IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON PRICES OF FOOD ITEMS:

EXPERIENCES AMONG SELECTED HOUSEHOLDS IN

LUNGLEI

SUBMITTED BY: C. LALNUNHLIMI

CLASS ROLL NUMBER: 8
UNIVERSITY ENROLLMENT: 2013BCOM008

GOVT. J. BUANA COLLEGE

APRIL, 2022

1|Page
 CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

With the onset of the pandemic in March 2020, many consumers experienced,
for the first time in their lifetimes, empty grocery store shelves. More than a
year into the pandemic, they are facing another unfamiliar trend when it comes
to accessing food: notably higher prices. Increases in wages in the food sector,
rising agricultural commodity prices, transportation bottlenecks, and strong
consumer demand have led to the highest annual grocery price increases in a
decade.

1.1 COVID-19 AND THE GLOBAL SCENARIO

The pandemic has enveloped the globe almost in its entirety and no country is
spared from the direct or indirect fallout of COVID-19. It is expected that the
pandemic will bring in a ‘new normal’, a recession of the world economy not
brought about by the cyclical turns in business, but a ‘black swan’ event in the
world economic order to usher in permanent change in the way we live, work
and play, with new social realities, and permanent structural changes in the
political & economic discourse all over.
First identified in China in December 2019, the Coronavirus Disease 2019 or
COVID-19 has been reported in 180 sovereign countries, prompting the World
Health Organisation to declare it as a ‘pandemic’ on 11th March 2020. The
virus has brought low the world’s richest and most powerful countries with
infrastructure and supplies stretched so thin that infections rise exponentially
with proportionate casualties.

1.1.1 Global Economic Impact

The global economy has slowed down considerably as preventative

measures to protect populations from infection has resulted in diminished
economic activity and unprecedented unemployment levels at a global scale.
At least 60% of the world’s supply and demand in goods and services, 65%
of manufacturing, and 41% of worlds’ manufacturing exports are being hit.

2|Page
 With contraction of the global economy seemingly eminent, the current
situation is being labelled as the Great Lockdown or the Coronavirus
Recession.
While COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted economies across the board,
industries that are particularly exposed are those that are reliant on
consumer discretionary spending (e.g., travel& tourism, sports &
entertainment, retail & e-commerce) and cross-border supply chains (e.g.,
automobiles, electronics, chemicals), which are experiencing increased
pressure on revenues and earnings.

1.1.2 Food Security

The COVID-19 pandemic is causing a disruption to food supply and

availability, leading to instability in both local and global food markets. In
addition to directly impacting food supply, the pandemic is affecting food
systems indirectly through decreases in purchasing power and in the
capacity to produce and distribute food.
A decline in purchasing power due to the economic impact of COVID-19
resulted in decline of demand which in turn affects the ability and
willingness of farmers and producers to invest in the sector. Consequently,
food production and availability shrunk further and this greatly affects the
poor and vulnerable.

1.2 COVID-19 AND THE INDIAN ECONOMY

Since the incidence of the first case of the COVID-19 in the country during the
first week of March, 2020, preventive actions taken by the Indian Government,
enforcing the ‘Janata Curfew’ on 22nd March followed by the Nationwide
Lockdown for 21 days, and extended for two whole years and other social and
fiscal & monetary measures, has been lauded as effective in containing the
outbreak, and buying much needed time and space for the administration to take
stock and put in place preventive and mitigation measures.
However, the world's biggest lockdown has shut a majority of the factories and
businesses, suspended flights, stopped trains and restricted movement of
vehicles and people. It has brought at least 75% of economic activity,
investment, exports and discretionary consumption to a standstill besides

3|Page
causing massive supply-chain disruptions, and internally displacing millions of
people.

