Joint partnership to tackle the contradictory challenge of hunger and food waste

Zomato and Feeding India are on a mission to collaboratively solve the challenges of malnutrition, hunger and food wastage. They aim to target each source of food wastage in the country i.e. farms, supermarkets, hotels, restaurants, events and corporates. The Zomato network is seeking to plug into the existing models of Feeding India to focus on sustainably feeding people who suffer from hunger.
 
Feeding India was set up with the aim to end hunger and malnutrition in India by providing food to vulnerable people, who have limited access to nutritious food. They redistribute excess food, that is good and nutritious and would otherwise go to waste, to people in need. They also cook fresh food through innovative kitchen models that supports people, especially women and children. Feeding India has also initiated a #FightFoodWaste movement to create awareness and address the annual wastage of food valued at INR 58,000 crores, which is thrown in landfills and emanates an environmentally harmful methane gas, while millions go hungry at night.
 
On the other hand, as a food company, Zomato is striving to address each step of the food value chain, to foster transparency and quality. Zomato actively engages in pro-environment messaging to encourage use of biodegradable packaging. Within six months of its launch, Zomato Piggybank, its reward points program, has raised funds equivalent to 22 lakh meals.
 
In highlighting this joint initiative, the Founder and CEO of Zomato, Deepinder Goyal said, “we have so far, taken environmental issues head-on with non-plastic initiatives like preventing the consumption of single-use plastic cutlery and promoting biodegradable packaging for food delivery. As we welcome Feeding India into the Zomato family, we will take this battle a notch higher by helping them build a system where excess food is directed to those in need. As a start, we aim to activate the restaurants on our platform into the Feeding India network and help them use technology to scale their volunteer operations. Feeding India will become a core part of our DNA and a significant step in our mission to ensure ‘better food for more people’. My many conversations with Ankit and Srishti have convinced me of our belief in a shared mission, and I am confident that together we will make a positive impact on food wastage and hunger.”
 
According to Ankit Kawatra, the Founder of Feeding India, “our ambitious aim is to end hunger and food wastage not just in India, but globally. I’m delighted to strengthen this movement with Zomato, given its vision of ‘better food for more people’ and our shared mission to combat hunger and food wastage. We see this collaboration as a pivotal step against food insecurity. I believe that restaurants can play a transformational role in powering hunger-free cities, and I look forward to working with the Zomato network in the future.”
 
The EAT-Lancet report that calls for a Great Food Transformation in order to create healthy diets from sustainable food systems, emphasises upon the crucial need to massively reduce the global volume of food loss and waste. Such multi-sectoral collaborations are critical for resolving complex challenges of malnutrition in the country and achieving development goals, underlining Zero Hunger. Of course, it remains to be seen how successful this initiative is in translating its vision into reality and resolving the seemingly contradictory existence of massive levels of hunger and wastage of food.
 
India Outbound
February 7, 2019

 
 

source https://indiaoutbound.org/joint-partnership-to-tackle-the-contradictory-challenge-of-hunger-and-food-waste/

UNCTAD: The Pain and Gain in the American-Chinese trade war

In a new report, by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), titled Key Statistics and Trends in Trade Policy 2018: Trade tensions, implications for Developing Countries, it has been stated that India is one of the countries that stands to benefit from the ongoing “tit-for-tat” trade tensions between the world’s top two economies i.e. US and China. Other expected beneficiaries include the members of the European Union, due to a USD 70 billion increase in the bloc’s exports, as well as Japan, Mexico and Canada, due to increase in their exports by more than USD20 billion each. This will reflect in the global export and import patterns.
 
The American-Chinese trade tensions started in early 2018 when both countries, imposed tariffs on each other’s goods worth $50 billion. This escalated in September 2018 when the US imposed 10% tariffs on $200 billion-worth Chinese imports. In retaliation, China imposed tariffs on additional US imports worth $60 billion. This imposition was initially supposed to increase to 25% in January 2019. However, both countries decided in early December 2018, to freeze further tariff increase, until March 1, 2019.
 
According to the study, bilateral trade tariffs would be of no help to the domestic firms in their respective markets. Pamela Coke-Hamilton (head of the UNCTAD’s international trade division) said that, “because of the size of their economies, the tariffs imposed by Unites States and China will inevitably have significant repercussions on international trade.”
 
She also said that “our analysis shows that while bilateral tariffs are not very effective in protecting domestic firms, they are very valid instruments to limit trade from the targeted country. The effect of US-China tariffs would be mainly distortionary. US-China bilateral trade will decline and replaced by trade originating in other countries.”
 
