Interview Eduardo Zegarra, published in El Comercio , January 16, 2010
Grade economist reveals how vulnerable our population face of rising food prices
By: Ramon Ortiz Marienella
If in one year we grew 10%, as happened in 2008 - the number of people with hunger-read caloric deficit-increased by 1.2 million people is a fact that should call for deep reflection. This wake-up call is made by the Grade economist Eduardo Zegarra, who along with Jorge Tuesta was commissioned by the FAO to determine the impact of price shock food that was experienced between 2007 and 2008. For poor Peruvians Zegarra and not so poor are defenseless against external shocks in food prices, and that requires urgent solutions, even more so when a similar shock could be repeated this year, albeit on a smaller scale.
What is the main conclusion of the report?
That Peru lacks a food security policy, which was well reflected in the price shock of 2008. The study focused on measuring the caloric deficit using INEI indicator that assesses whether a family is eating the food needed per day, if he fails, has a deficit, and is a way of saying he is hungry.
And what was the outcome?
caloric deficit in Peru rose 28% to 31.6% between 2007 and 2008. Of a total of 8 million people rose to 9.2 million. It is a very significant increase in a year that Peru's economy grew 10% and poverty fell by 4%.
is paradoxical.
And makes us think that we should not see only the poverty figure calculated on the basis of a theoretical cost of families. Should be a habit to other indicators, such as caloric deficit, child malnutrition and access to programs social. In addition, we saw nothing paradoxical was the fall of people's access to social programs in full price shocks.
Why?
social programs had the same budget, but food rose. That's where we observed poor responsiveness of the state.
Was not a good alternative to knocking on doors of houses to leave food?
That was basically a show. Should have a restructuring of the food programs, giving them more resources. In Peru only 50% of the calorie deficit population has access to a food program, ie 9.2 million solo 4,5 millones o 4,6 millones acceden a algún programa social. De otro lado, se ven cosas preocupantes: el déficit calórico en las zonas rurales aumenta tremendamente en el verano, en las vacaciones escolares, cuando los niños no reciben desayuno escolar o el vaso de leche. En general, los programas no están diseñados para enfrentar el problema alimentario de fondo: el déficit calórico.
Hace poco se dijo que la desnutrición había caído.
Sí, y eso se debe a cómo se mide la desnutrición a través del indicador de talla y peso. Mucho de esos buenos indicadores tienen que ver con mejores programas de salud y de atención a las madres, pues un niño does not grow well because it has many diarrhea. Not that they've improved the food programs. This government has not given higher priority to food. I always repeat that Lula (Brazil) has 80% acceptance in large part by the success of the Zero Hunger program, which guarantees every Brazilian three meals a day.
Zero Hunger How to replicate?
I think every country has to look at your model. The creation of the Food Security Council seems to me central. We should also be called a bonus for food, without much bureaucracy and logistics. With the updated figures to 2009, at least it would give a bonus of $ 88 to each resident annually.
"This would give a check to the resident?
would not be a free availability check, is a bond for redemption of certain foods. If we focus on the poorest, the program would total $ 570 million a year. Is
would have to restructure all social programs?
need to be articulate or complementarity. The programs must be focused on sectors that can not afford food. There is some idea that the nutritional issue is only for children and the elderly.
The controversy would be if people got used to support and not being required at all.
is a problems. In fact, such programs must have mechanisms for input and output. Also, do not think there is a valid argument to deny support to a population severely affected by food shortages. The same is an ethical dilemma and moral spend billions on weapons and not U.S. $ 600 million for people to have the basics.
And in 2009 things did not change much?
Some foods that did not rise much in 2008 saw increases in 2009. For example, bananas, fresh vegetables and chicken. In the end, inflation in 2009 that I have food and beverages is 4.3%.
Is that diffuses the INEI figure? What
happens is that the calculation based on the index throughout the year and compared to the average of 2008. The INEI monthly calculation does, then do not say much. What we see is that food inflation is much higher than overall inflation in 2009.
What is the reason for the increase in 2009?
There are chains in which companies have more pricing power. There is capacity in sugar pricing, as it remains highly protected (price band). That gives them an edge.
The government said there was speculation in 2008.
That was a mistake. Without more evidence began to say that there was speculation among retailers when he was an international issue. The flagship product was the oil that rose 40% in prices.
Is this increase justified?
We find that no, it rose much more than they should. We can say that Alicorp, which has major presence in the market when the international price rose, raised its prices, but when it fell, it was not in the same proportion. Then they had to adjust the price.
is speculated that the world would have an inflation problem this year, and that could drag back to food.
What happened in 2007 and 2008 could recur, as they continue latent factors that gave rise to: the increased demand for food in China and India and increased production of biofuels in the U.S. (Based on corn). No rule to have another price shock, perhaps not as strong but still affect the Peruvians. So it is remarkable that the MEF is already thinking about creating a food security program. Ideally, they should launch faster.
base calories: rice
The study determined that rice is the base support of Peruvian families.
In Peru, 20% of calories from rice. In the Sierra is 10% because it is the potato. In the jungle (rice) also is widely consumed, although the banana plays an important role. Of the three, rice is more competitive, because they pay less for the amount of calories, consume less energy in its production and is not perishable. Therefore, the penetration of rice is massive.
Is increased price of rice in 2008 had an impact on the diet? Fortunately we
efficient producers of rice. If we do not use much water, we would be better.
In proteins, the chicken is the star.
On the coast, mostly. In the mountains is the lamb and in the forest, fish.
What about the fish in the sea? We
a very low per capita consumption despite having a vast coastline. There is a question of habit, we like to eat fish more expensive. Furthermore, we do not like eating anything frozen, and that is a major constraint to increasing consumption of meat. That limits the industrial food chain.
