**Income Poverty and Hunger in Asia: The Role of Information**[^1]

> Shiladitya Chatterjee[^2]

Brahm Prakash

Steven R. Tabor

**Abstract**

Three decades of steady economic growth has contributed to a reduction
in the mass poverty and frequent bouts of starvation that plagued much
of post-war developing Asia-Pacific. Agriculture production played a key
role in generating a pattern of rural development and growth that
improved food availability and triggered virtuous cycles of poverty
reduction. But poverty has evolved in ways that leaves many vulnerable
to hunger, and our understanding of what it means to be hungry in
Asia-Pacific has also advanced thanks to new knowledge. In Asia-Pacific,
the poor, and the far larger numbers of those who are near-poor or
vulnerable to poverty, suffer transitory bouts of under-nutrition that
accumulate and have serious long-term consequences. Those in rural
areas, and particularly those in the remote or disaster prone regions of
South Asia, remain especially vulnerable to periodic bouts of severe
hunger. Female headed households, and girls in general, may go hungry
even in households with sufficient food supplies. Socially excluded
groups may suffer from chronic poverty and hunger even in otherwise
prosperous regions. Especially in South Asia, large numbers of
households regularly have insufficient access to essential
micro-nutrients, with devastating effects on productivity and human
development. This evolving nexus of poverty and hunger in Asia-Pacific
is less related to agriculture development than it was some three
decades ago. Moreover, this new nexus of poverty-hunger issues is not
well captured in food production reporting systems or in household
surveys. Better information is needed to track progress in combating the
evolving nexus of poverty and hunger issues that confront Asia-Pacific
today.

**I. Introduction**

Poverty has many dimensions. The most obvious one is hunger. Having
enough nutritional intake is considered a necessary condition for being
free from poverty. Therefore, poverty lines are developed to ensure that
incomes are sufficient to provide minimum nutritional needs -- usually
defined in calorific terms -- and serve to define the cut off between
the poor and the non-poor. Those households that exceed the basic income
poverty criterion should therefore not be expected to suffer from
hunger.

However, it is not correct to associate hunger with lack of calories
alone. Although being hungry -- a basic and apparent condition of
poverty -- is usually associated with lack of food, the quality of the
food consumed has long-term implications for health, longevity and human
productivity. Calories are perhaps the most basic of nutritional needs
and absence of enough calories constitutes an essential dimension of
hunger; but other nutrients are also important. If hunger is thus
defined more broadly as absence of sufficient nutrient intake for
long-term good health, then the nexus between income poverty, hunger and
health is wider still[^3].

Those who are income poor are also therefore likely to be in a state of
hunger as they are not expected to be having even the basic calorie
intake necessary to be free from hunger. Poverty and hunger are thus
inextricably inter-linked. A vicious cycle of poverty, hunger and
disease traps the vulnerable in perpetual poverty. The fulfillment of
basic nutritional requirements is a necessary prerequisite for
individuals to break out of this strangle hold, realize their human
potential and to participate fully in social and economic processes.
Policy makers in Asia-Pacific are aware of the enormous private and
social cost that poverty and hunger exert on both, individuals and their
societies. Economic development strategies have therefore been guided by
the imperative of assisting households to break out of the
poverty-hunger trap.

Asia has made rapid strides in reducing income poverty. In the early
1970s, more than half the population of the Asia-Pacific region was
poor, average life expectancy was 48 years, and only 40 percent of the
adult population was literate. Famines occurred frequently, and large
segments of the population were hungry and malnourished. Today, the
percentage of poor people in Asia-Pacific has decreased to nearly one
fifth of the population (Table 1), life expectancy has increased to 65
years, and more than 80 percent of the adults are literate \[ADB 2004
and Hasan 2004\].

Table 1: Poverty Headcount Ratios for \$1 a Day, Selected Asian
Countries, Various Years (%)

  -------------------- ----------------------- --------------- -- ---------- -- --------------- -- ----------- -----------
  **Region/Country**                           **Mid-1980s**      **Early       **Mid-1990s**      **Late      
                                                                  1990s**                          1990s,\     
                                                                                                   Early       
                                                                                                   2000s**     

                                                                                                               

                                                                                                               

                                                                                                               

  **East Asia**                                                                                                

                       China, People's Rep.    53.1 ~(1984)~      44.3          24.8 ~(1996)~      26.5        
                       of--Rural                                  ~(1990)~                         ~(2001)~    

                       Mongolia                ...                ...           13.9 ~(1995)~      27.0        
                                                                                                   ~(1998)~    

  **Southeast Asia**                                                                                           

                       Indonesia               37.8 ~(1984)~      20.5          13.9 ~(1996)~      7.5         []{.mark}
                                                                  ~(1990)~                         ~(2002)~    

  []{.mark}            Lao PDR                 ...                47.9          ...                39.0        
                                                                  ~(1992)~                         ~(1997)~    

                       Malaysia                2.0 ~(1984)~       0.4           1.0 ~(1995)~       .02         
                                                                  ~(1992)~                         ~(1997)~    

                       Philippines             22.8 ~(1985)~      19.8          14.4 ~(1997)~      15.5        
                                                                  ~(1991)~                         ~(2000)~    

                       Thailand                17.8 ~(1988)~      6.0           2.2 ~(1996)~       1.9         
                                                                  ~(1992)~                         ~(2000)~    

                       Viet Nam                ...                39.4          18.3 ~(1998)~      13.1        
                                                                  ~(1993)~                         ~(2002)~    

  **South Asia**                                                                                               

                       Bangladesh              22.0 ~(1985)~      35.9          28.6 ~(1995)~      36.0        
                                                                  ~(1991)~                         ~(2000)~    

                       India                   46.3 ~(1987)~      42.3          ...                36.0        
                                                                  ~(1993)~                         ~(1999)~    

                       India-Rural             51.8 ~(1987)~      49.1          ...                41.8        
                                                                  ~(1993)~                         ~(1999)~    

                       India-Urban             28.1 ~(1987)~      22.4          ...                19.3        
                                                                  ~(1993)~                         ~(1999)~    

                       Nepal                   40.3 ~(1984)~      ...           39.1 ~(1995)~      ...         

                       Pakistan                49.6 ~(1987)~      33.9          ...                25.3        
                                                                  ~(1993)~                         ~(1999)~    

                       Sri Lanka               9.4 ~(1985)~       3.8           6.6 ~(1995)~       ...         
                                                                  ~(1990)~                                     
  -------------------- ----------------------- --------------- -- ---------- -- --------------- -- ----------- -----------

... = data not available

Note: Reference years are enclosed in parentheses.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Source: ADB staff estimates for Lao PDR, Viet Nam, and Pakistan (1999);

World Bank, PovcalNet Database for the rest.

