全球粮食安全与营养论坛 (FSN论坛)

成员简介
浏览所有会员

博士 Rajiv Mehta

成员起始时间
组织: FAO
国家: 印度
专业领域：
I am working on:

Programme development and Programme Management in FAO Saudi Arabia, Statistical Systems, Evidence based Decision Making and SDG Reporting for Agriculture, Water and Environment Sectors

International expert in Official Statistics and Development Economics covering wide range of aspects on national economies, sustainable development and growth, particularly in agriculture, rural, natural resources and environment with over 4 decades of experience in important positions in India and in many countries on assignments with  UN Organisations. (FAO, WTO, IMF, UNCTAD, IMF, WMO, UNOSA, OECD, IFPRI etc.)

More than eleven years, working with Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO-UN) as Senior Statistician and Senior Technical Advisor in several countries, including Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Bangladesh, India and North Korea  associated with development and management of programmes for Sustainable Rural and Agriculture Development, global projects such as Global Strategy for Agricultural and  Rural Statistics (GSARS), Global Food Summit, Agriculture Market Information System (AMIS),  Food and Agriculture Information System (FAIS) and tracking Sustainable Development Goals (SDG).

Prior to it was serving the Government of India at senior level as member of Indian Statistical Service, handling various aspects of official statistics, rural and agriculture development, agricultural trade and price policy and faculty in agricultural marketing. Important positions held:

  • Ex-officio Member of National Statistical Commission (NSC),  
  • Member Secretary, Commission for Agricultural Cost and Prices (CACP) in Govt. of India,
  • Member Secretary, 11 Five Year Plan Working Group on Agriculture Demand Supply and Growth and Agricultiure Statistics,
  • Additional Director General, National Sample Survey, Survey Design and Data Processing, Govt of India,
  • Member WTO Negotiating team of Government of India on Agreement on Agriculture,
  • Faculty in National Institute for Agriculture Marketing, India
  • Head National Crop Forecasting Centre, Ministry of Agriculture.

Academic Qualification:

  • Masters in Statistics from Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, India,
  • Masters in Development Economics from University of Wales, UK
  • PG Diploma in Statistical Quality Control and Operation Research, Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, India
  • Doctorate in Agricultural Economics from University of Rajasthan, India.

Authored more than 80 papers and had contributed in several important expert forums and in policy forums. 

该成员提交的意见和建议涉及：

    • With appreciation to SOFA for its preliminary assessment of Hidden Cost in Agri food system, following points are offered:  

      • Though the TCA framework in SOFA 2023 is confined to Agri Food system, the aspect of Hidden Cost is ingrained in entire economic system.  Hidden cost, connoting “demerit good” produced in other sectors of economy, possibly may not over score the most essential merit good of healthy and active life  produced by Agri food system. The Hidden Cost is likely to be cascading and spilling over with expanding urbanization, changing food habits, transportation, trade, food preservation, processing and packaging. Therefore, the exercise of TCA,  assessment of Hidden Cost and its spillover may be seen in the context of entire economic system.  
      • In the above context, the SOFA 2023 exercise coincides with the  sustainable development agenda and It will be useful to reflect convergence in endeavors to control hidden cost and quests for SDGs. The aspect of Hidden Cost is related to SDG target 12.2 “ Achieve the sustainable management and efficient use of natural resources” and its indicator 12.2.1 “Material footprint  per capita, and per GDP”,  with  3600 coverage of eco system in dimensions of bio mass, fossil fuel, metal and non metal ores material footprints.  Similarly, SDG target 2.4 for ensuring sustainable food system will be resulting in decline in hidden cost and its 11 elements composite indicator 2.4.1 “Proportion of agricultural area under productive and sustainable agriculture” is similar to the factors of Hidden Cost.
      • There are some consistency observations. The Agri food Hidden Cost estimated for 2020 in PPP USD is about 10% of world GDP (in PPP 2020). Agri GVA on the other hand (about 4 Trillion USD nominal) was correspondingly about 4% of world GDP. This may be implying that hidden cost in Agri food system far exceeds the GVA of Agri food system. Secondly, the SOFA analysis reveals that Hidden Cost increased by 13% during 2016 to 2022. In the corresponding period, the real and nominal agri GVA (in USD $) increased by about 17% and 37% respectively. In the similar vein, the trend of global Total Factor Productivity (TFP) index of Agriculture (data source ERS USDA) has gradually increased from 101 in 2016 to 106 in 2021 (base 2015). Thus, the exercise of estimation, trend and control of hidden cost opens opportunity for coherence in policy analysis and decision support.