By: Ramon Ortiz Marienella
If in one year we grew 10%, as happened in 2008 - the number of people with hunger-read caloric deficit-increased by 1.2 million people is a fact that should call for deep reflection. This wake-up call is made by the Grade economist Eduardo Zegarra, who along with Jorge Tuesta was commissioned by the FAO to determine the impact of price shock food that was experienced between 2007 and 2008. For poor Peruvians Zegarra and not so poor are defenseless against external shocks in food prices, and that requires urgent solutions, even more so when a similar shock could be repeated this year, albeit on a smaller scale.
What is the main conclusion of the report?
That Peru lacks a food security policy, which was well reflected in the price shock of 2008. The study focused on measuring the caloric deficit using INEI indicator that assesses whether a family is eating the food needed per day, if he fails, has a deficit, and is a way of saying he is hungry.
And what was the outcome?
caloric deficit in Peru rose 28% to 31.6% between 2007 and 2008. Of a total of 8 million people rose to 9.2 million. It is a very significant increase in a year that Peru's economy grew 10% and poverty fell by 4%.
is paradoxical.
And makes us think that we should not see only the poverty figure calculated on the basis of a theoretical cost of families. Should be a habit to other indicators, such as caloric deficit, child malnutrition and access to programs social. In addition, we saw nothing paradoxical was the fall of people's access to social programs in full price shocks.
Why?
social programs had the same budget, but food rose. That's where we observed poor responsiveness of the state.
Was not a good alternative to knocking on doors of houses to leave food?
That was basically a show. Should have a restructuring of the food programs, giving them more resources. In Peru only 50% of the calorie deficit population has access to a food program, ie 9.2 million solo 4,5 millones o 4,6 millones acceden a algún programa social. De otro lado, se ven cosas preocupantes: el déficit calórico en las zonas rurales aumenta tremendamente en el verano, en las vacaciones escolares, cuando los niños no reciben desayuno escolar o el vaso de leche. En general, los programas no están diseñados para enfrentar el problema alimentario de fondo: el déficit calórico.
Hace poco se dijo que la desnutrición había caído.
Sí, y eso se debe a cómo se mide la desnutrición a través del indicador de talla y peso. Mucho de esos buenos indicadores tienen que ver con mejores programas de salud y de atención a las madres, pues un niño does not grow well because it has many diarrhea. Not that they've improved the food programs. This government has not given higher priority to food. I always repeat that Lula (Brazil) has 80% acceptance in large part by the success of the Zero Hunger program, which guarantees every Brazilian three meals a day.
Zero Hunger How to replicate?
I think every country has to look at your model. The creation of the Food Security Council seems to me central. We should also be called a bonus for food, without much bureaucracy and logistics. With the updated figures to 2009, at least it would give a bonus of $ 88 to each resident annually.
"This would give a check to the resident?
would not be a free availability check, is a bond for redemption of certain foods. If we focus on the poorest, the program would total $ 570 million a year. Is
would have to restructure all social programs?
need to be articulate or complementarity. The programs must be focused on sectors that can not afford food. There is some idea that the nutritional issue is only for children and the elderly.
The controversy would be if people got used to support and not being required at all.
is a problems. In fact, such programs must have mechanisms for input and output. Also, do not think there is a valid argument to deny support to a population severely affected by food shortages. The same is an ethical dilemma and moral spend billions on weapons and not U.S. $ 600 million for people to have the basics.
And in 2009 things did not change much?
Some foods that did not rise much in 2008 saw increases in 2009. For example, bananas, fresh vegetables and chicken. In the end, inflation in 2009 that I have food and beverages is 4.3%.
Is that diffuses the INEI figure? What
happens is that the calculation based on the index throughout the year and compared to the average of 2008. The INEI monthly calculation does, then do not say much. What we see is that food inflation is much higher than overall inflation in 2009.
What is the reason for the increase in 2009?
There are chains in which companies have more pricing power. There is capacity in sugar pricing, as it remains highly protected (price band). That gives them an edge.
The government said there was speculation in 2008.
That was a mistake. Without more evidence began to say that there was speculation among retailers when he was an international issue. The flagship product was the oil that rose 40% in prices.
Is this increase justified?
We find that no, it rose much more than they should. We can say that Alicorp, which has major presence in the market when the international price rose, raised its prices, but when it fell, it was not in the same proportion. Then they had to adjust the price.
is speculated that the world would have an inflation problem this year, and that could drag back to food.
What happened in 2007 and 2008 could recur, as they continue latent factors that gave rise to: the increased demand for food in China and India and increased production of biofuels in the U.S. (Based on corn). No rule to have another price shock, perhaps not as strong but still affect the Peruvians. So it is remarkable that the MEF is already thinking about creating a food security program. Ideally, they should launch faster.
base calories: rice
The study determined that rice is the base support of Peruvian families.
In Peru, 20% of calories from rice. In the Sierra is 10% because it is the potato. In the jungle (rice) also is widely consumed, although the banana plays an important role. Of the three, rice is more competitive, because they pay less for the amount of calories, consume less energy in its production and is not perishable. Therefore, the penetration of rice is massive.
Is increased price of rice in 2008 had an impact on the diet? Fortunately we
efficient producers of rice. If we do not use much water, we would be better.
In proteins, the chicken is the star.
On the coast, mostly. In the mountains is the lamb and in the forest, fish.
What about the fish in the sea? We
a very low per capita consumption despite having a vast coastline. There is a question of habit, we like to eat fish more expensive. Furthermore, we do not like eating anything frozen, and that is a major constraint to increasing consumption of meat. That limits the industrial food chain.
0 comments:
Post a Comment