The study has estimated that out of the $250 billion-worth Chinese exports that have been subjected to US tariffs, about 82% will be absorbed by firms of other countries, 12% will be retained by the Chinese firms and only 6% will be captured by the firms in the US. Similarly, about 85% of the $85 billion US exports will be captured by other countries, US firms will retain less than 10% and Chinese firms will capture about 5%. These estimates are consistent across multiple sectors, ranging from communication equipment, wood products and furniture, precision instruments and chemicals.
 
As the chart below reflects, Europe will benefit the most from this trade war, simply because bilateral tariffs alter the global competitiveness and economic capacities, in a manner favourable to firms that are not operating in the countries directly impacted by them. Thus, the European Union’s exports will probably increase the most, as it captures about $70 billion of the US-China bilateral trade i.e. $50 billion-worth Chinese exports and $20 billion-worth American exports.

These figures do not represent a massive chunk of global trade but US-China bilateral trade was valued at $640billion in 2017 and the tariff impositions have impacted more than half of this. Thus, for many countries, the resultant boost to their exports will be substantial. However, even for these countries, not all results will be positive and overall negative global effects are likely to dominate.
 
The report lists five macroeconomic factors over which the confrontations in international trade can have far-reaching consequences, given the fragile nature of the global economy and the economic interdependencies of the developing countries that may be less resilient to unfavourable conditions.
 

1. Global growth: disturbances in commodity prices, financial markets and currencies due to global economic downturn; the imposition of adjustment costs to international firms reflect upon investment decisions, profitability and productivity
2. Monetary policy and currency markets: risks of the trade tensions spiraling into currency wars given that the interlinkages of currency markets have already increased the volatility and downward pressures for many currencies, thus making the dollar-dominated debt tougher to service

   • Stagflation: increase in prices coupled with lower growth due to inflationary pressures and reduced efficiency, resulting in rising unemployment
   • Globally escalating trade tensions: more countries joining the bandwagon of protectionist policies
   • Domino effect of the “tit for tat” policies: of the two trade giants, in an interconnected global economy, beyond the targeted countries and sectors

Several examples have been given to illustrate these.In the soybean market, Chinese tariffs on American soybeans have caused trade distortionary effects that are advantageous for several exporting countries, particularly Brazil. Suddenly, Brazil has become the main supplier of soybeans to China. However, given the lack of clarity over the duration and magnitude of the imposed tariffs, Brazilian producers have shown reluctance in making investment decisions, in case the tariffs are revoked and they incur losses. In addition to this, the Brazilian firms that are operating in sectors (livestock feed etc.) that use soybeans as inputs, will lose their competitiveness due to rising prices, fueled by Chinese demand for the Brazilian soybeans.
 
Increase in tariffs penalize the suppliers along the value chains, in addition to the assembler of a specific product. Thus, the impact of the US tariffs on the high volume of Chinese exports is probably going to hit the East Asian value chains the most. UNCTAD estimates that they will suffer a contraction of about $160 billion.
 
The multiple rounds of retaliatory tariffs and protectionist policies adopted by US and China will not only result in trade spillovers and ripple effects that hurt weaker countries and economies, but will also have implications for the global trading system. Negotiations and settlements for the ongoing trade disputes are taking place bilaterally rather than within the ambit of the WTO. This indicates a weakening of the existing framework of the multilateral trading system.
 
The current rules of international trade might be in for drastic reform, given that the ongoing confrontations are underlined by disagreements over government subsidies, intellectual property rights and other types of non-tariff barriers that affect market access. However, it is left to be seen how conducive they will be in restoring balance to a well-functioning multilateral trading system, which can successfully defuse any protectionist impulses and maintain market access, especially for the poorer countries, while securing their interests.
 
All representative images and content sourced from the report.
 
India Outbound
February 6, 2019
 
 

source https://indiaoutbound.org/unctad-the-pain-and-gain-in-the-american-chinese-trade-war/

The Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) has released a report titled The State of Renewable Energy in India 2019. here's a closer look. https://t.co/dpqhPbENPe

The Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) has released a report titled The State of Renewable Energy in India 2019. here's a closer look.https://t.co/dpqhPbENPe

— India Outbound (@india_outbound) February 6, 2019

from Twitter : https://twitter.com/india_outbound

The World Obesity Federation has warned that obesity-related lifestyle diseases like cancer, diabetes and heart conditions will cost India a whopping $13 billion annually by 2025, in the wake of continued increase in childhood obesity. https://t.co/UClu0htFna

The World Obesity Federation has warned that obesity-related lifestyle diseases like cancer, diabetes and heart conditions will cost India a whopping $13 billion annually by 2025, in the wake of continued increase in childhood obesity.https://t.co/UClu0htFna

— India Outbound (@india_outbound) February 6, 2019

from Twitter : https://twitter.com/india_outbound

Anti-dumping duties: China and India

As of January 28, 2019, India has imposed an anti-dumping duty on 99 Chinese products to protect its domestic players from a glut of cheap imports in the local markets. These products include petrochemicals, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, machinery, yarn, fibres, steel and rubber. However, the Indian government has stated that it will not extend the anti-dumping duty on importing Chinese paracetamol, which is used in medicines.
 
