What's new

Bangladesh: No longer the 'hungry' man of South Asia

kalu_miah

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
6,475
Reaction score
17
Country
Bangladesh
Location
United States
http://dawn.com/news/1051282/bangladesh-no-longer-the-hungry-man-of-south-asia

Bangladesh: No longer the 'hungry' man of South Asia
MURTAZA HAIDER
Published 2013-10-23 13:46:53


52678aecba206.jpg

In less than a quarter century, Bangladesh has outperformed Pakistan in reducing hunger and malnourishment. From trailing Pakistan in hunger reduction in 1990, Bangladesh has sped ahead of Pakistan and even India by halving hunger statistics.

The recently released Global Hunger Index(GHI) by the International Food Policy Research Institute reveals that hunger has improved globally since 1990. However, South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa are home to worst forms of hunger. Estimates by the Food and Agriculture Organisation in the US suggest that no fewer than 870 million people go hungry across the globe.

The pejorative reference to the starving, naked Bangalis (Bhookay, Nungay Bengali) is still part of the Pakistani lexicon. The West Pakistan’s establishment thought not much of Bangladesh when it separated after a bloody war that left hundreds of thousands of Bangladeshis and others dead. After the 1971 war, even Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto calledBangladeshis pigs. Fast forward to 2013 and a new picture emerges where Pakistan struggles to feed its people while Bangladesh gallops ahead in human development. One wonders why Pakistan, which was once thought to have so much promise, has become the sick (and hungry) man of South Asia.

526785a629046.png

Pakistan shows the least progress in reducing hunger amongst other South Asian countries. Source: Calculations and graph by Murtaza Haider, 2013. Data obtained from GHI, 2013.

The GHI tells the story of how countries have performed over the past two decades in fighting hunger and disease. The report reveals the early gains made by South Asia in the 1990s to fight hunger and malnutrition. It was the same time when sub-Saharan Africa trailed far behind South Asia in human development. However, since 2000 sub-Saharan Africa has picked up pace and in 2013 it has on average performed better on hunger than the countries in South Asia.

Despite the slow growth in South Asia, Bangladesh is one of the top 10 countries that have made the most progress in reducing hunger since 1990. The Bangladeshi success with reducing hunger deserves a closer look to determine if this has resulted from sound planning or is merely a result of happenstance. Given that Bangladesh has beaten not just Pakistan, but also India, Nepal, and Sri Lanka in the pace at which it reduced hunger, the success is likely a result of good planning and execution.

The GHI is computed as an average of three indicators, namely prevalence of undernourishment in the population, prevalence of underweight children under five years, and under-five mortality rate. The latest data reveals that compared to Pakistan, Bangladesh has lower prevalence of undernourishment in population and under-five mortality rate. However, Pakistan has slightly lower prevalence of underweight children under five years old.

526785a628f8f.png

Source: Graph by Murtaza Haider, 2013. Data obtained from GHI, 2013

Research in north-western Bangladesh suggests that hunger impacts are rather seasonal. During times of low crop yields, food prices rise and result in lower accessibility to sufficient nutrition. The researchers found that most food insecure are the perpetual poor. A combination of safety nets setup by the government and the use of micro-credit helps the poor to manage food supply during lean periods.

Apart from safety nets, the improvement in hunger reduction is a result of several commitments and policies. The budget document in Bangladesh contains a separate entry for nutrition. Article 15 of the Bangladeshi constitution expects the State to provide citizens with the basic necessities of life, including food. The Bangladeshi government in 2012 committed to food security “for all people of the country at all times.” The Bangladesh Integrated Nutrition Project (BINP) improved the nutritional outcomes as of 1995. Later in 2002, the National Nutrition Program was launched. Also included in the effort were Expanded Programme on Immunisation and vitamin A supplementation.

The above are some examples of how strategic planning resulted in faster reduction of hunger in Bangladesh. Despite the above-stated successes, 17 per cent of the population in Bangladesh (25 million) continue to suffer from hunger. In fact, 41 per cent of the under five children are likely to be stunted and another 16 per cent of under five children are likely to be ‘wasted.’ These numbers show that Bangladesh still has a long way to go in providing food security to its people.

Given that South Asian countries together now lag behind sub-Saharan Africa in hunger reduction, it may be prudent for South Asian heads of states to join hands in collaborative efforts to feed the hungry. They may want to learn from the best practices in Bangladesh and elsewhere to protect the food insecure amongst them.


Murtaza Haider, Ph.D. is the Associate Dean of research and graduate programs at the Ted Rogers School of Management at Ryerson University in Toronto.
 
BD has done well!