1.2.1 COVID-19 lockdown and its overall impact on Mizoram

The sectors which are hit the hardest in Mizoram due to Nationwide
Lockdown are Trade, Hotel, Restaurants and Repair Services, Transport &
Communication, Construction, and those in manufacturing, micro & small
scale industries and those engaged in the informal sector.
Decrease of output in these sectors have direct repercussions in terms of loss
of livelihoods and incomes for those engaged, who invariably happen to be
the most vulnerable sections of the society.
The severity of external shocks on the State’s economy, its risk and
vulnerability across space and time can be summed up into two likely
scenarios.
The finances and development of the State is a direct function of the
circumstances at the Centre & its financial robustness, and hence it is more
vulnerable under the current circumstances. On the one hand, owing to its
economic status, the State can be partially immune to the disruptions if the
Central Government’s financial and its budgetary support to the State
remains dependable and stable. While on the other hand, as the State
depends on imports for most essential items such as rice, pulses, vegetables,
eggs and meat, supply shocks in other parts of the country, directly affects
the availability of food and sustenance which thus increases the price of the
mentioned products.

1.3 IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON PRICES OF FOOD ITEMS

The deep and prolonged shocks of COVID-19 that we are experiencing have not
been seen since the Great Depression. This time is different in terms of global
effects such as disruptions to the food supply chain and economic recession.
More importantly, producer and consumer prices have been moving in opposite
directions leading to a higher price spread than a normal economic condition.
Agricultural prices co-exist with a higher price at the retail level. Consumer
prices are likely to increase due to hoarding of storable commodities influenced

4|Page
by consumers’ psychological factors of panic buying and the rent-seeking
behaviour of processors or wholesalers.

Since addressing all of the above problems is challenging, the present study
investigates only the impact of COVID-19 induced lockdown on the prices of
basic food items and fresh food items among selected households in Lunglei.

The behaviour of food prices in Lunglei exhibited dramatic shifts following the
outbreak of COVID-19 and the associated lockdown measures to contain its
spread. Though the movement of essential commodities, including food items
was permitted during the first phase of the lockdown, it has been observed that
the food markets and supply chains were adversely affected during this period.
Arrivals in bazaar dropped, agricultural markets were closed and daily
movement of trucks collapsed. The supply chain disruptions caused by the
COVID-19 outbreak have led to changes in food prices within the state.

1.3.1 Factors affecting rise in food prices

There can be several factors which can operate through many channels
during the COVID-19 pandemic to alter price mark-ups of basic food and
fresh food items consumed by selected households in Lunglei.
The factors which affect the rise in food prices can be summarised as under:

A) A lockdown can affect the transportation of food products leading to

high transaction costs. Transport goods from one state to another is more
expensive than ever and the transportation costs are typically factored into
the price of the food items.

B) Prices of food items may increase because of labour shortages resulting

from a decline in the number of migrant workers.
The migrant workers were rendered unemployed and as such many of them
returned back to their state. Food manufacturers could not find enough
workers to meet demand i.e., to move the food items through the state
borders.

C) The uncertainty about the duration and intensity of the lockdown may
also prompt consumers to resort to panic buying and hoarding of essential

5|Page
 food items, leading to temporary increases in demand and rising of food
prices during the lockdown period.

D) Amidst disruptions in supply chain, increase in consumers’ demand may

enable retailers to charge higher prices on the food items sold to consumers
for their benefit.

1.4 LITERATURE REVIEW

Several recent studies conducted by Cullen, Maximo Torero, 2020 published

through the U.S National Library of Medicine conceptualize the potential
effects of the COVID‐19 and lockdowns on food security. They posit that the
lockdowns would pose a full range of threats to food security, such as reduction
in production, disruption of the food supply chain, restrictive trade flow, and
reduced dietary options. In the meantime, a large number of empirical studies
have shown overwhelming evidence to support the negative effects of COVID‐
19 and the lockdown measures on food security.
A pandemic shock can have a greater significance on economies due to lost
human lives compared to a weather shock such as drought or flood or a trade
embargo. Undoubtedly, all these shocks affect agricultural systems; however,
pandemic shocks affect all the sectors of an economy. The pandemic disrupts
demand and supply of food impacting the global supply chain; while droughts
tend to be localized affecting only the associated sector or stakeholders (Mishra
et al., 2021)
The agriculture sector registered positive growth post-pandemic but less than its
immediate past quarter growth witnessing a decline by 2.5% point due to the
impact of COVID-19. The positive growth in agriculture, although attributed to
a bumper crop harvest coupled with relaxation in agriculture related activities
during the lockdown, has not witnessed a significant increase in the farm
income but registered an inflation of 2.3% (Economic Times, 2020).
The reverse labour migration led to scarcity of labour which affected harvesting
of the winter (November–March) crops like wheat and pulses adversely in the
intensively cultivated north-western plains of India (Dev, 2020). COVID-19
induced lockdown has disrupted agricultural labour markets that witnessed huge

