| Literature DB >> 34458224 |
Noshaba Aziz1, Jun He1, Ali Raza2, Hongguang Sui3, Wang Yue1.
Abstract
Undernourishment is a big challenge for humanity across the world. Considering the significance of reducing undernourishment, the current study focuses on exploring the macroeconomic determinants of undernourishment in the South Asian panel. The study employed econometric models that are more robust to underpin cross-sectional dependency and heterogeneity in a panel data set. The overall findings reveal that an increase in food production increases undernourishment and infer that food availability at the national level is insufficient to reduce undernourishment unless poor people also had economic and physical access to food. In the case of economic growth and governance, the results are negatively significant in some countries. The results infer that GDP and quality of governance are nuanced in declining the rate of undernourishment in some countries, while in other countries where the results are found insignificant, the government should seek other interventions to curtail the prevalence of undernourishment. Unexpectedly, an increase in food prices lessens the undernourishment in developing countries that reflect that food prices might transform the dietary patterns of poor people from nutrient-rich foods to nutrient-poor staples, thus lead to undernourishment reduction but trigger overweight and obesity alongside. In conclusion, the results depict that policymakers should devise strategies keeping in view fundamental aspects of the country to reduce undernourishment.Entities:
Keywords: South Asia; economic growth; food price index; governance; undernourishment
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34458224 PMCID: PMC8397478 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.696789
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Public Health ISSN: 2296-2565
Undernourishment trends in South Asian countries.
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |
| South Asia | 291.2 | 23.9 | 277.7 | 14.9 |
| Afghanistan | 3.8 | 29.5 | 10.6 | 29.8 |
| Bangladesh | 36 | 32.8 | 24.2 | 14.7 |
| India | 210.1 | 23.7 | 194.4 | 14.5 |
| Maldives | <0.1 | 12.2 | <0.1 | 10.3 |
| Nepal | 4.2 | 22.8 | 2.5 | 8.7 |
| Pakistan | 28.7 | 25.1 | 40 | 20.3 |
| Sri Lanka | 5.4 | 9 | 1.9 | 22 |
Source: FAO (.
Explanation of variables.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| POU | Prevalence of undernourishment | 3-years averages | WDI |
| AVP | Agricultural food production | 2004–2006 U.S. per capita output | WDI |
| GDP | Economic growth | Current US dollars | WDI |
| CGI | Composite governance index | An index made by taking the average of all indicators | WGI |
| FPI | Food price index | Price Index | WDI |
The agricultural production portrays the relative level of the aggregate volume of agricultural production for each year in contrast to the base period 2004–2006. They are based on the sum of price-weighted quantities of different agricultural commodities produced after deductions of quantities used as seed and feed weighted in a similar manner. The resulting aggregate, therefore, signifies disposable production for any use except as seed and feed (.
Composite governance index (CGI) is measured by averaging its core indicators, such as corruption control, the stability of politics, effectiveness of government, the rule of law, quality of regulation, and voice and accountability domains.
The food price index is calculated as the trade-weighted average of the prices of food commodities spanning the key agricultural markets for cereals, vegetable oils, sugar, meat, and dairy products. While these commodities represent about 40 percent of gross agricultural food commodity trade (FAOSTAT), they are chosen for their high and strategic importance in global food security and trade. Prices are combined in the various sectors, using trade weights calculated from average export values over a chosen 3-year-based period, when the trade weights appear most stable relative to their trend values. A 3-year period is chosen to minimize the impact of variation in both internationally traded prices and quantities (.
Descriptive statistics.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 15.178 | 172.339 | 1608.6 | −0.827 | 8.244 |
| Median | 14.350 | 163.000 | 969.91 | −0.863 | 6.956 |
| Maximum | 47.800 | 339.000 | 7927.8 | −0.069 | 39.90 |
| Minimum | 4.500 | 89.950 | 158.63 | −1.981 | −6.811 |
| Std. dev. | 8.525 | 67.434 | 1683.5 | 0.460 | 6.479 |
| Observations | 140 | 140 | 140 | 140 | 140 |
Source: Author(s) estimations.
Stationary analysis results.
