 25%
4. 37.5%
5. 50%
6. 62.5%
7. 75%
8. 100%
9. No contribution
25. How much of the following food items do you need to buy for your family? (in percent)
1. Rice/wheat ________ 2. Lentil _________
4. Edible oil _________ 5. Meat __________
7. Vegetables__________
3. Fish__________
6. Egg__________
26. What percentages of Rice and Wheat do you meet for your household from own production?
1. 6.25%
6. 62.5%
2. 12.5%
7. 75%
3. 25%
8. 100%
4. 37.5%
5. 50%
9. No contribution
27. What percentages of Fish do you meet for your household from own production/by catching?
1. 6.25%
2. 12.5%
3. 25%
4. 37.5%
5. 50%
6. 62.5%
7. 75%
8. 100%
9. No contribution
28. What percentages of Egg or Animal Protein do you meet for your household from own production?
1. 6.25%
6. 62.5%
2. 12.5%
7. 75%
3. 25%
8. 100%
4. 37.5%
5. 50%
9. No contribution
29. What percentages of Lentil do you meet for your household from your own production?
1. 6.25%
6. 62.5%
2. 12.5%
7. 75%
3. 25%
8. 100%
4. 37.5%
5. 50%
9. No contribution
30 What percentages of Edible Oil do you meet for your household from own production?
1. 6.25%
6. 62.5%
2. 12.5%
7. 75%
3. 25%
8. 100%
4. 37.5%
5. 50%
9. No contribution
31. What percentages of Vegetables do you meet for your household from own production?
1. 6.25%
6. 62.5%
2. 12.5%
7. 75%
3. 25%
8. 100%
4. 37.5%
5. 50%
9. No contribution
32. What percentages of amounts do food items constitute among your total family expenditure?
1. 6.25%
6. 62.5%
2. 12.5%
7. 75%
3. 25%
8. 100%
4. 37.5%
5. 50%
9. Do not spend
33. What do you think about the role of government in keeping food price low/ normal in your area?
1. Greatly supportive 2. supportive but not adequate 3. not supportive 4. very little
No contribution of the government
5.
34. Do you know about any measure of food-relief by the government in your locality during flood/
cyclone/drought?
1. Heard but I have not received 2. I received 3. I never heard 4. Not applicable
35. What percentage of your produce can you retain in your possession?
1. 100%
2. 75%
3. 50%
4. 25%
5. less than 25%
63
36. After the production and distribution of crops among the share holders what percentages of your
possessed crop you have to sell?
1. 75%
2. 50%
3. 25%
4. less than 25% 5. others ______
37.A. Is the food supply remain the same in the local market throughout the year?
1. Yes
2. No
37. B. If not, in which month do you think there is shortage of food supply in the local market?
1. Baishakh 2. Jaishtha
3. Ashar
4. Srabon
5. Vadro
6. Asshin
7. Kartik
8. Agrahayan 9. Poush
10. Magh 11. Falgun
12. Chaitro
13. Not applicable
38. A. After harvesting does any crop damage occur in your household?
1. Yes
2. No
38. B. If yes, how much of the crop is damaged in your household?
1. 6.25%
2. 12.5%
3. 18.75 %
4. 25%
39. Do you exchange food with your neighbours?
1. Regularly 2. Sometimes I do
3. Hardly I do 4. Never
40. Is the food distribution even among members of your household?
1. Not even 2. Sometimes someone gets more
3. Even 4. Do not know
41. Is the food distributed even among the male and female members in your household?
1. No, boys get more
2. No, girls get more
3. Yes, even
42. Is the food distributed considering age in your household?
1. Yes, children get more food, 2. Yes, middle-aged ones get more 3. Old member(s) get(s)
more 4. No, Age does not matter while distributing food
43. Which is the preferred source of carbohydrate in your household?
1. Rice
2. Wheat
3. Potato
4.Maize
5. Others
44. Which is the preferred source of protein in your household?
1. Meat
2. Egg
3. Pulse
4. Fish
5. Bean 6. Others ___
45. To what extent do you or your family prefer commercial food?
1. High preference
2.Moderate 3. Moderate to low 4. Low preference
all
6. No ability to purchase
5. Not at
46. What do you think about the role advertisement plays in your decision of purchase of food?
1.High influence
2. Low influence
3. No influence at all 4. Cannot realize 5. Not
applicable
47.A. Do you think the pattern of food consumption is changing in your household?
1. Yes
2. No.
3. Do not understand
47. B. If yes, what is the type of changes in pattern?
64
food
1. Food prepared in hotel
4. Fresh food
2. Commercial (packaged) food available in shop
5. Not applicable
3. Frozen
48. What is the percentage commercial food constitutes in your list of food items?
1. 6.25% 2. 12.5% 3. 25% 4. 37.5% 5. 50% 6. 62.5% 7. 75% 8. Not applicable
49. Which type of food do you prefer?
1. Rice with lentil
2. Rice with fish
3. Rice with meat
4. Rice with egg curry
5.Tortilla with meat
6. Rice with vegetables 7. Khichuri
8. Biriany 9. Others _______
10. No such preference
50. How much land do you cultivate?
________________Acres ; Not applicable
51. How much land do you take as lease?
____________________________Acres; Not applicable
52. What arrangement have you made for cultivation?
1. Cultivate own land 2. Lease-out land in sharecropping 3.
sharecropping arrangement 4. Take lease 5. Others
Cultivate
land
in
53. What are the technologies do you use in cultivation?
1. Hybrid seed 2. Urea fertilizer
3. MP fertilizer 4. TSP fertilizer 5. SSP fertilizer
6.
Zinc sulphate 7. Cowdung 8. Chemicals/ pesticides 9. Tractor 10. Irrigation
machineries 11. Others_________
54. What are the sources of money in your cultivation?
Borrowing
Own sources of Own
and Own labor
income/deposit/
family labor
remittance
Borrowing to
be repaid in
kind (crop)
Purchasing
Seed
Irrigation
weeding
Purchasing
Fertilizer
Pesticides/
herbicides
Harvesting
Others
55. A. Do you borrow money for cultivation?
1. Yes 2. No
56. B. If yes, then what is the source of money?
65
1. Bank loan 2. NGOs 3. Local money-lender
others______ 7. Not applicable
4. Relatives
5. Neighbors
6.
66