The reduction in poverty was primarily the result of increases in
economic growth in which agricultural growth played an important part,
generating incomes in rural areas where Asia's poor predominantly
reside. Improvements in food security made an important contribution to
fall in poverty and to the progress made in combating hunger. Higher
agricultural output and rural incomes resulted from the green
revolution, the first widespread application of modern science to Asia's
agriculture. Between 1970 and 1995, cereal production doubled, with
almost all of the increase stemming from higher productivity on
practically the same amount of agricultural land \[ADB 2000\]. In those
parts of rural Asia where the new technology was widely adopted, incomes
and employment increased and the perennial food shortage problem was
largely solved. The Asian nations that grew earliest and fastest, such
as the People\'s Republic of China (PRC), Republic of Korea, Taipei,
China, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand, witnessed rapid progress in
agriculture and the highest reduction in rural poverty \[Yee 2004\].

Agricultural growth has a powerful impact on poverty reduction as it
tends to be more broad based in nature and raises employment and incomes
of the poor. Agricultural growth also spurs economic growth in general,
and rural economic growth in particular.

Rural growth results in rising output, employment and incomes which, in
turn, has unleashed a virtuous cycle of rising productivity,
consumption, savings and investment. Technological progress in
agriculture, which has been scale neutral in agricultural production,
benefiting even small farmers, has acted powerfully as an anti-poverty
force in rural areas where most of Asia's poor reside (Chatterjee 1995).
Indirectly, agriculture and rural development has impacted on economic
growth and poverty reduction in several ways. First, increases in
agricultural value-added earn foreign exchange that permit imports of
foreign technology, where new technology is embodied in physical
capital. Agricultural exports have a very high ratio of value added,
unlike many manufactured exports that rely heavily on imported materials
and components. Second, savings from the agricultural sector are a
function of agricultural value added, and higher savings translate into
faster physical capital deepening. Since agriculture is more easily
taxed than non-agriculture in the early stages of development, the
agricultural sector tended to provide revenue for public services
required by the economy as a whole. Third, rural education levels are
influenced by growth in agricultural productivity and rural incomes.
Such education can raise farm productivity directly and make the
migration process more economically rewarding for children who leave the
farm. Fourth, increases in staple food production tend to increase rural
food consumption. Better nutritional intake can raise labor productivity
and contribute to improved child development. Fifth, political
commitments to rural growth imply a more balanced political economy,
with lesser urban bias than has been seen in most developed countries.
Fostering social cohesion makes an economy more attractive to investors
and less susceptible to labor market dispute (Chatterjee 1995 and Timmer
2002).

Reduced income poverty levels have thus given a large boost to reducing
hunger in Asia. However, the battle against hunger in the overall sense
is still far from being won. First, the reduction of income poverty has
not been uniform in the Asia --Pacific region, and hence hunger
continues to be a basic issue where poverty remains concentrated. There
is also a non-uniform distribution of apparent or revealed hunger in
terms of calorie and protein intake. This is discussed in the second
section which focuses on the broad trends in income poverty reduction
and hunger in the region. Section three discusses aspects of the
poverty-hunger nexus that are hidden in aggregate poverty and hunger
data. The importance of information about the distribution of food, in
view of its importance for eradication of hunger is discussed in section
four. Section five discusses issues relating to the institutional
dimensions of gender, caste and ethnicity and their role in poverty
reduction and eradication of hunger. The important issue of hidden
hunger is discussed next in Section six. A series of policy
recommendations, pertaining to the role public policy and particularly
of information in illuminating poverty and hunger reduction initiatives
in the region, is presented in section seven.

> **II.** **Poverty and Food Availability in Asia-Pacific: Grounds for
> Optimism**

## ![](media/image1.wmf){width="3.625in" height="4.125in"} {#section .unnumbered}

Poverty incidence in Asia and the Pacific, using a \$1 a day standard
(estimated at purchasing power parity) declined by about 30% over the
1990s. As incomes increased, food consumption levels rose, which
resulted in lower levels of (macro-nutrient) hunger \[ADB 1999\]. In
1990, about 32% of people in the region lived below the poverty line. By
2000, this proportion had come down to 22% (Figure 1). Starting from a
higher base, rural poverty in the Asian and Pacific region declined from
39% to 28%, while urban poverty declined at a more modest pace from 24%
to 20%. The total number of the poor also declined by around 180
million, from 900 million in 1990 to 720 million by the end of the
decade (Figure 2). This was achieved in spite of a major financial
crisis in 1997 that disrupted regional growth and increased poverty
incidence \[ADB 2004\].

The region's performance was driven largely by the People's Republic of
China (PRC) and India. The total number of the poor fell from 372
million to 216 million in the PRC and 352 million to 335 million in
India. Outside of these two countries, the number of the poor remained
at about 172 million in the 1990s, although poverty incidence fell from
­­22% to 18%[^4] \[ADB 2004 and Hasan 2004\].

In the 1990s, poverty reduction in the region contrasts with that in
other developing regions where the number of poor people increased. An
important reason is that the region experienced faster economic growth
than the others. The same is true within the region. East and Southeast
Asia, which experienced the fastest increase in annual per capita income
of 6.4%, registered largest decrease in poverty. \[ADB 2004\].

Trends in average levels of food availability and macro-nutrient
consumption have mirrored growth in incomes and the reduction in
absolute poverty. On a per capita basis, food production in developing
Asia increased by 77% between 1970 and 2003. Especially strong
production growth was recorded over those three decades in three of the
largest Asian nations: China, India and Indonesia (Table 2). However, as
the case of Bangladesh shows, not all countries in Asia enjoyed such
increases on a per capita basis.

+---------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **Table 2: Food           |       |       |       |       |       |
| Availability in Asia**    |       |       |       |       |       |
|                           |       |       |       |       |       |
| **( Per-capita Production |       |       |       |       |       |
| Index net of exports and  |       |       |       |       |       |
| feed use)**               |       |       |       |       |       |
|                           |       |       |       |       |       |
| **(1999-2001=100)**       |       |       |       |       |       |
+---------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|                           | 1970  | 1980  | 1990  | 2000  | 2003  |
+---------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|                           |       |       |       |       |       |
+---------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Developing Asia           | 58.8  | 63.4  | 79.6  | 100.3 | 104.1 |
+---------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|                           |       |       |       |       |       |
+---------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| People's Republic of      | 40.9  | 45.7  | 66.0  | 100.3 | 109.0 |
| China                     |       |       |       |       |       |
+---------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| India                     | 74.5  | 74.5  | 90.1  | 99.2  | 98.5  |
+---------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Indonesia                 | 61.8  | 71.6  | 93.2  | 101.4 | 104.4 |
+---------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Bangladesh                | 110.6 | 96.8  | 92.8  | 102.9 | 97.9  |
+---------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Source: FAOSTAT at        |       |       |       |       |       |
| http://www.fao.org.       |       |       |       |       |       |
+---------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

An increase in production and trade of basic foodstuffs in Asia-Pacific
contributed to a dramatic increase in apparent calorie and protein
consumption. Improvements in calorie and protein consumption are widely
used as an indicator in progress, at the national level, in combating
hunger. Between 1970 and 2000, average per capita calorie and protein
consumption in developing Asia rose by 29% and 36% respectively,
according to United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
estimates (Table 3). Increased calorie and protein consumption was
especially pronounced in countries that rapidly reduced poverty, such as
China and Indonesia, and less so in Asian countries which experienced a
more moderate rate of poverty reduction[^5].

