study of the public distribution system in karnataka vl

A study of the Public Distribution System in KarnatakaNovember, 2016 Researched and compiled by Pratik Shetty

Contents

Introduction

Findings

Recommendations

Appendix Abbreviations Methodology Respondent Profile Sample Questionnaire

The Food Security Act is an attempt by the Government of India to distribute subsidized food through a ‘rights based’ approach

• The National Food Security Act was passed on 12th September 2013• Under the provisions of the Act, beneficiaries are entitled to 5 kg per person per month of cereals at

the following prices:• Rice at Rs 3 per kg• Wheat at Rs 2 per kg• Coarse grains Rs 1 per kg

• In India, 38% of children under the age of 5 have stunted growth and 55% of women between the age of 15-49 have anemia, in such a scenario food security becomes vitally important

• Approximately two thirds of the population of India is entitled to receive subsidized food grain under the Targeted Public Distribution System

• Identification of beneficiaries of the Targeted Public Distribution System is the responsibility of the State Governments

http://www.thehindu.com/multimedia/archive/01404/National_Food_Secu_1404268a.pdf

http://www.transformnutrition.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2015/12/India-Fast-Facts.pdf

Introduction





The implementation of the Food Security Act in Karnataka is the Anna Bhagya Scheme

• The Anna Bhagya Scheme, designed by the Government of Karnataka in compliance with the National Food Security Act, provides food security for Below Poverty Line (BPL) and Antyodaya Anna Yojana (AAY) families

• Antyodaya Anna Yojana (AAY) families are the poorest of the poor families in the BPL category

The Karnataka Government identifies a Below Poverty Line family based on the following guidelines:

• those who are not government employees or employed in government-aided companies/institutions

• those who are not Income Tax and Service Tax assesses • those who do not own at least 3 hectares of irrigated land • those who do not own a house of dimension 1,000 sq. ft in city

corporation limits or 1,200-sq. ft house in other towns• those who do not own a four-wheeler • those not drawing more than 150 units of power a month

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-karnataka/guidelines-for-identifying-bpl-families-simplified/article8971164.ece

Introduction



The introduction of biometric verification and monthly coupons has made an already cumbersome process unmanageable

Day 1

Day 2

Travel between 1 to 10 km to the nearest Bangalore

One Office/Coupon Center

Stand for 2 to 6 hours in two queues for biometric

verification

Try to verify biometrics anywhere between 1 and 25 times to collect the coupon

If verification fails

1. Bring a child from school or another family member from home

OR2. Travel to the food

office to resolve issue OR

3. Forgo rations for the month

Go to the ration shop on the day that it is open and stand in an even longer queue to collect ration

Introduction

The objective of the study was to understand the problems faced by the beneficiaries and to quantify the opportunity cost

What is opportunity cost?

An opportunity cost refers to a benefit that a person could have received, but gave up to take another course of action

For example – The opportunity cost of following the process of collecting ration results in each family losing two days of work (~Rs 400). Money which could have been used to buy 8 kg of good quality rice in the open market!

Which begs the question, does following the current PDS make any economic sense for the beneficiary?

Family is below the poverty line but does not

have BPL or AAY card

Family is eligible only for partial rations as

few members are excluded due to issues linking Aadhar Card to

Ration Card

Family has a BPL/AAY card and successfully linked Aadhar Cards but has issues with biometric verification

Family has a BPL/AAY card and successfully linked Aadhar Cards and no issues with

biometric verification

But what about the opportunity cost?

Families can be classified into four categories based on the problems that they face

1

2

3

4

Introduction

Contents

Introduction

Findings

Recommendations


Summary of Findings – Applicable to all the 9.6 lakh families in Bangalore Urban District that are eligible for Food Security

Findings

• 80% of the beneficiaries face serious issues with the current Public Distribution System6% are wrongly denied BPL/APL card altogether38% are eligible only for partial ration because of Aadhar Card issues36% are sent to the Food Office or asked to bring another family member because of issues with biometric verification

• The Opportunity Cost is Rs 557 per month per family (equivalent to 11 Kgs of rice)30% of beneficiaries have to go to the Food Office and 42% have to bring a family member to solve biometrics related issues– adding to the Opportunity Cost

• The failure rate of biometric verification system is a high 62%

• 50% of the beneficiaries said that the ration is not edible and quantity supplied is not consistent; 51% are denied kerosene without LPG

• In addition to the problems in the process, the Ration Shops are run in a corrupt and unprofessional manner

