The Government had imposed a ban on the sale of Maggi noodles following the detection of lead whose level was higher than what is permissible. While such stringent action is welcome, it throws up the problem of fast food in the larger context. Big companies produce unhealthy food like pizza, candies, and soda. Such items contain a high component of fat and sugar, but are low in terms of essential nutrients. Extensive marketing campaigns are undertaken to attract the people, school children in particular, to consume food that is potentially harmful. According to the World Health Organization, diabetes, heart problems, cancer and chronic respiratory ailments account for a large number of deaths every year. Unhealthy diet, resulting in overweight and obesity, can drive a person quicker to death. A nutritious diet can check the rate of mortality.
The big companies target school children to expand the market of harmful food items. They place advertisements in the course of children’s programmes. Cartoon characters are printed on the boxes that contain these items. Free samples are distributed in schools. Promotional campaigns such as sponsoring school events are undertaken. Altogether, it is a picture of fun and games and the harmful effects of such food are concealed. Children are particularly vulnerable and tend to suffer from excessive fat and malnutrition. They are susceptible to health problems if they miss out on essential elements in their diet.
The Government is aware of the negative impact. The tax on soft drinks was increased in the last budget to curb the spread of such food. In parallel, the Government also wants to attract FDI. Coca Cola has promised to invest $ 5 billion. This investment will generate a demand for bottles, transport, and labour. Thus the Government is reluctant to regulate these companies, fearing loss of investment and a downturn in the economy. But economic benefits of large companies are just one side of the story. If the consumption of fast food leads to sickness and death, the loss to the economy can be enormous.
Going by WHO’s projections, India will suffer a loss of national income from diabetes and cardiovascular diseases, amounting to $ 336.6 billion in terms of purchasing power. This means that gains to the economy from the entry of big companies are small in comparison to the loss from the deterioration of public health. And yet the Government is pushing for such investments because the benefits from the setting up of such factories are directly visible, while the losses from deterioration of health are “invisible.”
People are shortsighted like the Government. According to economic theory, the consumer knows how to maximize his welfare. We must assume that his welfare is enhanced by the consumption of pizza and carbonated drinks if he chooses to buy them. It is forgotten though that a condition underlying this economic theory is of “informed” choice. It is assumed that the consumer is aware of the harm that his health can suffer by the consumption of fast food. This is the crux of the problem. The companies launch large campaigns to communicate the benefits from expanded choice, good ambience of the restaurants and quick energy obtained from the consumption of fast food. But the harm caused by obesity and malnutrition are not mentioned. Thus the consumer is surreptitiously led to believe that his welfare will be enhanced by the consumption of such food, while actually his welfare gets undermined.
Government intervention can rectify such situations. For example, advertisements for liquor and cigarettes are banned. The idea being that people do not realise the negative impact of consumption. Therefore, the Government should step in as a trustee of people’s health and act accordingly. Some people might wish to consume more liquor but the Government says ‘no’ and thus dissuades them from the damaging consumption of liquor and tobacco. In the same way, it is imperative for the Government to step in and dissuade the consumers from consuming fast food.
Many developing countries have formulated rules to prevent such advertising aimed at school children. Costa Rica has banned chips, cookies, candy and carbonated sodas from elementary and high schools. Mexico has barred schools from serving or selling sugary sodas, juices or processed snacks; and has directed that all tacos, burritos and salads are to be prepared with low fat content. In Peru, only health food can be sold in school cafeterias. Philippines has prohibited the sale of carbonated drinks, sugar-based synthetic or artificial flavoured juices, junk food and any food product that may be detrimental to the child’s health. Only items that are rich in nutrients, such as root crops, noodles, rice and corn products, seasonal fruit and vegetables and fortified food products labeled as “rich in protein, energy, vitamins and minerals, milk, shakes and juices prepared from fruit and vegetables” are allowed to be sold.
The Foods Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) sets the standards for foods that are sold. The ban on Maggi noodles was imposed because the amount of lead was found to be in excess of these standards. But the role of FSSAI is restricted to ensuring safety of the food items. It is like ensuring that the paper used in the manufacture of cigarettes does not contain any poisonous material. FSSAI does not have the mandate to assess the impact of fast food, let alone regulate the marketing campaigns that are geared to promote these items. The Government must enact a law to regulate the manufacture, sale and marketing of fast food. We need to go beyond the marketing campaigns in schools and regulate the entire economic system in relation to fast food.
