Policy Instrument:
Definition
Food transfers or subsidized food are non-contributory social assistance instruments that Governments can use to pursue food-related objectives, and as such they need to meet both quantity and quality requirements. With food subsidies, basic food items are sold at a cheaper price than on the free market.
Rationale
Food transfers or subsidized food programmes provide direct access to adequate and nutritious food for vulnerable populations—helping stabilize consumption, improve nutrition outcomes, and protect purchasing power in contexts where markets are constrained or prices are high.
Key features
- Food transfers typically consist of non-perishable food items (e.g. packages, rations) and ideally including fortified foods, that are intended to contribute towards meeting food security and nutrition needs of households or individuals in a reliable and predictable way over a long period. Food transfers should not consist of single food items, but should include a balanced combination of one or more staple foods, pulses, vegetable oil, salt.
- Food may be procured from within the country, including from smallholder farmers, which can in turn support livelihoods and boost the local economy.
- Subsidies can be general or targeted to selected segments of the population (e.g. the poorest based on their socioeconomic and demographic characteristics).
- Successful delivery of food transfers requires significant investments in effective logistics for food procurement, planning food distributions, ensuring food safety and quality, and maximising their nutritional benefit.
- Food rations reaching vulnerable households are unlikely to meet the nutritional needs of all members of the household, and particularly those most at risk, such as for example pregnant and breastfeeding women and children under five years of age. A complementary and nutritious food supplement or cash top-up, or vouchers that is provided directly to these women and children, will be needed, particularly in contexts of high food insecurity, in order to prevent malnutrition.
- Because of fiscal constraints and macroeconomic inefficiencies, in many countries food subsidies have become less popular in recent years, with greater emphasis placed on employment and productivity-based interventions, as well as on cash-based transfers.
- Historically, food transfers and subsidies have often over-relied on cheap and calorie-dense foods which limits or even contributes to worsening the nutritional status of targeted beneficiaries. That said, food transfers and subsidies hold significant potential for achieving nutrition outcome at scale. Altering consumption patterns to favor certain types of nutritious foods for example, is a public policy objective that may be more easily achieved with well-designed and well-implemented nutrition-sensitive food transfers than with cash transfers (given the fungibility of cash).
- In contexts where food prices are high or volatile or experiencing high inflation, the capacity of food transfers to keep beneficiaries’ purchasing power constant can be an advantage and may make them a more appropriate instrument than cash transfers.
Households or individuals at risk of chronic food insecurity and malnutrition owing to poverty, vulnerability and social exclusion.
Instrument may be general or geographically targeted to households or individuals (e.g. school children, households with children in the first 1,000 days of life), or living in areas of the country identified as experiencing chronic levels of food insecurity and malnutrition, and/or to households whose members such as
- Young children,
- Pregnant and breastfeeding women,
- Elderly;
- People living with disabilities, and chronic diseases (such as HIV),
- People who have economic or social characteristics that expose them to a greater risk of hunger and malnutrition
Overview
Evidence from country programmes suggests that food transfer and subsidized food interventions can improve access to affordable food, strengthen dietary intake, and support food security among vulnerable populations. Findings from operational assessments, policy reform evaluations, and household-level impact studies indicate that these programmes can expand access to nutritious meals, increase calorie and nutrient consumption, and reduce poverty risks (Phadera et al., 2020; Rahman, 2016). Findings also point to their value as delivery mechanisms for reaching populations facing socioeconomic vulnerability, particularly when programmes combine broad coverage with strong implementation systems and affordable access to food (Sousa et al., 2025; Phadera et al., 2020). Recent research by Shrinivas et al (2025) further shows that increasing the value of food transfers can improve energy, protein, and fat consumption, enhance dietary diversity, and contribute to better child nutrition outcomes, including reductions in stunting among young children.
Evidence from selected countries
Brazil: Popular Restaurant Programme (PRP)
Brazil: Brazil’s Popular Restaurant Program (PRP) provides free or highly subsidized nutritious meals to people experiencing food insecurity and social vulnerability through a network of Community Restaurants (Restaurantes Populares). An assessment of 94 restaurants across 90 municipalities in the North and Northeast regions by Sousa et al (2025) found that 74-80% of establishments actively prioritized vulnerable populations, while serving an average of 487 meals per day in the North and 927 meals per day in the Northeast at highly subsidized prices of approximately US$0.27 and US$0.20, respectively. The study also reported strong implementation capacity, including nutritionist oversight in all facilities and monitoring systems in more than 90% of restaurants. While the study did not assess longer-term food security outcomes, the findings suggest that Community Restaurants are an effective mechanism for expanding access to affordable and nutritious meals among populations most at risk of food insecurity (Sousa et al., 2025).
