So is it the case, then, that the decline in per capita calorie consumption is simply a positive reflection of development in various forms? Unfortunately, such an optimistic conclusion cannot be arrived at so easily, and may probably be misleading. While very rigid norms may not be successful at allowing for differential requirements of individuals, there are other ways to estimate a possible nutritional deficit. One way is in terms of defining a reference "consumer unit" and then applying conversion factors to all the population according to age and gender.
 
This is what the NSS has been doing with its definition of a consumer unit at 2700 calories, which it has taken as the daily calorific requirement of a normal male person doing sedentary work and belonging to the age group 20-39 years. Other persons are assigned conversion factors based on age and gender, so that each household can then be defined in terms of the number of consumer units, which would be less than the number of household members.
 
This provides some indication of aggregate nutritional deficiency. Calorie consumption at less than 90 per cent would indicate nutritional deficiency. There are also suggestions of the prevalence of far greater nutritional deficiency at less than 70 per cent of the consumer unit norm. Nevertheless, here we consider only the broader estimate.
 
Chart 6 provides estimates of how such nutritional deficiency has moved over time. The results are quite stark. In the rural areas, the percentage of population with less than 90 per cent of the norm of calorie intake increased from 40 per cent in 1983 to 45 per cent in 1999-2000. And if the sense that the latest period survey overestimated food consumption is correct, the ratio is likely to be even higher. In the urban areas, the proportion of nutritionally deficient population declined to around 48 per cent by the early 1990s, but appears to have remained at that level thereafter.

Chart 6 >> Click to Enlarge
 
Of course, this all-India figure hides very substantial regional variation. Charts 7 and 8 indicate just how marked such variation is across states, in terms of average per capita calorie consumption across the rural and urban areas of the major states. The lowest rural average nutrient intake is to be found in the states of Assam, Gujarat, Kerala, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu. Note that these are not (except Assam) states with above-average incidence of rural poverty, and indeed have higher than average per capita income. Furthermore, in several of these states (except Kerala and Maharashtra) the average intake worsened over the 1990s.

Chart 7 >> Click to Enlarge

Chart 8 >> Click to Enlarge
 
Another state with relatively poor nutrient intake is Andhra Pradesh, in which also the situation appears to have worsened over time. This is especially surprising in view of the fairly extensive and highly subsidised Public Distribution System that was set up by the state government, although the reduction in food subsidy over the 1990s may have played some role in the worsening intake in rural areas in that state. Karnataka also indicates low average calorie intake in the rural areas.
 
It is of course possible that such state-wise variations are related to differing physiological requirements and cultural habits. However, another factor may also be at work: the deficiency of cereals production in these states. The Report of the High-Level Committee on Long-Term Grain Policy (July 2002) makes the following point: "Along with Bihar, these states have the lowest per capita cereals production among all the major states. This not only emphasises the continued importance of cereals even in relatively rich states, but also the limitations of trade.
 
A production deficit by itself does not imply food insecurity but involved additional costs and effort of getting supplies from elsewhere. Deficit production and relatively long distances from surplus regions lead to relatively high prices, e.g. NSS implicit prices of cereals purchased were 30-70 per cent higher in the South Indian states of Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu than in Uttar Pradesh. This restrains cereal consumption and keeps total nutrient intake even below that in the poorest states.” (page 120).
 
Two important points are made here: the relevance of local production in states, and the role of price movements of food, and cereals in particular. This latter factor may be a key element in explaining the calorie consumption puzzle, especially in the 1990s, since the decline in calorie intake is closely related to the fall in cereals consumption.
 
This was a decade marked by rising relative prices of cereals, all over India. While the NSS data show that cereals consumption has declined and that of non-cereals has increased, it is important to note that the share of cereals in food expenditure has not fallen. The fact that cereals prices increased faster than other food prices may have prompted a shift towards other kinds of food to the extent possible, and caused the decline in actual cereal intake (and therefore calorie intake). It should be remembered that cereals still account for half the food expenditure of the poor, and its share in household food budgets remains largely unchanged.
 
Tables 1 and 2, which present data on the changes in per capita calorie consumption in the rural and urban areas of the major states, bring to light further puzzles. The general decline in rural per capita calorie consumption is not universal; some states like Orissa (one of the poorest states) and Maharashtra actually show improvement after 1983. The decline is very sharp in rural Haryana and Punjab, which are richer states, but also in Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, which are poorer states. All these issues deserve much more careful investigation and analysis.

Table 1 >> Click to Enlarge

Table 2 >> Click to Enlarge
 
In urban areas, by contrast, average calorie consumption appears to have increased after 1983, in most states. The states where it has declined (such as Haryana, Karnataka and Kerala) are not distinguished by any common feature that could explain the decline.
 
However, in terms of extent of nutrition deficiency, the trend appears to be much more definitive. As Table 3 shows, across the major states of India, the proportion of people with nutritional intake less than 90 per cent of the norm, increased, especially after 1993. In some cases, as in West Bengal, this reflected an increase after a decade of decline, such that the 1999-2000 figure was still below that of 1983. But in most other states, the ratio of nutritionally deficient population kept increasing. In some states this increase was quite sharp, including in Andhra Pradesh.

Table 3 >> Click to Enlarge
 
In urban areas, the picture is more mixed. For the decade 1983-93, there appears to have been a decline, but substantially the proportion of nutritionally deficient population has stagnated at fairly high levels.
 
Another way to estimate the extent of adequacy of nutrition is to estimate chronic food deficiency based on body-mass indicators. Such an estimate for the major states, based on work done by the M.S. Swaminathan Foundation, is represented in Chart 9. This indicates very high levels of chronic energy deficiency of 50 per cent or more in many of the major and most populous states. The outlier here is Assam, for unknown reasons.

Chart 9 >> Click to Enlarge
 
All in all, the picture that emerges throws up more questions than can be answered here, especially in terms of the trend and regional pattern of calorie consumption. But the basic conclusion that must be drawn is that the current state of nutritional intake in the country is quite appalling, and needs immediate policy attention to ensure adequate access to food to people across the country.