Editor’s note: This is the second part of a two-part letter in response to recent news that certain Pakatan Harapan Cabinet members had opposed a plan to give free meals to school children three years ago.
Read Part 1 here.
OF COURSE, there are arguments against a universal school feeding programme.
One common argument against providing food for higher-income groups is the assumption that healthy food is economically attainable for these groups. For example, one might assume the middle 40 income group (M40) have enough income to pay for a nutritious meal, and hence, should be excluded.
However, this assumes that our criteria of who deserves assistance and who does not is perfect. This is not true as cases of deserving people excluded from receiving assistance exist.
Furthermore, the method to identify deserving recipients may be faulty. For instance, the present poverty or income threshold for the bottom 40 income group (B40s) may be too low, considering the recent price increases.
This subjective threshold may also leave families excluded from the threshold because of a marginal income increase, worse off. For example, a family previously categorised as poor that receives a small income boost because of a pay hike, but whose income increase pushes them out of the “poor” category.
As a result, they would lose all aid they were eligible for, including Rancangan Makanan Tambahan (RMT), and end up using that additional income boost to make up for the losses, instead of saving it or using it for other additional spending they could not afford before.
Furthermore, fluctuating earnings of non-standard workers may result in unfair judgments on their qualification for RMT. For example, if a parent receives an unexpected increase in earnings and this higher income is considered for the child’s RMT enrolment, this may result in the child being excluded, despite the parent receiving a low income during other periods.
“Shaming and stigma”
Proponents of a universal school feeding programme also note the negative effects of shaming and stigma from being in targeted programmes.
By targeting kids and forcing them to wear stickers indicating they are eligible for RMT meals, it creates a divide between students and forms a “us vs. them” mentality. Recipients may feel shame or get teased, and ultimately choose to opt-out of RMT.
From the administrators’ point-of-view, a universal programme also benefits them as it reduces administrative burden, as they are no longer required to do extensive and constant checks on who should be in the programme.
Prospective recipients also no longer face administrative barriers like filling out complex forms and so on.
As diet is an important factor in determining health status, the Government should ensure food accessibility for all through public policy, and a school feeding programme is a practical way of doing this.
The enrolment rate for primary school-age children in Malaysia is almost universal and thus, provides the perfect avenue to provide nutritious food and form lifelong dietary habits for all children.
“An investment”
Furthermore, the Government should consider this spending as an investment as the losses from malnutrition and gains from preventing and correcting malnutrition are large.
While diet is only one factor in determining health status, it is undeniably a vital one, and for children, it is imperative to achieve good health as it has important consequences throughout life.
Research asserts that malnutrition disrupts a child’s physical and cognitive development and that it would later affect productivity and earnings during adulthood.
Additionally, the healthcare cost burden would also increase as child malnutrition is linked to health problems throughout childhood and later in life as well.
By tackling malnutrition, not only are we avoiding these problems, but our children will also grow up to be healthier and more productive.
Calculations by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) show that the average lifetime lost earnings associated with stunting alone is US$1,400 per child. The estimated impact of malnutrition on the world economy could reach up to US$3.5 tril a year or US$500 per person.
In contrast, UNICEF estimated every US$1 invested in reducing stunting generates estimated returns of about US$18.
These numbers clearly show that malnutrition would have dire consequences for our children and the country, and addressing it would directly help those in need, ultimately benefiting all.
In other words, policies tackling malnutrition should be viewed as a high-return investment for Malaysia, with a universal school feeding programme being a vital tool in the toolkit to end malnutrition. – July 31, 2022
Jarud Romadan Khalidi is a research associate at Khazanah Research Institute (KRI). He is also a co-author of the Understanding School Feeding in Malaysia research paper.
The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Focus Malaysia or KRI.