81% of beneficiaries said the ration shop owner does not weigh the ration in front of them, 52% are charged more that what is specified in the SMS notification

Problems with the System

Problems with Biometrics

Problems with Ration Shops

Findings are applicable to Bangalore Urban and have a confidence level of 99% and 5% margin of error. The survey was conducted on 637 respondents (stratified random sample) across 134 depots in September and October 2016

80% of the beneficiaries face serious issues with the current Public Distribution System

Findings

Family is BPL

Family does not have BPL/AAY card

Family is BPL

Family has BPL/AAY card

Family is not eligible for full rations

Family is BPL


Family eligible for full rations

Family has problems with biometrics

Family is BPL


Family eligible for full rations

Family has no problems with biometrics

6%57k

families

38%3 lakh 65k

families

36%3 lakh 46k

families

20%1 lakh 92k

families

These families are not even eligible for free treatment at

government hospitals, they are denied BPL cards based on

arbitrary criteria such as owning a colour TV

Problems include being sent to Food Office and having to bring a

family member for biometrics

Problem of opportunity cost due to lost labor and other expenses

remains

These families are not eligible for full ration because one or many

members do not have an Aadhar Card or the card is not linked to

the ration card


The Opportunity Cost of collecting ration by following the current process, is Rs 557 per month (equivalent to 11 Kgs of rice)

Findings

Total Opportunity Cost per month

per family

1. Travel to Bangalore One center/Coupon distribution center – 37 Minutes

2. Wait in the queue to collect coupon – 3 Hours 40 Minutes (One day of cooley is lost)

4. Travel back home from Bangalore One center/Coupon Distribution center – 37 Minutes

3. Pay a fee to collect coupon

5. Travel to ration shop – 25 Minutes

6. Wait in the queue at the ration shop – 2 Hours 15 Minutes (second day of cooley is lost)

7. Pay for ration

8. Travel back home from ration shop – 25 Minutes

Rs 557Findings are applicable to Bangalore Urban and have a confidence level of 99% and 5% margin of error. The survey was conducted on 637 respondents (stratified random sample) across 134 depots in September and October 2016

30% of beneficiaries have to Go to the Food Office and 42% have to bring a family member – adding to the Opportunity Cost

Findings

Asked to go to the food office

30%

Asked to bring family member

42%30% of beneficiaries have been

sent to the food office to resolve biometrics related issue

42% of beneficiaries have been asked to bring a family member to

solve biometrics related issue


The failure rate of biometric verification system is as high as 62%

Findings

1 2 to 3 3 to 5 5+0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

28%

50%

18%

4%

Distribution of number of times that biometrics need to be verified to get a match

Number of times biometrics need to be verified to get a successful match

Perc

enta

ge o

f ben

efici

arie

s


50% of the beneficiaries said that the ration was not edible and quantity not consistent; 51% are denied kerosene without LPG

Findings

Not Edible Edible0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

50% 50%

Quality of Ration

Perc

enta

ge o

f ben

efici

arie

s

Consistant Varies0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

49% 50%

Consistency of Quantity

Perc

enta

ge o

f ben

efici

arie

s

No Keresene No LPG

Have Kerosene or LPG

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

51% 49%

LPG and Kerosene

Perc

enta

ge o

f ben

efici

arie

s

Almost all respondents said that the quality of the Ragi being provided was terrible and cannot be eaten by human beings


In addition to the problems in the process, the Ration Shops are run in a corrupt and unprofessional manner

Findings

56%Beneficiaries are forced to buy other items like soap and tea powder along

with rations

51%Beneficiaries are forced to pay more

money than what was specified in the auto generated SMS receipt

61%Beneficiaries said that the ration shop owner misbehaved and insulted them

when the collect ration

81%Beneficiaries said that the ration shop owner does not weigh the rations in

from of them

12 daysIs the average number of days that the

ration shop is open

6 hoursIs the average number of hours that

the ration shop is open


Contents

Introduction

Findings

Recommendations


Recommendations

Recommendations

There should be a move from Targeted Public Distribution towards Universal Public Distribution in order to ensure that the most helpless beneficiaries are not left out

The coupon system should be stopped because the Opportunity Cost (one days earning) is unacceptably high

Biometric verification of beneficiaries should be abandoned till the technology has an acceptable success rate

To avoid fraud, technology must be used to monitor ration instead of monitoring people e.g.- POS Machines at ration shops, CCTV cameras at storage facilities and GPS devices on trucks

Ration shops should be monitored to avoid the gross mismanagement and corruption that is taking place, Ration shops should be run by community organizations rather than by individuals