Table 3: Trends in Calorie and Protein Consumption in Selected Asian
Nations, 1970-2000

+-------------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+
|             | 1   |      | 1   |      | 1   |      | 2   |      |
|             | 970 |      | 980 |      | 990 |      | 000 |      |
+-------------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+
|             | C   | Pro  | C   | Pro  | C   | Pro  | C   | Pro  |
|             | alo | tein | alo | tein | alo | tein | alo | tein |
|             | rie | per  | rie | per  | rie | per  | rie | per  |
|             |     | day  |     | day  |     | day  |     | day  |
|             | (N  |      | (N  |      | (N  |      | (N  |      |
|             | o.) | (    | o.) | (    | o.) | (    | o.) | (    |
|             |     | Gr.) |     | Gr.) |     | Gr.) |     | Gr.) |
+-------------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+
|             |     |      |     |      |     |      |     |      |
+-------------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+
| Developing  | 2   | 50.7 | 2   | 53.3 | 2   | 61.8 | 2   | 68.9 |
| Asia        | 086 |      | 229 |      | 539 |      | 689 |      |
+-------------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+
|             |     |      |     |      |     |      |     |      |
+-------------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+
| Bangladesh  | 2   | 46.9 | 1   | 43.9 | 2   | 44.8 | 2   | 46.7 |
|             | 200 |      | 970 |      | 071 |      | 175 |      |
+-------------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+
| People's    | 2   | 47.9 | 2   | 54.3 | 2   | 65.3 | 2   | 82.7 |
| Republic of | 026 |      | 327 |      | 709 |      | 969 |      |
| China       |     |      |     |      |     |      |     |      |
+-------------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+
| India       | 2   | 52.4 | 1   | 47.9 | 2   | 56.2 | 2   | 56.1 |
|             | 086 |      | 964 |      | 318 |      | 415 |      |
+-------------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+
| Indonesia   | 1   | 38.6 | 2   | 46.3 | 2   | 58.6 | 2   | 65.9 |
|             | 861 |      | 199 |      | 628 |      | 920 |      |
+-------------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+
| Pakistan    | 2   | 57.9 | 2   | 53.8 | 2   | 59.4 | 2   | 62.4 |
|             | 271 |      | 185 |      | 341 |      | 447 |      |
+-------------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+
| Source:     |     |      |     |      |     |      |     |      |
| FAOSTAT at  |     |      |     |      |     |      |     |      |
| [http://    |     |      |     |      |     |      |     |      |
| www.fao.org |     |      |     |      |     |      |     |      |
| ](http://ww |     |      |     |      |     |      |     |      |
| w.fao.org/) |     |      |     |      |     |      |     |      |
+-------------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+-----+------+

# What the Averages Conceal: Spatial Disparities and Near Poor in Asia-Pacific 

While trends are general positive, the national estimates of poverty and
hunger may conceal as much as they reveal. While food consumption does
rise as incomes increase, a more robust and disaggregated set of poverty
and hunger indicators is needed to monitor progress and assess
effectiveness in breaking the poverty-hunger trap in the region.

1.  **The Countryside Lags Behind**

Poverty is predominately a **rural problem** in Asia and the Pacific. In
almost all countries, the vast majority of the poor live in rural areas,
but trends vary from country to country. The poverty incidence using the
\$1/day poverty line, is estimated to be more than 50% higher in rural
than in urban areas in countries such as Cambodia, Indonesia, Pakistan,
Lao, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, Viet Nam, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri
Lanka, Papua New Guinea (PNG), Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan
(Table 4).

The most common feature of Asia's rural poor is landlessness or limited
access to productive land. The major subgroups of rural poor are the
landless, marginal farmers and tenants, indigenous peoples and minority
castes, and internally displaced persons. Pastoralists and coastal
fishermen are also important subgroups of the rural poor in countries,
such as PRC, India, Indonesia, PNG, Sri Lanka, and in Central Asia. In
Asia and the Pacific, some 40% of the rural poor live in what are
described as marginal areas. They are farmers dependent on rain, forest
dwellers, highlanders, and indigenous peoples. Additionally, rural women
and female-headed households are particularly prone to acute poverty.
Rural women generally have fewer employment opportunities, less
occupational mobility, fewer marketable skills, and less access to
training \[ADB 2000, Yee 2004\].

In addition to limited access to productive lands, poor rural households
also tend to have larger families, with higher dependency ratios, lower
educational attainment, and higher underemployment. Most of the poor are
cut-off from thriving urban and global markets because of inadequate
transport and communication links. The poor also tend to lack basic
amenities such as piped water supply, sanitation and electricity. Their
access to credit, inputs and technology is severely limited. They have
little power to influence politics or local-government decision-making.
Low levels of social and physical infrastructure increase their
vulnerability to malnutrition and disease, especially in mountainous and
remote areas \[FAO 2004\].

> 2\. **Regional Pockets of Acute Hunger**

There are agro-ecological zones within Asia-Pacific that are chronically
deficit in food, and/or suffer periodic seasonal shortages or shortages
associated with climatic shocks, and civil disturbances. This includes,
for example, a large segment of the Himalayan mountain range, isolated
parts of Afghanistan, Irian Jaya and PNG, drought prone regions of
Western China and Mongolia, sections of the Bangladesh flood plain, and
many of the more remote islands of the South Pacific nations.
Irrespective of trends in national income and poverty incidence, the
population in these regions regularly suffer from food insecurity,
periodic outbreaks of severe hunger, and chronic poverty \[Scherr 2003,
FAO 2004\]. The chronically food insecure in Asia-Pacific tend to reside
in areas where there is sporadic exposure to shocks. The effects of
shocks accumulate over time and are disproportionately harsh on the
weaker groups, particularly in the remote and disaster prone parts of
the region (Millennium Project 2004).

