CHARACTERIZING THE FOOD SYSTEMS OF IGP-5 REGION:

1
CHARACTERIZING THE FOOD SYSTEMS OF IGP-5
REGION RESULTS FROM FIELD SURVEYS
Ahmed, A.U., Munim, K.M.A. and Alam,
M.S BANGLADESH UNNAYAN PARISHAD (BUP)
2
Kathmandu, 27-28 June, 2006
Field study report IGP-5
Study site for IGP-5 Greater Faridpur
District (i.e., Rajbari, Faridpur, Madaripur,
Shariatpur and Gopalganj)
3
Field study report IGP-5
Kathmandu, 27-28 June, 2006
Food Utilization Nutritional value food
diversity All major types of food are being
consumed. However, frequency of consumption of
nutritious food varies with economic status of
the households (i.e., on affordability)
Diet is generally based on rice, fish, lentil,
and vegetables.
4
Field study report IGP-5
Kathmandu, 27-28 June, 2006
Primary protein Fish Secondary protein lentil
(eggs?) Poor and MI hhs depend on open water
capture fisheries Only 11 of total lentil
consumed nationally has been produced by the
farmers. Rest has been imported. Who can afford
lentil?
Transformation in fisheries from capture to
culture fisheries 41.6 poor hhs do not consume
meat (high price!) Poors nutritional value from
protein intake is declining fast.
5
Field study report IGP-5
Kathmandu, 27-28 June, 2006
Food Utilization Social value role of food in
kinship Food has been playing quite an important
role in maintaining kinship bonding or social
relation. 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 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. 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. Source of food To 11.5
hhs, cent percent food which is served to the
relatives/friends is procured from commercial
sources, while only 3.6 hhs offer non-commercial
(self-grown) food. 86 hhs procure over 50 of
food from commercial sources while sharing with
relatives/friends.
6
Field study report IGP-5
Kathmandu, 27-28 June, 2006
Food Utilization Food safety source of drinking
water The two major sources of drinking water
are a) shallow tube well (56.8), and b) deep
tube well (41.2). There exists a high level of
awareness regarding safe drinking water.
Two-thirds of the hhs interviewed could report
whether the source of drinking water was
pollution-free. However, people are facing
increasing difficulties in finding sources of
arsenic-free safe drinking water. The poor are
particularly forced to drink water from STWs
(69.4), while the rich hhs find water from DTWs
(apparently arsenic free) (78.6). Only 28.2
poor hhs are lucky enough to fetch water from
DTWs.
Most of the respondent could identify diseases
which might result from use of contaminated water
for cooking, washing dishes etc.
7
Field study report IGP-5
Kathmandu, 27-28 June, 2006
Almost all the hhs have awareness regarding
seasonal influence on quality of food. However,
other than keeping the prepared food under
cover/lid, they do not consider any other safety
measure. People are aware that reheating could
enhance quality of stored food, however 56.4 do
not follow such measure due to lack of energy
insecurity.
Only 14.4 of the hhs do not store food and cook
afresh during every meal. Over 60 of the HHs
just cover the prepared food. Only 1.2 of the
hhs (all rich hhs) have the luxury of
refrigerating their foods.
8
Field study report IGP-5
Kathmandu, 27-28 June, 2006
Food Access Affordability HH income To majority
hhs, income reduces during peak monsoon and
pre-monsoon months.
A M J Jy A S O N D J F
M
9
Field study report IGP-5
Kathmandu, 27-28 June, 2006
Food Access Affordability Seasonality of
price To majority hhs, timing for lowering hh
income and increasing prices of food items are
superimposed. The poor hhs face the maximum
difficulty towards purchasing food items.
10
Field study report IGP-5
Kathmandu, 27-28 June, 2006
Myth Bangladesh achieved near self-sufficiency
in carbohydrate (ricewheat) production. About
60 hh enjoy enough rice? Fact The majority of
the poor still need to purchase rice from local
markets.
Rice, salt and edible oil are the three most
important food items which people need to
purchase from market. Even if price of rice and
edible oil increase, 52.3 and 71.5 hhs cannot
reduce consumption of rice and edible oil,
respectively, in order to cope with price hike.
11
Field study report IGP-5
Kathmandu, 27-28 June, 2006
Food Access Affordability Proportion of food
purchased About 86.7 of the hhs require to
purchase at least 50 of their food. 9.6 hhs
purchase all their food from local markets. Ultra
poor?
12
Field study report IGP-5
Kathmandu, 27-28 June, 2006
Very high proportion of hh expenditure goes for
purchasing food items. The condition of ultra
poor hhs is rather dismal. Price hike translates
into lesser consumption, reduced nutrition,
health erosion
To 72 hh, there has not been any policy support
by the state to maintain affordability of
food. 11.8 hhs believe the support has been very
nominal.
13
Field study report IGP-5
Kathmandu, 27-28 June, 2006
Food Access Allocation Ability to allocate
production for own consumption Majority of the
hhs have control over about 75 of their food
production. Control diminishes for the poorer
households.
14
Field study report IGP-5
Kathmandu, 27-28 June, 2006
Food Access Allocation Intra-household food
allocation/distribution Intra-household food
allocation is not equal. Over 86 households
reported that there has been unequal distribution
of food within their hh. There has been a
distinct bias (84.3) towards male members of the
hh.
The age group based distribution has also been
found unequal.
Extreme food vulnerability for the poor women.
15
Field study report IGP-5
Kathmandu, 27-28 June, 2006
Food Access Allocation Intra-household food
allocation/distribution Intra-household food
allocation is not equal. Very strong male bias.
Deprivation is high among the poor households.
Truth Males are always males, irrespective of
their hhs economic structure.
Even though the rich hhs claim that they do not
discriminate in food allocation in terms of age,
they do discriminate against women.
16
Field study report IGP-5
Kathmandu, 27-28 June, 2006
Food Access Preference Carbohydrates
protein People generally prefer rice as principal
food (86.8). Bread is common as a break fast
item, however puffed rice (muri) is preferred
over bread. Preferences for fish and meat are
comparable. However, only the rich can have meat
occasionally. Strong preference for meat does not
necessarily mean people can have meat.
17
Field study report IGP-5
Kathmandu, 27-28 June, 2006
Food Access Preference Commercially
available/processed food Peoples preference is
moderate to high for commercially processed
foods. However, it remains a question of
affordability. About 57.8 hhs consume
commercially processed/available food upto 1012
of their total food consumption. With such low
level of consumption of commercial foods, 36.9
hh reported that advertisements highly influence
their preferences, while 30.1 hh reported that
advertisements do not influence their preferences.
18
THANK YOU