Imposing a technology that does not work on people who depend on it for their survival is a grave injustice

- Jean Drèze Professor at the Department of Economics, Ranchi University on the changes to the PDS implemented across India

Appendix

Contents

Introduction

Findings

Recommendation


AbbreviationsPDS- Public Distribution System

BPL- Below Poverty Line

AAY- Antyodaya Anna Yojana

LPG- Liquid Petrolium Gas

POS- Point of Sale

CCTV- Closed Circuit Television

GPS- Global Positioning System

Appendix- Abbreviations

Contents

Introduction

Findings

Recommendation


MethodologySample Size selection• The survey and the subsequent inferences are limited to the district of Bangalore Urban

• Total population of Bangalore Urban is 96,21,551 http://www.census2011.co.in/census/district/242-bangalore.html

• Total number of families in Bangalore Urban is 19,24,310 (making the standard assumption that a family has 5 members)

• Number of families that should be covered under the Food Security Act is 9,62,155 (50% of urban families are to be covered) http://dfpd.nic.in/Salient-features-National-Food-Security-Act.htm

• Therefore the population for the purpose of the study is study is 9,62,155

• For 99% confidence with a 5% margin of error, 663 families should be surveyed for a population of 10,00,000 http://research-advisors.com/tools/SampleSize.htm

• The sample size for the survey will have to be 637 families for the above stated confidence levels

Representative Sample selection• Stratified random sampling was the technique used

• Slums/Low income areas were identified based on Location and Religion in order to make the sample representative

• The survey was conducted across 92 low income areas and 134 ration shops

• The low income areas were distributed across North, South, East and West Bangalore

• Respondents were spread across religions in proportion to census figures http://www.census2011.co.in/census/city/448-bangalore.html

Appendix- Methodology

http://www.census2011.co.in/census/district/242-bangalore.html

http://dfpd.nic.in/Salient-features-National-Food-Security-Act.htm



http://research-advisors.com/tools/SampleSize.htm



http://www.census2011.co.in/census/city/448-bangalore.html

http://www.census2011.co.in/census/city/448-bangalore.html

Contents

Introduction

Findings

Recommendation


The 637 respondents were selected across Gender, Age, Religion, Caste & Occupation, making the sample representative

Male Female0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

34%

66%

Respondents by Gender

18-25 25-35 35-45 45-60 60-70 70+0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%

6%

25%

35%

25%

8%

1%

Respondents by Age

Hindu Muslim Christian0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90% 84%

9% 7%

Respondents by Religion

Cooley

House W

ife

Domestic W

ork

Unemployed

Driver

Coorporati

on

Garmen

ts

Waste P

icker

Tailor

Others0%

25%

50% 48%

19%

8% 4% 3% 2% 2% 1% 1%

12%

Respondents by Occupation

SC ST Other0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%60%

6%

34%

Respondents by Caste

Appendix- Respondent Profile

The 637 respondents of the survey were selected from 92 areas to make the sample representative