Tracking the poverty and hunger status of those who live in remote and
disaster-prone regions is complicated by the fact that these are regions
that have little regular contact with government statistical reporting
services, where administrative boundaries (for statistical reporting
purposes) tend to differ from geographic boundaries, and where heads of
households tend to (temporarily) migrate when chances of subsistence
deteriorate in the region. In addition, the highly sporadic nature of
hunger and hardship in such regions is difficult to capture in data
collection systems that provide a snapshot of poverty or hunger for the
mainstream at one or a few points in time in the calendar year.

> 3\. **Asia-Pacific's Near-Poor**

A large segment of Asia's population is near-poor---i.e. have incomes
marginally above the poverty line. These households sometimes fall back
below the poverty line and are especially vulnerable to bouts of hunger
and food insecurity \[Bloom 2001, Millennium Project Task Force 2004\].
An approximate estimate of the share of the Asia-Pacific population who
subsist at the margins of poverty and hunger are those who have incomes
(in purchasing power parity terms) equivalent to between \$1 and \$2 per
day. This includes 30.1% of the population of China, 44.9% for
Indonesia, 32% for the Philippines, 45.4% for Viet Nam, 46.8% for
Bangladesh, and 45.2 % for India (Table 4).

Table 4: Poverty Estimates Based on National and International Poverty
Lines,\
Urban-Rural, Selected Developing Member Countries, Various Years

  -------------------- ------------ -------------- ----------- ----------- ----------------- --------- -------------- --- --------- --------------
  **Region/Country**   **National                                          **International                                          
                       Poverty                                             Poverty                                                  
                       Rates**                                             Measures**                                               

                       **Year**     **National**   **Urban**   **Rural**   **Year**          **\$1 a                      **\$2 a   
                                                                                             Day**                        Day**     

                                                                                             **HCR**   **Magnitude\       **HCR**   **Magnitude\
                                                                                                       (\'000)**                    (\'000)**

  **East Asia**                                                                                                                     

  China, People's Rep. 2003                                    3.1         2001              16.6      211,865.8          46.7      596,032.1
  of                                                                                                                                

  Mongolia             1998         35.6           39.4        32.6        1998              27.0      648.5              74.9      1,797.8

  **Southeast Asia**                                                                                                                

  Cambodia             1999         35.9           18.2        40.1        1997              34.1      3,966.9            77.7      9,045.4

  Indonesia            2002         18.2           14.5        21.1        2002              7.5       15,902.0           52.4      110,985.4

  Lao PDR              1997         38.6           26.9        41.0        1997              39.0      1,882.7            81.7      3,945.6

  Malaysia             1999         7.5            3.4         12.4        1997              0.2       36.8               9.3       2,004.5

  Myanmar              1997         22.9           23.9        22.4                          \...      \...               \...      \...

  Philippines          2000         34.0           20.4        47.4        2000              15.5      12,136.3           47.5      37,224.3

  Thailand             2002         9.8            4.0         12.6        2000              1.9       1,204.5            32.5      20,264.5

  Viet Nam             2002         28.9           6.6         35.6        2002              13.1      10,509.4           58.5      47,058.1

  **South Asia**                                                                                                                    

  Bangladesh           2000         49.8           36.6        53.0        2000              36.0      46,756.1           82.8      107,475.5

  India                1999         26.1           23.6        27.1        1999              35.6      354,762.0          80.8      804,808.9

  Nepal                1996         42.0           23.0        44.0        1995              39.1      8,150.8            80.9      16,859.8

  Pakistan             1999         32.6           25.9        34.8        1999              25.3      34,031.0           77.2      103,841.7

  Sri Lanka            1995         25.2           14.7        27.0        1995              6.6       1,144.9            45.4      7,914.9

  Maldives             1998         43.0           20.0        50.0        1998              0.1       0.3                2.9       7.5

  **Central Asia**                                                                                                                   

  Azerbaijan           2001         49.6           \...        \...        2001              3.7       297.7              33.4      2,709.9

  Kazakhstan           2002         27.9           20.3        36.9        2001              0.1       16.3               8.5       1,255.2

  Kyrgyz Republic      2000         52.0           43.9        56.4        2001              0.9       42.6               27.2      1,344.9

  Tajikistan           2003         56.6           47.7        59.9        1999              13.9      840.5              58.7      3,555.4

  Turkmenistan         1998         29.9           20.1        31.1        1998              12.1      593.8              44.0      2,164.3

  Uzbekistan           2000         27.5           22.5        30.5        2000              17.3      4,260.7            71.7      17,640.7

  **Pacific**                                                                                                                       

  Fiji Islands^a^      1990         25.5           27.6        22.4        1990              25.0      184.3              \...      \...

  FS Micronesia        1998         27.9           ...         ...         1998              5.2       5.5                19.7      21.0

  Kiribati                          \...           \...        \...        1996              38.0      30.0               \...      \...

  Marshall Islands                  \...           \...        \...        1999              20.0      10.2               \...      \...

  Papua New Guinea     1996         37.5           16.1        41.3        1996              24.6      1,023.4            54.4      2,263.0

  Samoa                2002         20.3           \...        \...        2002              5.5       9.8                \...      \...

  Tonga^a^             2001         22.7           \...        \...        2001              4.0       4.0                12.6      12.7

  Tuvalu^a^            1994         29.3           \...        \...        1994              17.2      1.6                \...      \...

  Vanuatu^a^                        \...           \...        \...        1998              40.0      72.8               \...      \...
  -------------------- ------------ -------------- ----------- ----------- ----------------- --------- -------------- --- --------- --------------

> ... = no data available, HCR = headcount ratio.
>
> ^a^ Per household (the rest are per capita).

Sources: Hasan, Rana and Manoj Panda. 2004*. Poverty in Asia*. ADB:
Manila.

[National Poverty Rates:]{.underline}

> ADB, RETA 5917: Building a Poverty Database and RETA 6047: National
> Poverty Reduction Strategies for PDMCs.

[\$1- and \$2-a-day Headcount Ratios:]{.underline}

ADB staff estimates for Lao PDR, Viet Nam, Pakistan, Maldives;

World Bank, East Asia Update: Regional Overview, October 2003 for Papua
New Guinea;

RETA 6047 for other Pacific DMCs;

World Bank, PovcalNet Database for the rest.

III. **The Distribution of Food**

The nature of food markets has a powerful influence on the ability of
the poor to meet minimum food requirements. Seasonal and cyclic changes
in food prices can make basic foods unaffordable during the lean periods
of the crop cycle in parts of Asia-Pacific. Government's intervene,
through a combination of public procurement, price stabilization and
public rationing programs to help stabilize the availability and price
of basic foodstuffs in the market. The effectiveness of such policies,
however, has been questioned in many countries in the region, and there
is an increasing trend towards the use of international trade to meet
deficits and dispose off surpluses in national food markets.

