Transcript

ETHIOPIAN DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE

Food consumption changes in Ethiopia

Mekdim Dereje IFPRI ESSP

Ethiopian Economics Association 13th International Conference on the Ethiopian EconomyJuly 23-25, 2015Addis Ababa

1

2

Introduction• Rapid changes in Ethiopia’s economy (Ethiopia one

of the fastest growing economies in the world)• Important increases in agricultural production in last

decade • Despite improvements in economy and in

agricultural production, still important nutritional problems in the country

• Purpose of the analysis: Explore patterns and changes in Ethiopia’s food economy, based on nationally representative data

Data

• Rely on the Ethiopian Household Consumption and Expenditure Survey (HICES) collected by CSA:

- Year 1995/96: 11,678 households- Year 1999/00: 17,320 households- Year 2004/05: 21,560 households- Year 2010/11: 27,831 households

• Use CSA’s retail price dataset for deflation of expenditures

Food versus non-food expenditures1) Important welfare improvements• Increasing real expenditures

overall• Food expenditures grew by

19% between 2011 and 2000

• Increasing share of non-food- 2000: 37%- 2005: 46%- 2011: 52%

2000 2005 20110

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800Food

Non-food

Birr

/cap

ita

Cereals versus non-cereals2) Increasing diversification in the food basket• Quantities of cereals

consumed is slightly increasing:

- 1996: 127 kgs/capita- 2000: 141 kgs/capita- 2005: 150 kgs/capita- 2011: 155 kgs/capita• Share of cereals in

expenditures on the decline

2000 2005 20110

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

cereals non-cereals

Shar

e in

food

exp

endi

ture

s (%

)

Non-cereal foods

3) Diversification into high-value food types• Non-cereal foods on the

rise: - animal products- oils and fats - F&V - Coffee/tea/chat

2000 2005 20110

2

4

6

8

10

12

animal products oil and fatF&V enset/kochocoffee/tea/chat

% fo

od e

xpen

ditu

res

Cereals

4) Considerable variation within cereal consumption• In kg terms, maize most

important cereals • Maize consumption increasing

over time (51 kgs in 2011; 37 kgs in 2000)

• In expenditure terms, teff, wheat and maize equally important (each about 7.5% of expenditures)

• Processed cereals not important yet overall (4.6% of expenditures)

2000 2005 20110

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

teff wheat barley maizesorghum other processed

kg/c

apita

/yea

r

Urban versus rural

5) Important difference between urban and rural• Urbanization low in Ethiopia

but taking off• Has implication on Ethiopia’s

food economy• Urban residents have

different food basket:- More consumption of teff

and meat- Lower consumption of maize,

sorghum and enset/kocho

teff

sorghum

maize

processed cereals

animal products

enset/kocho

F&V

-1 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15

RuralUrban

% food expenditures

Sources of food expenditures

6) Food markets becoming more important • Food in rural areas mostly

acquired through own consumption (42%)

• However, food markets (sales of food for food purchase (34%)) already important in rural areas and very high in urban areas

• Salaries/wages, sales of non-ag. products, and remittances important in urban areas

Auto-consumption

Sale ag. products

Sale non-ag. products

Salary/wage

Remittances

Others

0 5 1015202530354045

UrbanRural

% food expenditures

Calorie consumption7) Average calorie consumption improving• Average calorie

consumption 9% higher in last decade

• Cereals stays major source of calories:

- 2000: 65%- 2005: 61%- 2011: 62%• Maize makes up 20% of

calorie consumption in 2011

2000 2005 20110

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

cereals non-cereals

Kcal

/day

/adu

lt eq

uiva

lent

Calorie consumption

8) Large variation in prices paid per calorie • Maize is the cheapest

source of calories (followed closely by enset, sorghum, and root crops)

• Processed cereals four times as expensive as non-processed

• Cereals half the price of non-cereals

maize

enset/kocho

sorghum

root crops

barley

teff

wheat

sugar and salt

oil and fat

processed cereals

-0.4 0.1 0.6

Birr/kcal

Income and the share of food/cereals

Poorest q2 q3 q4 Richest0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2011 2005Shar

e of

food

in to

tal e

xp. (

%)

Poorest q2 q3 q4 richest0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2011 2005

Shar

e of

cer

eals

in fo

od e

xp. (

%)

• 9) Important difference between the poor and non-poor

Income and cereal expenditures

• Share of cereals going down for richer households

• Teff (9.1% versus 4.4%) and processed cereals (8.9% versus 2.6%) more eaten by the rich than by poor

• Maize (13.0% versus 2.6%) and sorghum (6.9% versus 1.8%) more eaten by the poor than by the rich

Poorest q2 q3 q4 Richest05

10152025303540

teff wheat barley

maize sorghum processed cereals

% fo

od e

xpen

ditu

res

Income and non-cereal expenditures • Share of non-cereals

going up for richer households

• Animal products (17.6% versus 6.6%) more eaten by the rich than by poor

• Enset/kocho (6.4% versus 1.7%) and pulses (10.1% versus 7.6%) more eaten by the poor than by the rich

Poorest q2 q3 q4 Richest0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

animal products pulsesoil and fat F&Venset/kocho coffee/tea/chatother

% fo

od e

xpen

ditu

res

Conclusions

• Important food diet transformation in the last decade:1/ Average quantity (+23%) and calorie (+9%) consumption has improved significantly 2/ Share of cereals in expenditures on the decline (43% in 2000; 35% in 2011)3/ Consumption of more expensive foods on the rise (animal foods; processed foods; coffee/tea/chat) • Large differences in food consumption by income levels

and between urban and rural populations

Conclusions• Implications:1/ Agricultural policy successful in promoting cereal productivity in the past; however, more demand for diversified foods; more emphasis required in the future on diversification in production2/ Agricultural markets play more important role in food economy; further stimulate these markets and better understand constraints in their functioning3/ While average improvements, part of the population no adequate diets; further continuation and strengthening of nutrition-sensitive safety nets required


Top Related