The Paradox of Plenty: Pakistan’s Empty Stomachs and Full Granaries

                                                                 

Prof Waqar Hussain

Pakistan sits uncomfortably near the bottom of the 2026 Global Hunger Index. With a score of 25.5, the country ranks 106th out of 122 nations assessed — a placement that speaks volumes about empty stomachs in a land of substantial harvests. Golden Sparrow of the past. Multidimensional poverty data paint a similarly sobering picture, with over a third of the population facing overlapping deprivations in health, education, and living standards, far higher than regional peers.

*What the Global Hunger Index Actually Measures*

The GHI is a composite score running from 0 (best — no hunger) to 100 (worst). It combines four indicators: undernourishment in the population, child stunting, child wasting, and under-five mortality. Scores are grouped into categories: low (≤9.9), moderate (10–19.9), serious (20–34.9), alarming, and extremely alarming. Pakistan’s 25.5 falls squarely in the “serious” band. Lower is better; a rising score since 2018 signals regression rather than progress.

*How the Subcontinent Stacks Up*

South Asia as a whole scores 23.5. Within the region the contrast is stark. Sri Lanka leads with a moderate 10.2, followed by Nepal at 14.5 and Bangladesh at 19.2. India sits at 24.1 (100th globally). Pakistan’s 25.5 places it second-worst in South Asia, ahead only of Afghanistan’s 28.6. While Pakistan has improved substantially from its 36.2 score in 2000, the recent uptick — driven by higher undernourishment and child wasting — has left it lagging behind most of its neighbours.

*An Astonishing Statistic*

Here is the enigma that refuses to resolve itself neatly. Pakistan produces roughly 50 million tons of cereals each year — wheat around 29–30 million tons, rice about 10 million tons, and maize roughly 9–10 million tons. At a typical food-use rate of 140–150 kilograms per person per year, that volume could theoretically sustain 330–350 million people. Pakistan’s population stands near 255–260 million. On paper, the surplus looks large enough to feed an extra 70–100 million souls.The Punjabi maxim captures the paradox perfectly:

اٹھ جولاۓ ، دس حُقّے 

اِس پر بھی، دھکم دھکے

“Eight washermen, ten hookahs — yet still they push and shove.”

*Justifying the Gap*

The arithmetic is beguiling but incomplete. Not every ton reaches a plate. A substantial share of rice is exported. Maize is diverted in large quantities to animal feed. Post-harvest losses, seed requirements, and industrial use claim further volumes. Wheat is often close to self-sufficiency or requires modest imports rather than generating a true surplus. More critically, the gap is less about absolute quantity and more about access and affordability. High food prices, unequal distribution, weak purchasing power among poorer households, and limited dietary diversity mean calories may exist at the national level while empty stomachs persist at the household level. Recent surveys show declining per-capita consumption of wheat, rice, pulses, milk, and meat precisely because of price pressures.

*What the Government Should Do*

Closing the gap requires more than bumper harvests. Targeted measures could include strengthening social safety nets and cash transfers so the poorest can afford nutritious food; reducing post-harvest losses through better storage and logistics; expanding support for diverse, nutrient-rich crops beyond cereals; and tackling the structural drivers of inflation and economic instability that erode household purchasing power. Climate resilience in agriculture and improved market transparency would also help ensure that production translates into accessible meals rather than merely impressive statistics.

*Conclusion*

Pakistan’s granaries are not empty, yet too many stomachs are. The Global Hunger Index score of 25.5 and the ranking of 106th out of 122 are not abstract numbers; they reflect a real and stubborn mismatch between aggregate production and equitable access. Bridging that paradox will demand more than higher yields. It will require deliberate policies that put food on the tables of those who currently cannot afford it. Until then, the paradox of plenty will continue to define the country’s food-security story.