The greater reliance on global agricultural markets has had both
advantages and disadvantages for poverty and hunger in the region.
Thanks to abundant global resources, national food availability is less
vulnerable to the vagaries of climate, disease or natural disasters that
may exert a strong influence on domestic production. Moreover, improved
access to global commodity markets has provided a powerful boost to
commercial agriculture development in many of the Asia-Pacific states.
But the integration of global and national agriculture markets has not
had as much positive effect on poverty and hunger as it could have.
First, depressed global prices that arise as a result of the subsidies
and distortions in agricultural markets in the wealthier countries
depress farm prices and incentives for innovation in agriculture in the
Asia-Pacific states. This contributes to widening rural-urban inequality
and a situation in which many small staple-producing farmers find
themselves poor or vulnerable to poverty. Second, many of the major
mega-cities in Asia have come to rely heavily on imports of staple
foodstuffs, out-competing the rural areas of these countries for an
important market for domestic produce. Third, farmers in the hinterlands
of Asia-Pacific find it difficult to compete on global markets, largely
because of high farm-to-market transport costs.

Aggregate availability of foods tend to be less of a problem in
Asia-Pacific thanks largely to the integration of national and global
commodity markets. However, the availability and access to food by
vulnerable groups, including food deficit farmers in rural areas, small
and marginal farmers, and poor urban households, remains problematic
because these groups may be chronically, seasonally or periodically
unable to afford adequate diet. Government's in Asia-Pacific have
developed a variety of food-based assistance programs, including public
works schemes, food price subsidy schemes, food-stamp programs, and food
ration shop schemes to assist those in need. But the targeting,
management and triggers for the operation of such schemes merits
improvement. Where such schemes operate well, the potential for
protecting basic food security is great. But even in countries in which
national food supplies are adequate, there is the risk that localized
shortages or access problems may trigger severe hunger if the quality of
the food-based public assistance programs are not well managed, funded,
targeted or operated.

**V.** **Institutions and their Impact on Hunger**

i\. **Gender**

Two-thirds of Asia-Pacific's poor are women, and poverty is particularly
acute for women living in rural areas. In poor families, the gender
division of labor means that the burden of poverty falls most heavily on
women. Given disparities in education, health care, economic and
political participation, and incomes, women and girls are most
vulnerable to poverty. The proportion of female-headed households ranges
from 20 to 40 percent in Asia-Pacific. Change in the household
structure, with women increasingly responsible for the double-burden of
earning and family-care, has made women's situation worse, especially
for women with several dependants. It has contributed to an increasing
trend in feminization of poverty in the region. This poses serious
constraints to poverty reduction because the children of poor women are
more likely to repeat cycles of poverty and social disadvantage.

The manner in which food is distributed within the household may subject
girls and women to a greater risk of hunger, regardless of the level of
family income or food access \[Hunt 1999, ADB 2001\]. In many parts of
Asia-Pacific, and in particular in the poorer regions of South Asia, men
and boys are accorded priority in the household distribution of food.
This is one of the reasons why girls and women have inferior nutrition
and health outcomes, even in families that have sufficient income and
food access to afford an adequate diet \[UNICEF 2003\]. An extensive
survey of dietary discrimination by Haddad finds that women in
Bangladesh, Pakistan and India have a lower status in terms of dietary
discrimination than women in other parts of Asia, and also compared to
most other countries of the world (Hunt and Quibria 1999). This
contributes to the perpetuation of low status of women from one
generation to the next via preferences for boys, less food for girls and
lower investment in female human capital. Low birth weights result,
causing under-nutrition to be passed from generation to generation.
Conversely, increases in female status are strongly associated with
reductions in child malnutrition rates throughout Asia-Pacific.

ii. **Caste and Ethnicity**

Complex variations in ethnicity, caste, language and religion influence
access to schooling, employment, healthcare and natural resources in
several countries. In some countries, the dominant ethnic, caste,
religious or social groups are in positions of power, have
administrative and political connections, educational and cultural
advantages, and unscrupulously capture public resources. Those who are
socially excluded from progress tend to suffer multiple disadvantages,
including a higher poverty incidence and greater malnutrition. For
example, UNDP \[2003\] reported that in Nepal, the lowest caste group
(Dalits) earn less than half of what the upper caste groups earn and
that their life expectancy is 13 years less. Rarely are the differences
in poverty and hunger conditions amongst different social groups
reflected in national statistics, although reducing differences in
living standards amongst social groups may be central to interventions
aimed at tackling poverty and hunger.

**V. Hidden Hunger -** **Diet Quality Dimensions**

The persistence and high prevalence of micronutrient deficiencies among
women and children in Asia endangers health, shortens life expectancy,
retards the cognitive potential of children, and directly reduces
productivity \[UNICEF and MI 2004\]. Only recently have the links
between the quality of the diet, access to essential vitamins and
minerals (i.e. micronutrients), health outcomes, educational achievement
and productivity been better understood. What is now referred to as
"hidden hunger", or insufficient consumption of micro-nutrients, affects
nearly 1.5 billion persons in Asia. On a global scale, three-quarters of
all those suffering from micro-nutrient deficiency are to be found in
Asia. While the poor are most likely to suffer from micro-nutrient
deficiency, a large number of families with incomes above the poverty
line also suffer from it. The weak relationship between poverty and
hidden hunger may be seen from the scatter diagram in Figure 3 which
plots poverty incidence against iron deficiency in children in 17 Asian
countries. This illustrates the complexity of the interaction between
poverty and hunger, when the latter is thought of in terms of a diet
that is adequate in nutritional quality \[Millennium Project Task Force
on Hunger 2004, UNDP and UN ESCAP 2003\].

**Fig 3: National Poverty Incidence and Estimated Prevalence of Iron
Deficiency Anemia in Children Under 5 Years**

![](media/image2.wmf){width="5.75625in" height="3.122916666666667in"}

The most serious micronutrient problem is iron deficiency anemia (IDA).
In Asia, 60 percent of all pregnant women, half the women of
reproductive age, and 40 percent of preschool children suffer from IDA.
Consequenty, there is high maternal mortality (an estimated 65,000 women
in Asia die in pregnancy due to anemia each year), impaired intellectual
development and learning capacity, decreased physical activity and
productivity of women, and reduced immunity. Children suffering from IDA
often never enter school, or drop-out in the early years. A recent ADB
study estimated that the national income loss in Bangladesh from IDA
alone was nearly 2 percent of GDP \[Hunt 2001, ADB 2004b\].

