Edible Oil

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1652544

commentary

october 10, 2009 vol xliv no 41 EPW Economic & P 22 olitical Weekly

budget 2009-10, the GFD limit for the states has

been increased to 4% of GSDP.

2 This ranking is for 20 states and excludes small

states and union territories. Though the latest

ranking of states based on per capita incomes is

available for the year 2005-06, in this article we

take the ranking for 2004-05 for identifying the

poorest states. This is because due to some inexplicable

reason Jammu and Kashmir jumped to the

second position in 2005-06, after being in position

eight for two consecutive years 2003-04 and 2004-05

(in the ascending order of per capita incomes).

3 Though the budgeted estimates (BE) of 2008-09

are available, in order to maintain consistency,

these have not been included in the analysis (given

that there is almost always some discrepancy

between BE and RE/actuals).

4 Expenditure includes outlay on education, sports,

art and culture

5 Includes expenditure on medical and public

health, and family welfare.

6 Grants for the education and health sectors are an

additionality, over and above the normal expenditure

to be incurred by the states in these sectors.

See "Main Recommendations of the Twelfth Finance

Commission", available on http://finmin.nic.in/

the_ministry/dept_expenditure/plan_finance/FCD/

main-recomm.html accessed on 2 September 2009.

References

GoI (2009): Economic Survey (2009-10), Ministry of

Finance, Government of India.

Isaac, Thomas and R Ramakumar (2006): "Why Do

the States Not Spend?", Economic & Political Weekly,

Vol 41, No 48.

Planning Commission (2008): "Ranking of States Per

Capita Income Wise-Current Prices", available on

http://www.pbplanning.gov.in/pdf/Ranking of States

Current.pdf accessed on 17 August-September 2009.

RBI (various years): State Finances: A Study of Budgets,

Reserve Bank of India.

- (2009): Reserve Bank of India Annual Report 2008-09.

Policy Options for India's

Edible Oil Complex

A Amarender Reddy

Stagnating oilseed yields for

the last two decades and an

inefficient and underutilised

processing sector have resulted

in an uncompetitive complex in

India. The country's commitments

at the World Trade Organisation

have led to increased edible oil

imports and a simultaneous

decline in area under oilseeds.

India needs a long-term edible oil

policy to improve competitiveness

by bridging the existing

technology and yield gaps.

India's edible oil imports are likely to

register a surge to around 7.5 million

tonnes (mt) in the oil-marketing year

2009. On an average in the last five years,

India produced about 6-7 mt and imported

between 4-5 mt of edible oils annually to

meet its domestic consumption. India's

oilseed and edible oil sector is exposed to

international markets and influence of

policy options like the minimum support

price (MSP) and other market interventions

are limited. Historically, India has been a

net importer of edible oils. After a period

of stagnation in oilseed production and

large edible oil imports, the government of

India started the Technology Mission on

Oilseeds (TMOs) in 1987, which increased

oilseed production and made India selfsufficient

by the early 1990s. This is now

widely known as the "yellow revolution".

A commendable aspect of this yellow

revolution was an integrated effort led by

the Ministry of Agriculture, National

Oilseeds and Vegetable Oils Development

(NOVOD) Board and National Agricultural

Cooperative Marketing Federation (NAFED),

for providing extension and market support;

and research and development support provided

by