FEATURES NEWS THE RISING NEPAL (DAILY)

By P.C. Wasti

POVERTY, hunger and malnutrition are the major challenges of the least developed countries like Nepal. According to the latest estimates, thirty eight percent of the population in Nepal remains below the poverty line. However, UNDP estimates that about fifty per cent of the population, who earn less than a dollar a day, is considered poor. According to Human Development Report of Nepal 2002, the number of absolutely poor persons has nearly doubled in the past 20 years approaching nine million mark-45 per cent of the total population in 1996.

Result

Poverty is the major cause of hunger and malnutrition and hunger and malnutrition result in poverty. This creates a vicious cycle, which must be broken by the efforts of the government.
The recent surveys show that about 50 per cent of the children of age below five years are underweight (malnourished). Seventy five per cent of the pregnant and 67 per cent of non-pregnant women are anaemic. Vitamin A Deficiency and Iodine Deficiency Disorder still remain problems among the children and women. All types of malnutrition have damaging physical and mental consequences for people, households and communities. It can reduce a person's productivity and child's cognitive development. Ultimately malnutrition hinders the economic and human development of a nation.
More income is not enough to improve nutrition because more calories may not be purchased with the increased income. Important non-food factors such as environmental hygiene and health care cannot be bought with increased income, and because much hangs on how food and non-food resources are actually used in households-particularly by women, who tend to be the main caregivers. If women are not empowered with knowledge, any increased income my not be used to maximum nutritional benefit.

Even if incremental income is used to acquire more or different foodstuffs, these may not be the foods that provide the nutrients required for a balanced diet. If costlier refined cereals are purchased with extra income, the nutritional benefits may not accrue. But if the extra income translates into a more varied diet, for example, with some meat and dairy products, fruits and vegetables, then-although calories may not increase appreciably-micro nutrient status (and with it, nutritional status) is likely to improve. Micronutrients have tended in the past to be ignored in discussing the food-income relationship.

Most studies concur in showing that calorie-income elasticity is high for households consuming very low initial per capita calories (the poorest of the poor), but lessens as mean consumption increase. Hence, the impact of income on calorie intake is unlikely to be negligible.

Intake of adequate nutrients is not enough for better nutrition. Sickness can seriously hamper the utilisation of nutrients at cellular level, reducing nutritional status and further weakens the link between income and nutrition. The link between child nutrition and income is particularly weak, firstly because young children do not need much food (and hence income is less of a constraint) and secondly because they are particularly vulnerable to growth faltering as a result of infection and disease.
Diet and disease have two-way relationship, with independent and additive effects on a child's anthropometric status. Low calories intake will thus adversely affect nutrition directly, but also indirectly through accentuating the effects of morbidity; diarrhea, for example may last longer or be more severe if dietary intake is inadequate.

Young children, particularly in the first two years of their lives, are most vulnerable to becoming malnourished, and the consequences too are serious at this time. Household income poverty may not be the most important constraint to the growth of an infant. Other capabilities, including those relating to health and care, are likely to be critical determinants. For such young children, human resources such as knowledge and time of caregivers are more important than income though it is recognised that income poverty forces difficult trade-offs and can reduce time for quality childcare.

Poverty has conventionally been measured in terms of income. Income poverty however, excludes other elements of deprivation such as a lack of access to basic resources like housing, clothing, education and health care. In recent years, a broader definition of "human poverty" has been proposed wherein poverty is seen primarily as relating to people's capabilities and opportunities.

UNDP originally recommended the use of new "Capability Poverty Measures" to reflect such a lack of basic or minimally essential human capabilities. This was actually a composite of the prevalence of underweight under-five children, the proportion of birth deliveries unattended by trained personnel, and the female illiteracy rate, which in the positive (converse) sense represent important capabilities. The poorest of the poor will be illiterate, malnourished, without access to safe water or health services, and likely to die young.

Consequence

Poverty alleviation only in terms of income doesn't assure the development in a real sense. Poverty alleviation in terms of capabilities and opportunities could give a taste of development. Now time has come to think of human poverty and act accordingly to get rid of the devastating consequences of hunger and malnutrition.

Other Stories