The facts worldwide onobesity are shocking —what was once the diseaseof high-income nations isnow spreading in epidemicproportions to developingcountries still struggling

to cope with malnutrition. Even in sub-saharan Africa, which

continues to face serious problemswith undernutrition, obesity is on therise, particularly among urbanpopulations.

In a global food system where 870million people are undernourished, astaggering 29 million deathsworldwide each year result fromovereating. This global obesityepidemic threatens to weaken andeven reverse progress made ineconomic development and tacklingpoverty throughout the Indian Oceanregion.

Until recently, obesity in developingcountries was considered a problem ofthe elite, but experience is showing theproblem spreading to groups furtherdown the socioeconomic scale. In partsof Africa and South Asia, these are thepeople who can’t afford nutritiousfood.

Throughout the world, a “nutritionaltransition” is occurring as peopleabandon traditional diets for energydense, Western-style processed foods.Globalisation causes this transition tohappen rapidly and at lower incomelevels in the developing world becauseof exposure to new global foodsystems. For instance, new productionprocesses have created an abundantsupply of cheap vegetable oils thatallow low and middle-income

households to increase their energyconsumption.

Urbanisation is one of the drivingforces behind such changes. Urbanpopulations are more exposed to foodmarketing and imported processedfoods through supermarket chains andfast-food restaurants. Lifestylechanges involving more sedentaryoccupations, and more women in theworkforce, mean less food is preparedin the home, with more reliance ontakeaway and street food.

South-East Asia has been facingrising obesity levels for more than adecade, as its countries industrialiseand incomes rise. Indonesia, Thailandand Burma all have levels ofoverweight between 20 per cent and 40per cent and increasing problems withchildhood obesity.

India, which has one of the world’sbiggest problems in feeding its people,is also facing an emerging obesityepidemic.

It is disturbing that Australia hasone of the highest rates of obesity inthe region. The prevalence of obesityhas more than doubled in the past 20years and it is now the single biggestpublic health threat facing the nation.The cost of obesity to Australia’scollective wellbeing is equivalent toabout 8 per cent of the economy’sannual output.

Obesity is not yet as big a problem inthe Indian Ocean region as hunger, butif trends continue, overeating will posea grave situation for health andnutrition. As rates of obesity grow, theimpact on health and on labourproductivity threatens to underminedevelopment hopes.

Governments in developingcountries are having to deal withhealth problems associated withoverweight and obesity before theyhave the financial means to do so.

Without structural changes to foodsystems, obesity is likely to continueto grow in the developing world evenas the problem of hunger continues.

Countries such as India andIndonesia, which are experiencingrapid growth, could be confronting bigincreases in obesity rates in comingdecades.

Estimates for direct healthcare costsassociated with obesity range between2 per cent and 8 per cent of totalhealthcare expenditure globally. Thisfigure will increase as the obesitypandemic continues to spread.

The World Health Organisationreports that each year, 100 millionpeople are pushed into povertybecause they have had to bear the costof paying directly for health services.In Tanzania, for instance, whereobesity levels are rising, especiallyamong women, the cost of diabetestreatment is 25 per cent of theminimum wage.

In addition to burdening thehealthcare system, obesity incursconsiderable indirect costs fornational economies because it lowerswork productivity. By reducingpeople’s capacity to work, obesity thenbecomes a driver of household poverty.

In many parts of the developingworld, households now face a dualburden, with increased consumptionof energy-dense processed foods thatare low in vital nutrients leading topeople being overweight while stillsuffering from micronutrientdeficiencies. Many households buythese foods because they are cheap andbetter alternatives are not widelyavailable to the urban poor.

In many countries there seems to bea lack of will to direct attentiontowards obesity in places where itoccurs alongside chronicundernutrition. But failure to addressthis issue could have seriousconsequences for the health andaspirations of people in the developingworld.Lauren Power is a research analyst with theGlobal Food and Water Crises researchprogram for Perth think tank FutureDirections International

The global paradox ofobesity and hungerDeveloping countries facea potentially economicallycrippling epidemic, writesLauren Power

Signed Alston prints are available from Press Photos. Phone 9482 2378.

Established 1833Tuesday, August 20, 201316

OPINION thewest.com.auEmail opinion@wanews.com.au

EDITORIAL

Successive Federal governments havebeen criticised for squandering theChina-fuelled mining boom whichhas underpinned the nationaleconomy for a decade — and

middle-class welfare has been pinpointed as aculprit.

The vote-winning potential of governmenthandouts was identified early by JohnHoward, and the former prime minister usedtargeted payments very effectively in his bidto wrest the “Howard Battlers” from theirtraditional political champions in Labor.

The expansion of family tax benefits A andB and the decision not to means-test theprivate health insurance rebate and the babybonus were glaring examples of peoplereceiving money when they arguably did notneed it.

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott makes nosecret of the fact that he models himself onMr Howard. The coalition’s paid parentalleave scheme takes the concept ofmiddle-class welfare, perfected by his mentor,to a new extreme.

Under Mr Abbott’s plan, new mums wouldget 26 weeks paid leave at their actual wageplus superannuation contributions, to amaximum of $75,000.

Women earning the generous salary of$150,000 would be paid, over the course of halfa year, about $10,000 more than Australia’saverage full-time salary.

Mr Abbott has trumpeted statisticsshowing a woman earning about that averagefull-time salary, $65,000 a year, would get$32,500.

This is $21,000 more than under Labor’scurrent scheme, which pays all new mothersearning less than $150,000 18 weeks atminimum wage, or $622 a week.

The coalition believes an increase inproductivity and workforce participation willbe a benefit flowing from the scheme butimprovements in these areas would have tobe marked to justify this multibillion-dollarcost.

Mr Abbott has blunted an obviouscriticism — that it is wrong for taxpayers onmodest wages to subsidise the familyaspirations of wealthy citizens — by makingbusiness pay for the scheme.

This is a cynical move, given the coalition’sPPL would start on the same day that a cut tothe company tax rate to 28.5 per cent wouldcome into effect — July 1, 2015. About 3000companies with a taxable income of morethan $5 million would contribute to the PPL’s$5.5 billion annual cost.

Leaving aside the questions over whetherthe 1.5 per cent levy will cover the entire bill,potentially exposing taxpayers, there willstill be a sting in the tail for less-well-offAustralians.

The cost will inevitably be passed on toconsumers in the former of higher prices forgoods and services. Many of the companieswhich will foot the bill will be publicly listed.

Shareholders, many of whom will likely bethe same comparatively well-off people whowill receive the generous PPL scheme, willnot soften their demands for robust profitmargins and dividends. Mr Abbott’s policywill feed this country’s addiction to welfareat a time when a stalling economy means wecan least afford it.

Baby paymentsfeed addictionto welfare