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
| |
| POU | −1.6510 | −8.03518 | −4.30267 | −4.06693 |
| AVP | −0.1694 | 0.93898 | −1.90064 | −2.0114 |
| GDP | 2.936 | 1.89565 | −2.37356 | −2.37356 |
| CGI | −2.520 | −1.78373 | −4.29050 | −2.75328 |
| FPI | −2.467 | −0.57278 | −7.05133 | −6.45034 |
indicate levels of significance at 1, 5, and 10%, respectively.
Cross-sectional dependence and CIPS unit root test results.
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||
| POU | 13.39086 | 0.000 | −4.49 | −2.22 |
| AVP | 7.568020 | 0.000 | −1.41 | −1.81 |
| GDP | 19.03166 | 0.000 | 2.36 | −2.32 |
| CGI | 5.443783 | 0.000 | −3.93 | −4.628 |
| FPI | 7.422865 | 0.000 | −2.38 | −2.99 |
Signify the significance level at 1, 5, and 10%, respectively.
Westerlund (40) bootstrap panel cointegration test.
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Gt | −4.112 | −5.114 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Ga | −16.524 | −4.983 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Pt | −10.785 | −6.859 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Pa | −16.632 | −5.478 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Null hypothesis, i.e., no cointegration among model variables. The test is performed under 500 bootstraps replications.
Source: Estimation of Authors.
indicate levels of significance at 1, 5, and 10%, respectively.
Panel cointegration test (POU) of Kao.
|
| |
|---|---|
| ADF | −3.157 |
| Residual variance | 1.096 |
| HAC variable | 2.761 |
Signifies a significance level at 1%.
FMOLS and DOLS long run results of POU.
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| AVP | −0.160 | 0.023 | −6.974 | 0.588 | 1.13E-09 | 5.20E+08 |
| GDP | −0.005 | 0.001 | −6.763 | −0.009 | 6.92E-12 | −1.28E+09 |
| CGI | −3.142 | 0.927 | −3.391 | −43.134 | 1.17E-07 | −3.68E+08 |
| FPI | −0.107 | 0.026 | −4.137 | −2.599 | 5.35E-09 | −4.86E+08 |
Source: Estimations of authors.
indicate levels of significance at 1, 5, and 10%, respectively.
Cross country analysis of POU.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| AVP | −0.092 | 0.010 | −0.258 | 0.008 | −0.112 | −0.349 | −0.327 |
| GDP | −0.027 | −0.002 | 0.004 | −0.000 | −0.010 | −0.003 | 0.000 |
| CGI | −8.296 | 2.799 | −13.115 | −2.078 | 9.809 | −10.325 | −0.787 |
| FPI | −0.239 | −0.076 | −0.174 | −0.009 | −0.298 | 0.082 | −0.029 |
| C | 39.878 | 17.268 | 54.008 | 1.719 | 48.156 | 72.437 | 47.425 |
|
| |||||||
| AVP | −0.196 | 0.002 | −0.227 | 0.008 | −0.116 | −0.333 | −0.329 |
| GDP | −0.033 | −0.002 | 0.003 | −0.000 | −0.010 | −0.004 | 0.000 |
| CGI | −8.429 | 3.204 | −12.975 | −1.659 | 9.704 | −10.402 | −0.575 |
| FPI | −0.219 | −0.077 | −0.153 | −0.009 | −0.295 | 0.045 | −0.014 |
| C | 53.435 | 18.511 | 49.548 | 1.776 | 48.848 | 70.075 | 47.579 |
Source: Estimations of authors.
indicate levels of significance at 1, 5, and 10%, respectively.
Results of heterogeneous panel causality test.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| AVP does not homogeneously cause POU | 3.792 | 0.000 |
| POU does not homogeneously cause AVP | 4.536 | 0.000 |
| GDP does not homogeneously cause POU | 4.606 | 0.000 |
| POU does not homogeneously cause GDP | 2.031 | 0.042 |
| CGI does not homogeneously cause POU | 0.693 | 0.489 |
| POU does not homogeneously cause CGI | 3.783 | 0.000 |
| FPI does not homogeneously cause POU | −0.230 | 0.818 |
| POU does not homogeneously cause FPI | 0.966 | 0.334 |
Source: Estimation of authors.