IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ocp/ppaper/pb37-21.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Food Security in the Context of COVID-19: The Public Health Challenge | The Case of the Republic of Mauritius

Author

Listed:
  • Isabelle Tsakok

Abstract

Mauritius is a refutation of the proposition that food self-sufficiency at all costs is the way to achieve food security. Mauritius, a trade-dependent island economy, imports around three quarters of its food consumption. It is food self-sufficient in only local vegetables and fruits. Post-independence governments have succeeded in virtually eliminating extreme poverty. Mauritius has grown at an annual average of 5.3% or 4.4% in per-capita terms for decades, and has built a comprehensive social safety net and a public health system for universal healthcare. The food security of its people has thus vastly improved. Mauritius was a monocrop, agrarian, low-income country at independence in 1968: GNP/cap was around $260 . Today, it is classified as a high income country, with GNP/cap of $12,740 (2019) . It has no precious minerals like South Africa, or rich natural resources like its nearest African neighbor, Madagascar. The 1960 report to the government by Meade and Tittmuss held out bleak prospects for Mauritius. According to James Meade (1961), the “outlook for peaceful development [of Mauritius] is weak”

Suggested Citation

  • Isabelle Tsakok, 2021. "Food Security in the Context of COVID-19: The Public Health Challenge | The Case of the Republic of Mauritius," Policy notes & Policy briefs 1952, Policy Center for the New South.
  • Handle: RePEc:ocp:ppaper:pb37-21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.policycenter.ma/sites/default/files/PB_37-21_Tsakok.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ocp:ppaper:pb37-21. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Policy Center for the New South's Customer service (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ocppcma.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.