       

       

    •  

      With compliments to HLPE-FSN team for drafting the complexity of urban and peri urban food system and food security in the context of urbanization and rural transformation, following points are offered:  

      1. Conceptual framework

      • The food systems evolve and coexist with typologies of human settlements.  The urbanization is a continual process of human settlement transformation, taking place in diverse typologies of changes in dominant occupations, lifestyle, culture and behavior, and thus altering the demographic and social structure of both urban and rural areas (World Urbanization Prospects:  United Nations, 2018), and the food system transformation is corollary to it. This phenomenon of demographic shift, primarily triggered by combinations of social and economic pull and push factors at different period of time; leaves options and / or choice for the people to adjust in lifestyle, including food.  A small section on this process can be considered.

      3.  trends/variables/elements identified in the draft report

      • The challenges and opportunities for the food security with sustainable food system (Table 4.1) may not be generalized for urbanization per say but may be contextual to corresponding distinct food systems and individuals. The territorial markets may be less relevant to food importing countries, where trade assumes greater significance. Similarly, the single member working population, a pronounced urban phenomenon, would depend on different food system than normal households.
      • The quest to enhance resilience of food security in urban context may anchor on positives of efficient market and supply chains, higher literacy and awareness, better social services and convenience of public interventions and distress mitigation, that get easily harnessed in urban food system. In some respect, the rural transformation is more guided by urban transformation and not vice versa, particularly in conditions of promotion of rural non farm employment, commercial farming and market oriented economy, seeking parity with urban lifestyle.
      • The context of modern and traditional channels in retail sector (Fig 4.2) possibly has got disrupted due to spurt in digital payment system during COVID   and rapidly increasing digital connectivity across the continents. Now the analytical studies on household spending using digital payments reflect emerging trends of consumer behavior. The solutions for resilience of food security may possibly also account these trends and technological currents, getting stronger in coming future.

      Rajiv Mehta, Senior Statistician, FAO, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

    • Dear Colleagues,

      With compliments to the HLPE FSN team for the draft of Report on Reducing inequalities for Food Security and Nutrition (FSN), following comments and suggestions are offered on Sl. No. 1. , Conceptual Framework, Sl. No. 2. Coverage of FSN dimensions and Sl. No. 5 on layers of structural drivers.

      1. In the subject theme of inequality, the aspect of measurement of inequality in FSN context is equally important, if not more, along with characterisation of inequality and inequity and the Scope of FSN in its  expanded six-dimensional. Though the aspect of FSN measurement is sparsely reflected in the draft report, it may be meaningful to have a section on measurement of FSN inequality with its accentuating needs, key methodological features, constraints and complexities in current and future context.
      2. The measurements of inequality with application of tools like Gini Coefficient depend on specific parameters on the scale of time (point or period of time), domain and territory (such as rural and urban and degree of urbanisation).  In my analysis, distinct relations were observed between Undernutrition, Obesity and Dietary Energy Supply with degree of Urbanisation and Economic Conditions (per capita GDP) and corresponding synthesis of inequality may lead to distinct policy perspective.   Thus, the specificity in measurement of inequality is relevant for prompt decision support and interventions for FSN, that is expected to be more exigent for those in vulnerable periphery of its iniquitous space. 
      3. Such parametric specificity is apparently more in measurement of nutritional aspects (e.g. undernutrition, stunting, wasting and obesity). However, for the complexly and diversely characterised domain of Food Security and its inequality, there is need to review specificity of convergent measurement and awareness of appropriate use in policy and decision making.
      4. The earlier four-dimensional conceptual framework of Food Security (Availability. Access, Utilisation and Stability) could possibly be more convergently related to an integrated measures of dietary energy supply and demand, balanced food basket and prices on time and territory. The expanded framework of Food Security with dimensions of Agency and Sustainability add to the complexity of measuring inequality of FSN. 
      5. The Agency, as is understood to be socio economic dimension of choice and preference of food production and consumption by sections of society, may have differentiated significance on layers of inequality, less food secured segments may have less options of choice of food produced and consumed. The aspect of sustainability will be more on food system on longer time scale.
      6. This also invite a reference to objective forecasting the plausible trends of inequality and early warning and vulnerability mapping, a situation that has been experienced in Covid-19 pandemic.

      With best compliments and greetings for a very happy year 2023 to FSN fraternity.

      Rajiv Mehta

       [email protected], [email protected]