Impact of agro climatic and socio-economic variability on the nutritional status of inhabitants in the Garhwal Himalayas

The Garhwal Himalayas are a part of a unique ecosystem, with sharp agro-climatic variations within a very small geographical area (53,485 km2). The varied agro-climatic situations result in different cropping systems and socio-economic lifestyles that could likely affect the nutritional status of th...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inEcology of food and nutrition Vol. 43; no. 5; pp. 409 - 420
Main Authors Dutta, A, Pant, K, Kumar, P, Singh, R.P
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published London Taylor & Francis Group 01.09.2004
Taylor and Francis
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:The Garhwal Himalayas are a part of a unique ecosystem, with sharp agro-climatic variations within a very small geographical area (53,485 km2). The varied agro-climatic situations result in different cropping systems and socio-economic lifestyles that could likely affect the nutritional status of the people living in this region. This article will attempt to explore the impact of these variables (namely, age, family size, education, income, calorie and protein intake, land holding, number of animals, and wheat production) on the body mass index (BMI) of the population residing in the Garhwal Hills. A total of 1,030 subjects were studied from the three agro-climatic zones (406 from the high hills, 292 from the mid hills, and 332 from the low hills). It has been found that the people living in the high hills are the most undernourished, as the lowest percentage of people (52.6 per cent) with an acceptable BMI and the highest percentage of people in the severely malnourished category (11.1 per cent) are found here. People living in urban areas have a better nutritional status. Correlation studies show that the nutritional status of the population improves with age, literacy levels, and small family size. In some cases, calorie and protein intake have a positive impact on the health of the people, whereas size of land holding, number of animals, and income of the family do not have any significant influence on nutritional status.
ISSN:0367-0244
1543-5237
DOI:10.1080/03670240490500325