<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<record
    xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
    xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml/schema/MARC21slim.xsd"
    xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">

  <leader>01521pab a2200157 454500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="008">180718b1999   xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d</controlfield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Mooij, Jos</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Dilemmas in food policy: about institutional contradictions and vested interests</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="260" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="c">1999</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">p.A114-20</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="362" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">25 Dec</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">The public distribution system (PDS) is one of the most important and costly welfare programmes in India. Till 1997 the PDS was a more or less universal programme, which distributed food to rich and poor cardholders alike. This universal set-up changed in 1997, when the government of India introduced targeting. The implementation of targeting proved, however, difficult. Based on fieldwork in two Indian states, Karnataka and Bihar, the paper discusses some of these difficulties. In particular, it focuses on some misconceptions and wrong assumptions underlying the introduction of the targeted PDS. Politicians and policy-makers have overlooked vested interests and institutional constraints, which often make it impossible or at least very difficuslt to implement the policies as they were meant to be implemented. The paper argues that policy discussions are insufficiently grounded in the day-to-day political and bureaucratic realities at the state and local level, and that this is, in part, related to the institutional organisation of the policy-making process itself. - Reproduced</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Public distribution system</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Economic and Political Weekly</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="909" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">43647</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="c">43647</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">43647</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="0">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="1">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="4">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="7">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="a">IIPA</subfield>
    <subfield code="b">IIPA</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">2018-07-19</subfield>
    <subfield code="h">Volume no: 34, Issue no: 52</subfield>
    <subfield code="p">AR44044</subfield>
    <subfield code="r">2018-07-19</subfield>
    <subfield code="w">2018-07-19</subfield>
    <subfield code="y">AR</subfield>
  </datafield>
</record>