According to a notification by the directorate general of trade remedies (DGTR),”the authority holds that domestic industry failed to provide any satisfactory evidence that the expiry of the said anti-dumping duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury to the domestic industry.” The Indian finance ministry had imposed the anti-dumping duty on Chinese paracetamol for the first time in 2002. This was extended in 2007 and 2013 for a period of five years. Before the expiry of the duty in October 2018, the Indian industry has approached the directorate in May 2018, to appeal for the continuation of the duty.
 
China has also imposed anti-dumping duties on the import of ortho dichlorobenzene (ODCB) from India and Japan, due to significant damage to the domestic industry. ODCB is used for the production of multiple chemical products, used widely in the manufacturing of dyes, medicines and pesticides. Duties ranging from 31.9% to 70.4% will be levied for a period of five years.
 
The imposition of anti-dumping duties is a means of ensuring fair trade practices and creating level-playing fields for domestic producers as well as foreign players. On India’s part, this is one of the steps taken as part of ongoing and sustained efforts to bridge the country’s trade deficit by lowering trade barriers for Indian exports to China.
 
During China’s trade policy review at the WTO in 2018, India demanded that efforts be made to lower trade barriers for Indian products like meat, rice, pharmaceuticals and IT products, in order to reduce the unsustainable trade imbalances and the $63 billion trade deficit between both countries. India is also seeking market access for multiple agricultural products, oil seeds, milk and milk products as well as animal feeds.Indian exports have been facing obstacles in accessing Chinese markets due to opaque, stringent, complex and onerous regulatory market requirements in case of exports of agricultural and pharmaceutical products.
 
During China’s trade policy review at the WTO in 2018, India demanded that efforts be made to lower trade barriers for Indian products like meat, rice, pharmaceuticals and IT products, in order to reduce the unsustainable trade imbalances and the $63 billion trade deficit between both countries. India is also seeking market access for multiple agricultural products, oil seeds, milk and milk products as well as animal feeds.Indian exports have been facing obstacles in accessing Chinese markets due to opaque, stringent, complex and onerous regulatory market requirements in case of exports of agricultural and pharmaceutical products.
 
In case of the services sectors, Indian companies faced challenges related to the complex criteria for participation and qualification for contracts with Chinese state-owned enterprises (SOEs). There is immense scope for collaborations between the Indian IT sector and Chinese SOEs to provide state-of-the-art and custom-designed solutions, if issues related to licensing and taxation are adequately addressed.
 
Both countries have signed a protocol for India to export fish oil, fish meal and non-basmati rice to China. The General Administration of China Customs (GACC) has also approved the import of rapeseed meal from six Indian mills. In addition to this, a protocol for the export of Indian tobacco leaves to China has also been inked. China is the largest producer and consumer of tobacco in the world.
 
All these efforts highlight that India is actively engaged in the reduction of its ballooning trade deficit with China. Bilateral trade between India and China has been rising despite military and political stand-offs. In 2017, it rose to a historical high of $84.44 billion and Indian exports to China saw a 40% increase. Before this, bilateral trade had stagnated at $70 billion for several years, despite setting a target of $100 billion by 2015. In the coming years, trade and investments are expected to be boosted further between both countries.
 
India Outbound
February 5, 2019
 

source https://indiaoutbound.org/anti-dumping-duties-china-and-india/

The State of Renewable Energy in India: CSE

The Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) has released a report titled The State of Renewable Energy in India 2019. Chandra Bhushan, the deputy director general of CSE states that the report, “takes a close look at where we stand now, what are the strengths of and the challenges facing the sector, and whether the sector can overcome these obstacles and emerge as a viable alternative to conventional energy sources”. The report is centered around understanding the logic behind India’s renewable energy target (175 GW renewable capacity target by 2022), since renewable energy is undoubtedly the future, but the question about how India will achieve this, remains.
 