ByapannahalliAnanduram

Bangi ColonyDodda Nagar

SevanagarShivanagar

Harumariyamma NagarMCT

Doddanna LayoutHakki Pikki

HosahalliKunti grama

Ramabhai ColonyJaibheemanagar

MCT QuartersRajeshwari Nagar

Yarab NagarChamundi Nagar

Kasthuramma BhadavaneLagere

Vinayaka BhadavaneAmbetkar Nagar

MankalammathotaUllala

Old Baglur LayoutAmbetkar Colony

SanyasikunteBheemankuppe

Jai Bhuvaneshwari NagarSanjay Nagar

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0%1.1%

1.3%1.3%1.3%1.3%1.3%1.4%1.4%1.6%1.6%1.6%1.6%1.6%

2.1%2.1%

2.4%2.5%2.7%2.7%

2.9%2.9%3.0%3.0%

3.3%3.5%

4.0%4.9%

5.1%5.2%5.4%

Respondents by Area


Anjanappa GradenBanashankari

BandunagarBhavani Nagar

Chamindeshwari NagarDT Halli

KR PuramNew Tharagupet

NTY LayoutDJ Halli

G. NagarJanatha Colony

Narashimaiah ColonyRayan Circle

Flower GardenGR Nagar

Harijana Seva SanghaKalasipalya

Triveni NagarBakshi Garden

GiddenahalliHavadiga Colony

Jolly MohallaKSB QuartersGajadrwayar

New Baglur LayoutPantharapalya

Ullal UpanagarVinoba Nagar

Nagaianapalya

0.0% 0.2% 0.4% 0.6% 0.8% 1.0% 1.2%0.3%0.3%0.3%0.3%0.3%0.3%0.3%0.3%0.3%

0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%

0.6%0.6%0.6%0.6%0.6%

0.8%0.8%0.8%0.8%0.8%

1.0%1.0%1.0%1.0%1.0%

1.1%

Respondents by Area

BennisandraBSK

Chikka BanaswadiDeviaah ParkDodda Basti

GovindrajnagarHegganahalliKathalipalya

KoromangalaLakshidevanagar

LingrajpuramMandya

MarenahalliMCT Slum

MoodalaplayaMotappa Circle

Muniyappa PalyaMunneshwar Badawane

NagarabhaviNC Colony

Periyar NagarPH Colony

Rajiv Gandhi ColonyRT Nagar

Shankar NagarSomanahalliSubramanya

TippunagarOld Byyappanalli

PillanagardenPK Colony

Venkateshpuram

0.0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.3% 0.4%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%

0.3%0.3%0.3%0.3%

Respondents by Area

The 637 respondents of the survey were selected from 134 Ration Shops to make the sample representative


Raithara SanghaBhagwan

KFCSCBhagya LakshmiMahadeshwara

BasavarajuShadakshari

MeeneshwaraRamahalli

JayanthiVSSSN

GaneshSelvaraj

DevalambaThandaveshwaraJayarame GowdaNanjundeshwar

ManjunathUpanagaraLakshmanJay Durga

RajaAshwathi Nyaya

CPS JaiR BabuKSCFC

GowarammaRizwan

AyyappaPrakash

AmbetkarVenkateshwara

NayndahalliSri Amgalaparmeshwari

AshokaSuncity

GajananaRomahalli

RagavandraHanumanKGNMDA

PriyaVeerabhadranagar

ByrappaRajshekar

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0%0.7%0.7%0.7%0.7%0.7%0.7%0.7%0.7%0.7%0.7%0.7%0.7%

1.0%1.0%1.0%1.0%1.0%1.0%1.0%1.0%1.0%1.0%1.0%1.0%1.0%

1.2%1.2%1.2%1.2%

1.4%1.7%1.7%

1.9%1.9%1.9%

2.2%2.2%2.2%

2.4%2.9%2.9%

3.1%4.1%

5.5%7.2%

Respondents by Ration Shop

Jayraj NagarVenugopal

MohanJ Jayanthi

AdhijambavaJai Maruthi

AnnapoornaVijayaswamy

RajajinaragBrinda Store

KS TownVenkatapura

KFCSHegarehalli

Womens CCSChoudiah Block

PriyadarshiniMuniyappa

HajiraYamini

Jai BharathKSCSC

MaruthiRamanna

BabuLakshmiZareenaKrishna

ShivannaGovindaJay Ram

AvalahalliPeddaraju Stores

SathyasevaRamuAlmas

ParthibanChamrajpet

SarakiBadari Narayana

KaushikShekar

VenkateshpuramTippu Nagar

Satish

0.0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.3% 0.4% 0.5% 0.6% 0.7% 0.8%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%

0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.5%

0.7%0.7%


DB Nagar

Kottigepalya

Rajanna

Rangadhama

Jai Bhuvaneshwari Nagar

Ramamma

Janarhdan

Sharadha

Peddaraju

Mariyamma

Noorjan

Dhanlakshmi

RP

Khalik

Razak

Ramesh

Krishnappa

CSS

Sudhamalila

Bapujinagara

Sunandanm

Sri Ramulu

Lakshmikanth

Prathiban

Alamarcy

SRS

ISSC

Bala Simha

Murugan

Sashi

Vijaykumar

Abdulla Basha

0.0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.3%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%


Contents

Introduction

Findings

Recommendation


Survey questionnaire format

Appendix- Questionnaire

• Col. Mathew Thomas (Retd) and Mr. VK Somasekhar for envisioning the project

• Dr. Kshitij Urs, Kevin Noronha and Malarvizhi Balachander for their constant support and guidance

• All the activists who were instrumental in designing and conducting the survey

Acknowledgement

Appendix- Acknowledgement

o Bommio Shahirao Usha Nayako Ushakumario Arulselvio Jhansiranio Rathnao Pushpao Manjula KNo Yamunao Dhanalakshmi

o Manjula Ro Ashao Kavithao Rathnajayaramo Manjuo Kavyao Chandrikao Meenao Ramanio Geetha Co Rathnajayaram

study of the public distribution system in karnataka vl

Documents