Iodine deficiency remains the single greatest cause of preventable
mental retardation in the world today. Every year, 40 million children
in Asia are being born with out the protection that iodine offers to the
brain and body\-\--just over a third of these children will suffer a
significant degree of mental impairment. The total population goiter
rate is especially high (above 25%) in India, Afghanistan, Pakistan and
Tajikistan. In India and Pakistan alone, more than 8.7 million children
are estimated to be born each year mentally impaired due to iodine
deficiency. In countries with a total goiter rate above 10%\-\--which is
most of Asia\-\--the intellectual capacity of the population is lowered
by between 10 to 15%, adversely affecting school performance, labor
force productivity and household incomes. Iodine deficiency rates are
now in decline as almost all nations iodize salt. While more than 80% of
the salt is iodized in countries such as China, Bhutan, and Viet Nam,
the share of household salt that is iodized is very low in many other
Asian countries. For example, just 14% of the salt in Cambodia is
iodized; 17% in Pakistan, 50% in India, 24% in Philippines, and from
50-75 percent in other parts of South and East Asia. It is the poor who
are most likely to consume salt that is not iodized in countries with
low salt iodization coverage \[UNICEF and MI, 2004\].

For many years, it has been known that lack of vitamin was a cause of
impaired vision and blindness. Research in the 1980s has shown that
children with even mild vitamin A deficiency were found to have 25-30%
higher death rates when the overall nutrition situation was controlled
for \[Allen and Gillespie 2001\]. The WHO has found that the weakened
immunity due to vitamin A deficiency is a major contributor to malaria,
diarreheal disease, and acute respiratory infections and measles. Within
Asia, a quarter of the child population suffers from sub-clinical
Vitamin A deficiency. Reported prevalence ranges from a low of 12
percent in China to a high of 53 percent in Afghanistan. India has the
largest absolute number of vitamin A deficient children in the world,
and has yet to reach even a third of its under-fives with supplementary
vitamin A. Efforts to control vitamin A deficiency, through
supplementation and food fortification, have largely paralleled the
progress of salt iodization, and most countries in Asia, children
receive one high-dose vitamin A supplement each year. This, however, is
insufficient to overcome the deficiency and explains why many countries
are providing two high-dose supplements per year \[UNICEF and MI 2004\].

+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| # Table        |         |         |         |         |          |
|  5: Vitamin an |         |         |         |         |          |
| d Mineral Defi |         |         |         |         |          |
| ciency in Sele |         |         |         |         |          |
| cted Asian Nat |         |         |         |         |          |
| ions {#table-5 |         |         |         |         |          |
| -vitamin-and-m |         |         |         |         |          |
| ineral-deficie |         |         |         |         |          |
| ncy-in-selecte |         |         |         |         |          |
| d-asian-nation |         |         |         |         |          |
| s .unnumbered} |         |         |         |         |          |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
|                |         |         |         |         |          |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
|                | IRON    |         | IODINE  |         | VITAMIN  |
|                | DEF     |         | DEF     |         | A        |
|                | ICIENCY |         | ICIENCY |         | DE       |
|                |         |         |         |         | FICIENCY |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
|                | > Es    | > Es    | > Es    | > Total | > E      |
|                | timated | timated | timated | >       | stimated |
|                | > pre   | > pre   | >       |  Goiter | > % of   |
|                | valence | valence |  annual | > Rate  | >        |
|                | > of    | > of    | >       | > (%)   | children |
|                | > iron  | > iron  |  number |         | > under  |
|                | > def   | > def   | > of    |         | > 6 with |
|                | iciency | iciency | > c     |         | > sub-   |
|                | >       | >       | hildren |         | clinical |
|                |  anemia |  anemia | > born  |         | >        |
|                | > in    | > in    | > m     |         |  vitamin |
|                | > c     | > women | entally |         | > A      |
|                | hildren | > age   | > i     |         | > de     |
|                | > under | > 15-49 | mpaired |         | ficiency |
|                | > 5     | > (%)   |         |         |          |
|                | > years |         |         |         |          |
|                | > (%)   |         |         |         |          |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
|                |         |         |         |         |          |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Afghanistan    | 65      | 61      | 535,000 | 48      | 53       |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Bangladesh     | 55      | 36      | 750,000 | 18      | 28       |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Bhutan         | 81      | 55      | \-      | \-      | 32       |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Cambodia       | 63      | 58      | 85,000  | 18      | 42       |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| China          | 8       | 21      | 940,000 | 5       | 12       |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| India          | 75      | 51      | 6,      | 26      | 57       |
|                |         |         | 600,000 |         |          |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Indonesia      | 48      | 26      | 445,000 | 10      | 26       |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Kazakhstan     | 49      | 36      | 54,000  | 21      | 19       |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Kyrgyzstan     | 42      | 31      | 23,500  | 21      | 18       |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Lao PDR        | 54      | 48      | 27,000  | 14      | 42       |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Mongolia       | 37      | 18      | 8,500   | 15      | 29       |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Myanmar        | 48      | 45      | 205,000 | 17      | 35       |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Nepal          | 65      | 62      | 200,000 | 24      | 33       |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Pakistan       | 56      | 59      | 2,      | 38      | 35       |
|                |         |         | 100,000 |         |          |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Papua New      | 40      | 43      | \-      | \-      | 37       |
| Guinea         |         |         |         |         |          |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Philippines    | 29      | 35      | 300,000 | 15      | 23       |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Tajikistan     | 45      | 42      | 43,000  | 28      | 18       |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Thailand       | 22      | 27      | 140,000 | 13      | 22       |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Turkmenistan   | 36      | 46      | 11,000  | 11      | 18       |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Uzbekistan     | 33      | 63      | 136,000 | 24      | 40       |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
| Viet Nam       | 39      | 33      | 180,000 | 11      | 12       |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+
|                |         |         |         |         |          |
+----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+

Source: UNICEF and MI. 2004*. Vitamin and Mineral Deficiency: A Global
Progress Report*, Geneva and New York.

6.  **Slow Progress in Nutrition**

During the 1990s, nutrition status of vulnerable groups has been slow to
improve, despite steady declines in income poverty incidence and
improvements in staple food availability. Three quarters of the world's
under-nourished children are living in Asia, specifically 112 million
under-weight and 132 million stunted children \[Hunt 2001, ADB 2001\].