However, we must understand that there was more scope for BD to progress than the others as it was so far behind in the first place.

The main reasons for the reduction in hunger has been economic growth that has been widely shared by the majority of the population, and
the sound policies of successive governments in targeting the poor.
 
BD has done well!

However, we must understand that there was more scope for BD to progress than the others as it was so far behind in the first place.

The main reasons for the reduction in hunger has been economic growth that has been widely shared by the majority of the population, and
the sound policies of successive governments in targeting the poor.

I would rather say that all South Asians did badly, but we did not screw up as badly as others.

How about roles played by NGO's like BRAC, Grameen Bank and countless others?

There are two main external sources of funds: remittances and export value addition of RMG and other export industries. These sources need to be diversified.

The main problem that is holding us back is politics and leadership at the top. Unless something is done to change political culture and leadership, progress will remain slow. I see every country as a bigger version of a corporation. If the CEO is stupid and corrupt, there will never be much progress or growth in market share of the goods and services our nation has to sell in the global market place.
 
I would rather say that all South Asians did badly, but we did not screw up as badly as others.

How about roles played by NGO's like BRAC, Grameen Bank and countless others?

There are two main external sources of funds: remittances and export value addition of RMG and other export industries. These sources need to be diversified.

The main problem that is holding us back is politics and leadership at the top. Unless something is done to change political culture and leadership, progress will remain slow. I see every country as a bigger version of a corporation. If the CEO is stupid and corrupt, there will never be much progress or growth in market share of the goods and services our nation has to sell in the global market place.

The interesting thing is that BD was actually ahead of Pakistan in 2005 and is now slightly behind!

It seems that in the last 8 years progress has ground to an almost halt in BD - thereby confirming that the easy "catch-up" years were over by 2005.

I agree that NGO's have also been a major factor, along with the widespread employment in the garments industry for millions of woman and the relatively sound, well by South Asian standards, government
policies towards the poor

BD's bad leadership will continue for least for another decade. Unfortunately there is no easy way to reform the current ineffective political system.
 
Well the small and an ethnic majority country with less population is quite easy to govern(BD, SL, Npl) than big, populous and multi ethnic ones(Ind, Pak).
 
BD is small in land area but has a population of 150 million compared to 180 million for Pakistan.

All those 150 Million are ethnic Bengali's unlike Pakistan which is home to several ethnic groups. In short Bangladesh & Pakistan have no comparison at all.

Having said all that it doesn't mean that Pakistani leaders had done their best in the past to pull Pakistanis out of crises...truth stays there - while world was progressing, Pakistani corrupt leaders were busy milking Pakistan & quadrupling their already looted wealth.:mad:
 
Congrats

I hope Pakistan will follow you guys.since we also got a govt atleast good at economics
 
Every country has their own unique set of circumstances, so it is not fair to compare countries in that sense. But the reason the author in OP article compares them I believe is to make constructive criticism, so people are more encouraged to improve on their country's economic performance. And a bit of friendly and sportsmanlike competition is not a bad thing, in my opinion.
 
Pakistan's Nominal GDP 2012: $226 billion
Bangladesh's Nominal GDP 2012: $123 billion

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

In 1972, Bangladesh had around 20 million more people than Pakistan and today, Pakistan has around 34 million more people than Bangladesh.
 
Pakistan's Nominal GDP 2012: $226 billion
Bangladesh's Nominal GDP 2012: $123 billion

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

In 1972, Bangladesh had around 20 million more people than Pakistan and today, Pakistan has around 34 million more people than Bangladesh.

Thanks for showing the GDP figures. Having same hunger index with almost double the per capita nominal GDP shows higher levels of inequality, inefficient food distribution and over all poor country management in both Pakistan and India, as with almost half the money and resources Bangladesh managed to improve hunger situation at a faster pace to bring it at almost the same level as Pakistan and at a better level than India, who is lagging behind significantly compared to both Pakistan and Bangladesh. I think OP was essentially making this point.