The writer is former Professor of Economics at IIM Bangalore.
The big companies target school children to expand the market of harmful food items. They place advertisements in the course of children’s programmes. Cartoon characters are printed on the boxes that contain these items. Free samples are distributed in schools. Promotional campaigns such as sponsoring school events are undertaken. Altogether, it is a picture of fun and games and the harmful effects of such food are concealed. Children are particularly vulnerable and tend to suffer from excessive fat and malnutrition. They are susceptible to health problems if they miss out on essential elements in their diet.
The Government is aware of the negative impact. The tax on soft drinks was increased in the last budget to curb the spread of such food. In parallel, the Government also wants to attract FDI. Coca Cola has promised to invest $ 5 billion. This investment will generate a demand for bottles, transport, and labour. Thus the Government is reluctant to regulate these companies, fearing loss of investment and a downturn in the economy. But economic benefits of large companies are just one side of the story. If the consumption of fast food leads to sickness and death, the loss to the economy can be enormous.
Going by WHO’s projections, India will suffer a loss of national income from diabetes and cardiovascular diseases, amounting to $ 336.6 billion in terms of purchasing power. This means that gains to the economy from the entry of big companies are small in comparison to the loss from the deterioration of public health. And yet the Government is pushing for such investments because the benefits from the setting up of such factories are directly visible, while the losses from deterioration of health are “invisible.”
People are shortsighted like the Government. According to economic theory, the consumer knows how to maximize his welfare. We must assume that his welfare is enhanced by the consumption of pizza and carbonated drinks if he chooses to buy them. It is forgotten though that a condition underlying this economic theory is of “informed” choice. It is assumed that the consumer is aware of the harm that his health can suffer by the consumption of fast food. This is the crux of the problem. The companies launch large campaigns to communicate the benefits from expanded choice, good ambience of the restaurants and quick energy obtained from the consumption of fast food. But the harm caused by obesity and malnutrition are not mentioned. Thus the consumer is surreptitiously led to believe that his welfare will be enhanced by the consumption of such food, while actually his welfare gets undermined.
Government intervention can rectify such situations. For example, advertisements for liquor and cigarettes are banned. The idea being that people do not realise the negative impact of consumption. Therefore, the Government should step in as a trustee of people’s health and act accordingly. Some people might wish to consume more liquor but the Government says ‘no’ and thus dissuades them from the damaging consumption of liquor and tobacco. In the same way, it is imperative for the Government to step in and dissuade the consumers from consuming fast food.
Many developing countries have formulated rules to prevent such advertising aimed at school children. Costa Rica has banned chips, cookies, candy and carbonated sodas from elementary and high schools. Mexico has barred schools from serving or selling sugary sodas, juices or processed snacks; and has directed that all tacos, burritos and salads are to be prepared with low fat content. In Peru, only health food can be sold in school cafeterias. Philippines has prohibited the sale of carbonated drinks, sugar-based synthetic or artificial flavoured juices, junk food and any food product that may be detrimental to the child’s health. Only items that are rich in nutrients, such as root crops, noodles, rice and corn products, seasonal fruit and vegetables and fortified food products labeled as “rich in protein, energy, vitamins and minerals, milk, shakes and juices prepared from fruit and vegetables” are allowed to be sold.
The Foods Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) sets the standards for foods that are sold. The ban on Maggi noodles was imposed because the amount of lead was found to be in excess of these standards. But the role of FSSAI is restricted to ensuring safety of the food items. It is like ensuring that the paper used in the manufacture of cigarettes does not contain any poisonous material. FSSAI does not have the mandate to assess the impact of fast food, let alone regulate the marketing campaigns that are geared to promote these items. The Government must enact a law to regulate the manufacture, sale and marketing of fast food. We need to go beyond the marketing campaigns in schools and regulate the entire economic system in relation to fast food.
The writer is former Professor of Economics at IIM Bangalore.
No comments:
Post a Comment