> Table 6: Child Nutrition Outcomes in Selected Asian Nations, 1990-2001

+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
|                                | Children under |                    |
|                                | 5 years of age |                    |
|                                | who are        |                    |
|                                | moderately and |                    |
|                                | severely       |                    |
|                                | underweight    |                    |
|                                | (%)            |                    |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
|                                | 1990-1996      | 1995-2001          |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| # East                         |                |                    |
|  and North East Asia {#east-an |                |                    |
| d-north-east-asia .unnumbered} |                |                    |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| China \[3\]                    | 16             | 10                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Mongolia \[5\]                 |                | 13                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| # Southeast Asia               |                |                    |
|  {#southeast-asia .unnumbered} |                |                    |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Cambodia \[5\]                 | 40             | 45                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Indonesia \[3\]                | 35             | 26                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Lao People's Democratic        | 44             | 40                 |
| Republic \[4\]                 |                |                    |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Malaysia \[1\]                 | 23             | 18                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Myanmar \[3\]                  | 43             | 36                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Philippines \[4\]              | 30             | 28                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Thailand \[3\]                 | 26[^6]         | 19[^7]             |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Viet Nam \[3\]                 | 45             | 33                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| # Sout                         |                |                    |
| h and Southwest Asia {#south-a |                |                    |
| nd-southwest-asia .unnumbered} |                |                    |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Afghanistan \[5\]              |                | 48                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Bangladesh \[4\]               | 67             | 48                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Bhutan                         | 38[^8]         | 19                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| India \[4\]                    | 53             | 47                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Maldives                       |                | 30                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Nepal \[3\]                    | 49             | 48                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Pakistan \[3\]                 | 38             | 38                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Sri Lanka \[4\]                | 38             | 29                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| #                              |                |                    |
| North and Central Asia {#north |                |                    |
| -and-central-asia .unnumbered} |                |                    |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Armenia \[5\]                  |                | 3                  |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Azerbaijan \[4\]               |                | 17                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Kazakhstan \[4\]               |                | 4                  |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Kyrgyzstan \[3\]               |                | 11                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Tajikistan \[5\]               |                |                    |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Turkmenistan \[3\]             |                | 12                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Uzbekistan \[4\]               |                | 19                 |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| #                              |                |                    |
| Pacific {#pacific .unnumbered} |                |                    |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Fiji                           |                | 8[^9]              |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Kiribati                       |                | 13[^10]            |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Papua New Guinea \[4\]         | 35[^11]        | 35[^12]            |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Solomon Islands                |                | 21[^13]            |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+
| Vanuatu                        |                | 20[^14]            |
+--------------------------------+----------------+--------------------+

> *Sources:* United Nations, *Promoting the Millennium Development Goals
> in Asia and the Pacific*, 2003 Food and Agriculture Organization of
> the UN, *The State of Food Insecurity in the World*, 2003
>
> ^a^ Indicates data that refer to years or periods other than those
> specified in the column heading, differ from the standard definition
> or refer to only part of a country

proportion is less than 2.5% undernourished

\* includes Taiwan Province of China

> \*\* estimates of the proportion of undernourished for 1999-2001 are
> not available; estimates for 1998-2000 published in SOFI were used
> instead
>
> Figures following country name refer to the prevalence categories
> (proportion of the population undernourished in 1999-2001):

\[1\] \< 2.5% undernourished

\[2\] 2.5-4% undernourished

\[3\] 5-19% undernourished

\[4\] 20-34% undernourished

\[5\] ≥35% undernourished

In South Asia, where the problem is most severe, the proportion of
children under 5 years of age who are moderately or severely
under-weight has shown very little improvement in the 1990s while it has
tended to increase in parts of Central Asia and the South Pacific. The
proportion of the under-5 child population who are under-nourished is
substantially higher than the proportion of the population living in
poverty in countries that have recently reported high rates of growth,
such as Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand (Table 6). Numerous factors
combine to contribute to poor nutrition outcomes including gender-bias
in household food distribution and human capital investment,
micro-nutrient deficiencies, deficiencies in maternal education,
inadequate clean drinking water and sanitation facilities, and
weaknesses in the access and quality of maternal and child health
services \[Allen and Gillespie 2001\].

**VII. Policy Implications**

In the relationship between income, poverty and hunger, information has
an important role to play. It is well known that those aspects of
poverty and hunger that are measured and reported-on are relatively
promptly acted upon. The role of timely and accurate information
increases in importance as standards of education, awareness and good
governance improve. The nature of the relationship between poverty and
hunger in the region has changed in ways that force a rethinking of
poverty reduction strategies, including approaches designed to combat
hunger. Three decades ago, agriculture statistics and food balances
sheets were reasonably good proxies for tracking poverty and hunger in
the region. It was then understood largely to be a problem of
macro-nutrients and producing sufficient staple foods. Thanks to new
knowledge, our understanding of poverty and hunger issues has advanced.

Today, nutrition issues are not as much linked with structural issues
like agricultural productivity or food availability as before. In most
of the countries in the region, agricultural produce constitutes less
than one-third (if not lower) a proportion of GDP, and countries have
more money (domestic as well as foreign exchange) to procure and sustain
food supplies. Issues such as urban-rural differences in living
standards, gender and excluded-group entitlements to income and food,
food status in remote/isolated regions, and micro-nutrient availability
are at the heart of the Asia-Pacific poverty-hunger nexus. However, many
of the region's most serious hunger problems\-\--involving food access
within the household and social groups, in remote regions, and at the
level of micro-nutrients\-\--aren't well tracked by existing statistical
reporting systems that are commonly used to track poverty and household
food consumption.

The public food distribution system continues to be an important
instrument for reducing hunger in many countries of Asia-Pacific. But
its efficiency has to be improved through better targeting towards the
poor. This implies a need to develop better indicators for identifying
those who are likely to be both poor and hungry, a task made more
difficult by the large numbers of near-poor and vulnerable in the
region. Short-term indicators, such as trends in real wages, may need to
be monitored as proxy indicators for seasonal and regional spurts in
income poverty. Regular monitoring of food price disparities across
regions may be important, especially to spot area-specific shortfalls in
essential foodstuffs. Finally, the efficiency and effectiveness of
public distribution programs for basic foodstuffs requires continuous
monitoring and assessment, to ensure that these systems are sufficiently
robust and effective to withstand the stresses to food availability and
access that can arise from various shocks.

Better information on the links between income, poverty and hunger is
also required if households in Asia and the Pacific are to make food
consumption choices that result in better nutrition outcomes. Use of the
processed foods, supermarkets and reliance on meals consumed outside the
home is a relatively recent development in Asia and the Pacific, and has
been associated with a rising incidence of obesity, diabetes and other
lifestyle-related diseases. A large share of the consumer budget
continues to be allocated to meet food requirements, but eradication of
hunger (and especially hidden hunger) remains complicated by literacy
levels that even today are quite modest, cultural habits that favor
feeding men/boys over girls, and a dearth of fortified foods in the
marketplace. Regular statistical reporting systems have yet to adjust to
regularly collect and report on these issues, despite widespread
awareness that these are at the heart of today's poverty-hunger nexus in
the region.