UKBengali also made an interesting point that by 2005 Bangladesh improvement plateaued, which means that Indian installed Hasina govt. did zilch. If it was not for Indian interference in Bangladesh internal affairs, situation in Bangladesh would have improved further. This should give Indians some clue about why Bangladeshi population are upset with Indian govt. policy. But then knowing Indians it would not register.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Hunger_Index

583px-GHI_2013_by_severity.png

Ranking
Countries with extremely alarming (GHI ≥ 30), alarming (GHI between 20.0 and 29.9) or serious (GHI between 10.0 and 19.9) hunger situation

Global Hunger Index[9]
Rank Country 1990 1995 2000 2005 2013

1 Burundi 33.8 38.1 39.5 39.5 38.8
2 Eritrea — 40.6 40.2 39.3 35.0
3 Comoros 24.0 27.5 33.3 29.8 33.6
4 East Timor - - - 26.0 29.6
5 Sudan 31.1 25.7 27.2 24.7 27.0
6 Chad 38.8 34.9 29.8 29.7 26.9
7 Yemen 29.8 27.7 26.9 27.9 26.5
8 Ethiopia 42.3 42.7 37.1 31.0 25.7
9 Madagascar 25.5 24.6 25.9 24.4 25.2
10 Zambia 24.9 24.5 26.3 25.3 24.1
11 Central African Republic 30.7 29.4 28.0 28.5 23.3
12 Haiti 33.8 31.7 25.7 27.0 23.2
13 Sierra Leone 31.3 29.5 30.0 28.4 22.8
14 Burkina Faso 26.9 22.7 26.1 26.6 22.2
15 Mozambique 36.0 32.0 28.5 25.1 21.5
16 India 32.6 27.1 24.8 24.0 21.3
17 Tanzania 23.4 26.9 26.1 20.5 20.6
18 Republic of the Congo 23.7 23.9 19.3 18.4 20.5
19 Niger 36.4 34.6 30.3 25.6 20.3
20 Djibouti 33.5 28.5 27.7 24.0 19.5
21 Bangladesh 36.7 35.1 24.0 20.2 19.4
22 Pakistan 25.9 22.8 21.6 21.2 19.3

23 Uganda 21.4 22.9 19.9 18.6 19.2
24 Angola 39.5 38.5 31.6 22.7 19.1
25 Laos 33.4 30.3 28.0 23.7 18.7
26 Namibia 22.1 21.9 17.5 17.1 18.4
27 North Korea 18.8 22.6 22.5 20.0 18.0
28 Kenya 21.4 21.0 20.5 20.2 18.0
29 Liberia 23.4 28.2 24.7 20.6 17.9
30 Nepal 28.0 27.3 25.3 22.3 17.3
31 Guinea 21.4 21.2 22.4 18.2 16.9
32 Cambodia 32.2 30.7 27.8 20.9 16.8
33 Zimbabwe 20.0 22.0 21.7 20.5 16.5
34 Tajikistan - 21.2 22.6 19.0 16.3
35 Ivory Coast 16.3 16.5 17.3 16.4 16.1
36 Sri Lanka 22.3 20.7 17.8 16.9 15.6
37 Guatemala 15.0 16.1 17.0 17.0 15.5
38 Rwanda 30.8 37.3 29.0 23.6 15.3
39 Malawi 30.6 27.6 21.6 18.7 15.1
40 Nigeria 25.3 22.6 17.9 16.3 15.0
41 Mali 27.4 26.9 24.3 20.7 14.8
42 Togo 23.0 19.1 20.4 18.2 14.7
43 Cameroon 23.7 23.8 20.3 16.3 14.5
44 Swaziland 10.4 12.9 12.7 12.5 14.4
45 Guinea-Bissau 21.7 20.8 20.6 17.7 14.3
46 Gambia 19.1 20.4 16.1 15.6 14.0
47 Botswana 16.8 17.0 17.8 16.3 13.9
48 Senegal 18.1 19.8 19.2 13.7 13.8
49 Benin 22.5 20.5 17.3 15.2 13.3
50 Philippines 19.9 17.4 17.7 14.0 13.2
51 Mauritania 22.7 16.2 17.2 14.6 13.2
52 Lesotho 13.2 14.6 14.6 14.9 12.9
53 Bolivia 18.8 16.9 14.2 13.8 11.2
54 Mongolia 19.7 23.6 18.5 14.1 10.8
55 Paraguay 9.3 7.5 6.5 6.3 10.1
56 Indonesia 19.7 16.9 15.5 14.6 10.1

The Global Hunger Index is composed of the proportion of the undernourished as a percentage of the population, the prevalence of underweight children under the age of five and the mortality rate of children under the age of five (calculated average, in percentages).
 
Last edited:
wel done bangladessh!!:)
even if we r not the worst....but im disappointed by our(india) performance....:(
 
Pakistan's Nominal GDP 2012: $226 billion
Bangladesh's Nominal GDP 2012: $123 billion

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

In 1972, Bangladesh had around 20 million more people than Pakistan and today, Pakistan has around 34 million more people than Bangladesh.

This clearly show that wealth is not equally distributed like in India also. bangladesh sucess is because of other way round. Also defence related expenditure is also low in Bangladesh...
 
Back
Top Bottom