Currently, the renewable energy capacity in India is 73 GW i.e. 20% of the country’s total energy capacity. According to Bhushan, “we believe that India needs a renewable energy policy that both de-carbonise the economy and provide access to large numbers of people who are energy-deprived. But a mere number target will not suffice. We need a clear vision going forward.”
 
As per the report, the renewable energy sector in India is a sunshine industry, given the combination of certain favourable policies and good market conditions. Solar has particularly made considerable progress since, large-scale solar has shown an average annual growth rate of over 70%, in the past four years. The installed solar capacity has seen an increase from 2.6 GW in March 2014 to 23.1 GW in June 2018. Priced on an average at less than INR 3 per unit, solar and wind energy has become cheaper than coal in India.
 
Yet, the CSE report lays down some key concerns plaguing the sector, given the slowdown witnessed in 2018, caused by the financial difficulties being faced by the distribution companies, due to import tariffs and subsequent tariff increases.
 

• Inconsistent policy: According to Priyavrat Bhati (advisor, Energy Group, CSE), “Nothing can be more disruptive for an emerging sector that seeks to attract global investors, than ad hoc and abrupt policy changes.” For instance, in the solar module manufacturing industry, the government had reserved auction capacity for domestic manufactures. After the WTO censured this, import duties were applied but later removed. At present, a safeguard duty of 25% has been levied on imported modules. In the wind industry, an auction-based regime for awarding bids from the feed-in-tariff process has been introduced.
• Underperformance by distribution companies (discoms): This has led to dampening of investor confidence and developers’ interest. The Ujjwala Discom Assurance Yojana, the latest attempt at reform, has failed to deliver desired results. The discoms are enduring financial stress, leading to delays in payments for developers, cancellation of auctions and lack of contracts’ enforcement.
• Failure of solar rooftop to make headway in a market skewed in favour of large-scale renewable energy: While India is aiming to achieve 40 GW of rooftop solar capacity by 2022, as of November 2018, only 1,334 MW of grid-connected solar rooftop systems have been installed. The preference for commercial and industrial installations had disrupted the uptake of rooftop solar, even though residential consumers hold immense potential, but account for less than 20% of installed capacity.
• Distributed energy pushed to the back-burner: Almost all schemes (like SAUBAGHYA), focus on grid extensions i.e. connecting un-electrified households to centralized distribution and transmission networks. However, this does not lead to consistent availability or supply of electricity. Thus, the government’s goal of ensuring universal energy access appears misplaced.

It is within the context of these concerns, that CSE has presented the following key recommendations:

• Need to look beyond INDCs (Intended Nationally Determined Contributions) to chart an ambitious low-carbon growth path way

• Need to increase the share of distributed (solar rooftops, mini-grids) renewable energy generation

• Need to encourage the use of “smart grids” (based on communications infrastructure, information technology and control systems) for efficient delivery

• Need to rethink the discom model, since discoms comprise the heart of the electricity market

• Need to invest in the development of inexpensive energy-storage capacity, based on indigenous research and policy support to improve the existing technology’s cost and performance and driving up the scale for the battery industry

• Need to make energy access a key priority for sectoral growth

 
Thus, in order to prevent the disruption of existing electricity markets and systems, due to increased renewable energy, there is a critical need to engage with distributed systems and evolve the current discom model (rethinking fundamental principles of business and institutional incentives), since a large-scale model alone will not suffice. The destabilization of the system actually presents an opportunity to reframe subsidies and target consumers effectively.
 
According to Bhushan, “we stand at the cusp of a momentous shift in the energy sector. For the first time, decarbonized electricity appears feasible in the foreseeable future; it is not an abstract vision. The question is, whether India will reach peak coal and 100 per cent renewable quickly and efficiently, or whether it will be a delayed process, merely egged on by global momentum.”
 
India Outbound
February 4, 2019
 
 

source https://indiaoutbound.org/the-state-of-renewable-energy-in-india-cse/

Specificities of tackling the obesity menace in India

A burgeoning burden
 
Obesity refers to abnormal or excessive fat accumulation in the body that impairs health It is fundamentally caused by the imbalance between the consumption and expenditure of calories. (WHO). Several factors can be attributed to rising obesity levels in India, including abundance of food resulting from societal affluence, limited physical activities or sedentary lifestyles, cultural fixation with sweets, excessive use of fats in cooking or carbohydrates-rich diets and genetic factors.
 