A new toolkit is emerging to tackle the poverty-hunger nexus. This
combines initiatives aimed at boosting the incomes of the poor with
interventions to improve the quality of the food supply (fortified
foods, pure food regulation), provide clean drinking water, enhance
maternal education, and improve access to maternal and child health care
services. Compared to the situation a few decades ago when Agriculture
Ministries bore the main burden for enhancing agricultural production to
reduce poverty and tackle hunger, many different agencies and
stakeholders are involved today. Ensuring that information is available
to tracking progress made in addressing poverty and nutrition using this
new toolkit is essential to help coordinate and harmonize the
contributions of so many different, and largely independent
stakeholders.

More creative use must be made of agricultural production statistics and
household surveys to capture the poverty-cum-hunger status of vulnerable
groups, backward regions, and to carefully track progress made in
meeting micro-nutrient consumption goals. It may also be necessary for
national governments to rethink the indicators used to track MDG-1,
particularly with respect to the eradication of hunger. Regular tracking
of micro-nutrient deficiencies, gender-specific feeding practices,
rural-urban nutrition disparities, and food status of isolated/remote
regions may help to provide a more complete understanding of the extent
and intensity of hunger amongst the poor in Asia-Pacific.

**References**

Allen, Lindsay and Stuart Gillespie. 2001. *What Works: A Review of the
Efficacy and Effectiveness of Nutrition Interventions*. ADB Nutrition
and Development Series. Manila.

Asian Development Bank (ADB). 1999. *Fighting Poverty in Asia and the
Pacific: The Poverty Reduction Strategy of the Asian Development Bank*.
Manila: ADB.

---------. 2000a. *Rural Asia: Beyond the Green Revolution: A Study of
Rural Asia Overview*. Manila: ADB.

\_\_\_\_\_ . 2004. *A Review of the ADB Poverty Reduction Strategy*.
Manila: ADB.

\_\_\_\_\_\_. 2004b*. Food Fortification in Asia*. ADB Nutrition and
Development Series. Manila.

Bloom, D E, Craig, P H and Malaney, P.N. 2001. *The Quality of Life in
Rural Asia*. A Study of Rural Asia Vol 4. ADB and Oxford University
Press.

Chatterjee, Shiladitya. 1995. *Growth, Structural Change and Optimal
Poverty Interventions*. Occasional Papers No. 13, Asian Development
Bank, Manila.

FAO. 2004. *The State of Food Insecurity in the World*. Rome.

Gillespie, Stuart and Lawrence Haddad. 2001. *Attacking the Double
Burden of Malnutrition in Asia and the Pacific*, ADB Nutrition and
Development Series. Manila.

Hasan, Rana and Manoj Panda. 2004. *Poverty in Asia: Measurement,
Estimates and Prospects*, ADB, Manila.

Hunt, Joseph and M.G. Quibria. 1999. *Investing in Child Nutrition in
Asia*, ADB Nutrition and Development Series. Manila.

Mason, John, Joseph Hunt, David Parker, and Urban Jonsson, 2001.
*Improving Child Nutrition in Asia*. ADB Nutrition and Development
Series Number 3, Manila.

Millennium Project Task Force on Hunger. 2004. Halving Hunger by 2015: A
Framework for Action. Interim Report. Millennium Project, New York.

UNDP. 2003. *Nepal Human Development Report*, Katmandu, Nepal.

UNDP and UN ESCAP. 2003. *Promoting the Millennium Development Goals in
Asia and the Pacific,* United Nations, New York.

UNICEF. East Asia and Pacific Office. 2003. Strategy to Reduce Maternal
and Child Undernutrition. Bangkok.

UNICEF and MI. 2004*. Vitamin and Mineral Deficiency: A Global Progress
Report*, Geneva and New York.

United Nations. 2003. *Indicators for Monitoring the Millennium
Development Goals: Definitions, Rationale, Concepts and Sources*, New
York.

Scherr, Sara 2003. *Halving Global Hunger, Millennium Project Background
Paper of the Task Force 2 on Hunger*, UNDP New York.

Timmer, C. Peter 2003. *The Role of Foreign Assistance in the Economic
Growth of Developing Countries*, Natsios Report on Foreign Assistance.
Washington D.C.

Yee, John, S. Tabor and J. Nave. 2004*. Rural Development Policies in
Asia and the Pacific: Lessons Learned and Future Course of Action*. FAO,
UNESCAP and ADB Regional High-Level Roundtable Meeting on Sprearheading
Sub-Regional Programmes and Cooperation for Eradication of Poverty and
Food Insecurity in Asia and Pacific. Bangkok.

[^1]: Prepared for the International Conference on Agriculture
    Statistics (ICAS III), Cancun, Q. R. Mexico, November 2-4, 2004.

[^2]: The authors are, respectively, Principal Poverty Reduction
    Specialist, Director (retired) and Staff Consultant of the RSPR
    Division of the Asian Development Bank, Manila. The views expressed
    in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily
    represent the views of the Asian Development Bank.

[^3]: At the level of an individual, hunger refers to a lack of
    nutritious food needed to keep people alive and healthy. This, in
    turn, is related to access and consumption of both macro-nutrients
    and micro-nutrients. Although the words \"hunger,\" \"starvation,\"
    \"undernutrition,\" and \"malnutrition\" are often used
    interchangeably, FAO makes some distinctions among them. Individuals
    experiencing \"undernutrition\" have an insufficient intake of
    energy for normal growth and physical development, body maintenance,
    and for pursuing ordinary human activities. \"Malnutrition\" is more
    strictly defined as a nutritional disorder resulting from faulty or
    inadequate nutrition. It is also used to describe dietary
    deficiencies (e.g., micronutrient deficiencies such as vitamin A,
    iodine, or iron) \[FAO 2004\].

[^4]: In the transitional economies of Central Asia, poverty incidence
    was also higher at the end of the 1990s than at the beginning, but
    there are signs that poverty incidence has started to fall from the
    peaks of the mid-1990s.

[^5]: The food production situation is far from favorable in all
    countries in the region. In Bangladesh, calorie and protein intake
    has declined; in India there is virtual stagnation. In India, food
    surpluses have increased while insufficient growth in calorie intake
    has occurred, evidence of a skewed pattern of production,
    sub-optimal distribution of foodstuffs and a public distribution
    system that has failed to deliver to the poor.

[^6]: ^a^

[^7]: ^a^

[^8]: ^a^

[^9]: ^a^

[^10]: ^a^

[^11]: ^a^

[^12]: ^a^

[^13]: ^a^

[^14]: ^a^