India: Public Distribution System (PDS)
India’s Public Distribution System (PDS) is one of the world’s largest food security programmes providing subsidized food grains to eligible households.  Evidence from PDS highlights the role of food subsidy programmes in improving food security and nutrition. An evaluation of expanded PDS coverage in a highly food-insecure region found an 8% increase in per capita calorie consumption, together with approximately 7% higher calorie and protein intake and an 11% increase in fat consumption (Rahman, 2016). A more recent research by Shrinivas et al (2025) found that an additional ₹30 per capita per month in food transfers increased daily consumption by approximately 167 kcal, 4.3 grams of protein, and 4.1 grams of fat per adult-equivalent household member, while also improving dietary diversity. The study further estimated that the programme prevented around 1.8 million children from becoming stunted, underscoring the potential of food subsidy programmes to support both immediate food security and longer-term nutrition outcomes, particularly among vulnerable households and young children (Rahman, 2016; Shrinivas et al., 2025).
Iraq: Public Distribution System (PDS)
Iraq’s Public Distribution System (PDS) is one of the world’s largest food subsidy programmes and a cornerstone of the country’s social protection system, providing subsidized wheat flour, rice, sugar, and vegetable oil to nearly the entire population. The programme has played a critical role in protecting food security and reducing poverty, particularly during periods of crisis and displacement. Evidence from a study by Phadera et al. (2020) shows that access to PDS is associated with higher calorie consumption, lower hunger, and a 14.6 percentage point reduction in the likelihood of poverty among displaced households. Historically, PDS transfers accounted for up to 30% of income for the poorest 10% of Iraqis and supplied around 70% of the calories consumed by the poorest 40% (Phadera et al., 2020).
References
Phadera, L., Sharma, D., & Wai-Poi, M. G. (2020). Iraq's universal public distribution system: Utilization and impacts during displacement (Policy Research Working Paper No. 9155). World Bank. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/239031582135436157/pdf/Iraqs-Universal-Public-Distribution-System-Utilization-and-Impacts-During-Displacement.pdf
Rahman, A. (2016). Universal food security program and nutritional intake: Evidence from the hunger prone KBK districts in Odisha. Food Policy, 63, 73–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.07.003
Shrinivas, A., Baylis, K., & Crost, B. (2025). Food transfers and child nutrition: Evidence from India’s Public Distribution System. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 17(3), 161–207. https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/79b87fd1851d9e0a0e3e090ec8f2113f-0050022025/original/shrinivas-et-al-2025-food-transfers-and-child-nutrition-evidence-from-india-s-public-distribution-system.pdf
Sousa, M. S., Akutsu, R. C., Silva, C. M. S., Teixeira, C. S. S., & Silva, I. C. R. (2025). Food security in Brazil: Evaluation of the effectiveness of community restaurants in the North and Northeast regions. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 22(2), 315. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22020315
Just like with any policy instrument, there may be a few risks associated with the use of food transfers or subsidized food. For example, there may be risks around the safety and quality of food distributed. Having national food safety and quality policies in place and ensuring their effective implementation is a critical risk management measure in this regard.
Also, there may be a risk that households with individuals most at risk of malnutrition are not adequately reached with food transfers or subsidies. To redress this risk, nutrition considerations need to be integral to targeting and need assessment processes, where applicable, so that design of transfers systematically consider nutrition. In practice this may mean ensuring that additional support is provided to at-risk individuals, such as pregnant and breastfeeding women and girls and children under five.
Another potential risk is that food distributed does not match people's preferences or needs, which can result in food items being traded rather than consumed. Periodic consultations with communities to understand their needs and priorities should be integral components of food transfer programmes and of subsidies.
SDG 3: Good health and well-being
- Target 3.1 - Maternal mortality: By 2030, reduce the global maternal mortality ratio to less than 70 per 100,000 live births.
- Target 3.2 - Neonatal and child mortality: By 2030, end preventable deaths of newborns and children under 5 years of age, with all countries aiming to reduce neonatal mortality to at least as low as 12 per 1,000 live births and under-5 mortality to at least as low as 25 per 1,000 live births