The World Obesity Federation has warned that obesity-related lifestyle diseases like cancer, diabetes and heart conditions will cost India a whopping $13 billion annually by 2025, in the wake of continued increase in childhood obesity. The WHO has revealed that 8.7% of the Indian population (70 million) suffers from diabetes, even if they are not overweight. The percentage of Indians living with obesity is set to jump from 3.7% in 2014 to 5% in 2025. The rate of increase in obesity has far outstripped the decline in levels of under-nutrition.
 
According to the National Family Health Survey-4 (NFHS-2015-16), the number of obese people in the country have doubled in the last decade. In 2017, a WHO study showed that one in every 50 children in India is obese. The changes in physical activity and dietary patterns are a product of societal and environmental changes, related to the lack of policies to support the development of health, agriculture, urban planning, transport, environment as well as food processing, marketing, education and distribution.
 
Misconceptions
 
Sometimes, the twin paradoxical challenges of malnourishment and obesity exist within the same families. Malnourished women give birth to under-weight babies who are then overfed in childhood, leading to early onset of hypertension and diabetes. This is the Barker hypothesis, wherein individuals not receiving adequate nutrition in-utero, but have access to excess or even regular calorie intake later, are more likely to become overweight adults and are hence, susceptible to obesity-linked disorders/life-style and chronic diseases. The individual’s vital organs are unable to utilize the calories that leads to fat deposits (excess energy) in the body.
 
The Body Mass Index (BMI) is an internationally accepted clinical measure of obesity, originally designed to determine broader health trends among large groups of people. However, it is not meant for assessing the “healthy weight” of an individual, even though it is widely used for that purpose, as a means of enforcing a particular body type as “normal.” While there is not enough research done on the scientific validity of BMI, some scholars have questioned the underlying mathematical logic.
 
The BMI formula requires dividing the individual’s weight by the square of the height to determine the categories of “underweight, normal, overweight or obese.” Thus, it assumes a two-dimensional perspective while ignoring crucial factors like the body frame, tissue composition, bone density etc. Forget variance across regions and countries, two people with identical heights cannot possibly weigh the same in all instances.
 
Role of diets
 
The quick transition from being underweight to over-weight, caused by the consumption of energy-dense but nutrient-poor foodsis unhealthy. The unaffordability of healthy food options like whole grains, fresh fruits and vegetables can lead to social inequalities and impose limits upon efforts to reduce the burden of obesity. On the other hand, the trend of low-calorie fad diets (Paleo diet, Ketogenic diet, Intermittent fasting etc.) to counter obesity and weight issues, often endorsed by popular figures, is especially harmful for people in the long-run, unless adopted under medical advice, due to deprivation of essential nutrients. Such diets are not tailor-made for specific nutrient needs of individual body types.
 
The WHO’s report titled Assessing and Managing Children at Primary Healthcare Facilities to Prevent Overweight and Obesity in the Context of the Double Burden of Malnutrition regarding assessments of eating habits and counselling, highlight some simple dietary changes to help prevent obesity. It endorses whole grains over processed cereals as a major source of energy and all essential nutrients, dal for protein, avoidance of binge eating, sugar intake less than 10% of total calorie consumption to maintain normal weight, limited consumption of visible fats that comprise 15% of total calories consumed and use of a combination of cooking oils.
 
Collective action
 
According to Regional Director WHO South East Asia, Poonam Khetrapal Singh, governments must tax sugary drinks, re-invest revenues in health-related activities and insist on accurate food labeling to enable consumers to make informed choices. The Indian government and FSSAI are likely to implement packaging and advertising norms for packaged junk food and beverages (soft drinks, energy drinks and other sugar sweetened beverages). Such investments can help achieve the WHO’s 2025 targets to halt rising obesity and achieve 25% reduction in mortality caused by NCDs.
 
India boasts of being one of the world’s largest consumer markets and producers of fruits, vegetables, milk and seafood. However, it historically lacks the infrastructure to process raw materials into high-value food products for domestic and international sale. The consumption of fats, sugars, oils, animal products and packaged/processed foods have surged since 2011, according to India’s National Council of Applied Economic Research, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Such soaring rates raise major questions about India’s flourishing unorganized food sector and the government’s billion-dollar campaign favoring foreign processed foods in the Indian market.
 
The key to countering obesity risks through regulation of dietary habits and lifestyle choices of people is spreading awareness and education. In addition, the regulatory frameworks around food advertising and labelling must be strengthened, especially in case of products that are targeted towards children. Moreover, transformation of food systems at the national and global level can help alleviate the economic, health and environmental impacts of unsustainable food production and consumption practices.
 
Aditi Rukhaiyar
February 1, 2019
 

source https://indiaoutbound.org/specificities-of-tackling-the-obesity-menace-in-india/