PROMOTING MILLETS FOR URBAN FOOD SECURITY: AN ANALYSIS OF MILLET

PORRIDGE VENDORS AND CONSUMERS IN MADURAI,

TAMIL NADU, INDIA PRESENTED AT THE INTERNATIONAL FOOD SECURITY

DIALOGUE 2014

“ENHANCING FOOD PRODUCTION, GENDER EQUITY AND NUTRITIONAL SECURITY IN A CHANGING

WORLD.”

Sponsored By: Hosted By:

Introduction

Food Insecurity in Urban India

Urban vs Rural PovertyPoverty has declined at a greater rate in rural IndiaUrban areas lag behind in poverty reductionSchemes tend to focus on rural areas

Urban Food InsecurityCompared with rural areas, urban India has a higher % of

total population that consumes less that recommended 1890 kcal/day

Food security schemes (whether production, distribution, or consumption related) see urban population simply as passive beneficiaries of cheap food grains

Informal Sector and Street Food Vendors

Informal Sector plays a major role providing urban poor (90%) with employment and livelihood opportunities Street food vendors, as a part of the informal sector, provide urban poor with food security and livelihoods (especially for poor women)While street foods have been portrayed as unhealthy and unhygienic, nutritious street food options do exist (ie. Millet Porridge)

RESMISA ProjectThe CIFSRF project, led by CMU & DHAN Foundation, aims to increase production, distribution, access, and daily consumption of small millets and pulses seeds in rainfed regions of India, Nepal and Sri Lanka.

An exploratory study of Street Food Industry in Madurai was initiated in order to explore urban channels for promoting consumption of small millets in the urban areas through informal channels

Field Site: Madurai, TN, India

Situating Madurai’s Millet Porridge Vendors

Objectives, Methods, and Classifications

Research Objectives

Research was conducted with four overlapping objectives:

(i)To understand the role of street vendors for enhancing consumption of nutritious RTE food among poor (including millet porridge)

(ii) To understand the socioeconomic profile of street food vendors

(iii) To understand the socio-economic profile of street food consumers and their preferences for food quality, nutrition, and hygiene

(iv) To explore rural and urban linkages between rural peasants and the informal food sector employing urban poor.

MethodsMixed Methods Exploratory Research

90 Semi-Standardized Vendor

Interviews

239 Consumer Surveys

Of which 169 consumed millet

porridge from vendors

Focus Group Discussions

Mapping Exercise

1. Porridge Vendor 2. Non-Porridge Push Cart

3. Hawker 4. Small Scale Restaurant

Classification of Street Food Vendors by Infrastructure Level and Products Sold

Classification of Street Food Vendors by Infrastructure Level and Products Sold

No infrastructure

Pushcart/ tricycle

Semi-permanent structure

All infrastructure

typesSelling millet

porridge– Porridge

vendors (37) – 37

Selling other

productsHawkers (21)

Non-porridge pushcart

vendors (13)

Curb-side food stalls (19) 53

All products 21 50 19 90

Findings

Socioeconomic Profile of VendorsHawkers Porridge

VendorsNon-porridge Pushcart Vendors

Curb-side Food Stalls

% illiterate 76 61 27 10

% low caste (SC, BC, OBC) 100 94 100 100

% migrant 14 43 15 42

% without bank account 71 83 38 22

% without motorized vehicle 90 81 69 42

% below poverty line (BPL card) 100 92 100 89

Products offered by Vendors

10 Popular Products Offered by Vendors

Idli

Dhosai

Pearl Millet Porridge*

Finger Millet Porridge*

Vada

Poori

Pongal

Paanaryam

Variety Rice

Chapati

Consumer Profile◦ Poor labourers,

informal sector workers, petty traders

◦ Majority have less than grade 11 education

◦ More than 1/3 were not fully literate

Street Food Preferences

◦ Street foods are purchased often, (on average once every 2 days) due to their convenience

◦ Millet porridge is only available from porridge vendors (not made at home)

◦ Millet porridge ◦ Favoured by day labourers because it kept them

full and gave them stamina to do their work◦ Favoured by diabetic patients

Consumers and Health

◦ Literature indicated that poor consumers are not concerned with health and hygiene

◦ On the contrary, poor consumers were concerned with the quality and hygiene of street foods

◦ Awareness of the nutritional benefits of millet consumption was high

◦ Household incidences of diabetes is high among consumers (treated with Finger Millet Porridge)

Lessons Learned

Lessons for Policy Makers◦ India’s food subsidy has grown more than 25 fold over the past

two decades: $0.62 billion (1992) to $16.67 billion (2012).

◦ This subsidy will be further increased one the National Food Security Act will be implemented: Estimates are 1.1 to 3% of GDP.

◦ Production, Distribution, and Consumption related schemes have not engaged the urban poor◦ Production schemes: Exclusively in rural areas◦ Distribution schemes: Problems with leakage and corruption◦ Consumption schemes: See the urban poor as passive beneficiaries

None of these schemes provide any employment opportunity for the urban poor

Engaging the Informal Sector in state run schemes

Amma Unavagam◦ Launched on February 24, 2013 (Jayalalithaa’s birthday).◦ Offer ready-to-eat cooked food at subsidized rates to urban

consumers at highly subsidized price.◦ 200 outlets in the greater Chennai: 200, 000 people per day. ◦ Adverse impacts on street vendors?

Street Food Voucher scheme?◦ Market based food subsidy for the urban poor◦ Vouchers to be used exclusively at street food vendors

Engaging street vendors in RTE food distribution schemes such as ICDS, Mid Day Meal programs.

Enabling Policy Environment◦ Current policy on health and safety standards of street food is drafted by

the Confederation of Indian Industry!

◦ Street Vending Act (2014): ◦ Licensing and Legitimacy◦ Greater voice for vendors?

Opportunities for food scientists improving the nutrition and quality of street foods Limited understanding of the street food vending environment Participatory approaches to link food scientists with vendors. Opportunities to improve nutrition and diversity

◦ Role for NGOs ◦ linking small farmers with urban consumers via street food vendors◦ capacity building for street vendors (micro credit, financial services)

Acknowledgements•Canadian International Food Security Research Fund (CIFSRF)

•International Development Research Center (IDRC)

•Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA)

•Development for Humane Action Foundation (DHAN)

•Esther Parameswari, Anwar Khan, and B. Gerard (translation)

Thanks!