6|Page
reverse migration. A survey reports that 45% of the migrants returned home
during lockdown (Imbert, 2020)
Secondly, the restrictions on movement disrupted the supply chains, hampering
the uninterrupted flow of inputs for and outputs of agricultural activities (Barrett
2020; Carberry and Padhee, 2020). Supply of perishable commodities were
affected more, challenging the food and nutritional security of the vulnerable
sections of the society (Harris et al., 2020).
Huge buffer stocks of rice and wheat supplemented by a record harvest in
2019–20 crop season enabled the Indian food system to tackle the pandemic
(Padhee and Pingali, 2020; Pothan et al., 2020). At the same time tonnes of food
grains were wasted according to a government report, at the Food Corporation
of India (FCI) storage structures, since May 2020. The COVID-19 induced
lockdown exacerbated food loss at production, marketing, distribution and
wastage at household consumption level. For instance, due to lack of demand
and logistics, food commodities such as milk, vegetables and fruits were wasted
at farm level while distribution of milk by the Anand Milk Union Limited
(AMUL) – the largest milk cooperative in India – was also affected.
Uncertainty imposed by the crisis, restrictions on inter-state movements and
absence of transportation disrupted the food supply chains and spiked food
prices (Kalsi et al., 2020) and affected farm operations. COVID-19 induced
lockdown in India disrupted food markets which forced consumers to alter their
consumption patterns. Consumers prioritized what they wanted and what they
really needed. Various surveys report that individuals lost their jobs or their
income decreased during lockdown (Arun, 2020; Cariappa et al., 2020a; Imbert,
2020; Ray, 2020). The lockdown coupled with sudden negative income shock
posed serious concerns about food and nutrition security in India. In a survey of
2259 migrant youth, 32% reduced their daily food intake (Imbert, 2020).
Consumers changed their behaviour patterns by reducing consumption of non-
essentials, reduced market visits, stocking and consumption behaviour changed
equally (Cariappa et al., 2020).
The cropping pattern in India varies among the states. During March and April,
rabi crop harvesting is at its peak among major states. The pandemic outbreak
coincided during this time causing a significant effect on farm production. Due
to lockdown, farmers could not complete land preparation and provide irrigation
on time, which caused a negative impact on crop productivity. The primary
survey on farmers in India reported that 24% of the respondents did not harvest
due to lockdown-related reasons and hence the prices of their produce spiked
(Jaacks Lindsay M, Veluguri D et al., 2021).

7|Page
Theoretically, the equilibrium market price of a commodity is determined by its
supply and demand in the market. Therefore, any factors that could affect either
the supply and demand for that commodity would affect the commodity price.
Previous studies suggest that the COVID-19 policy restrictions affected both the
supply and demand sides of food markets worldwide (Mahajan K, Tomar S et
al., 2020).
Besides the lockdown, a commodity’s supply and demand can be impacted by
various factors, depending on a country’s weather variability, cyclical nature of
the product, macroeconomic conditions, economic structure, and culture. In
India, farmers that mainly produce staple foods (rice and wheat) reside
primarily in villages. Hence, farmers are affected by an increase in transaction
cost, mainly due to transportation costs, access to inputs, and less demand from
mid-stream suppliers, such as millers and wholesalers. More importantly,
market prices can be affected by food supply shortage due to the seasonality
nature of a crop, such as rice is needed to grow for three to four months.
However, during the pandemic, it is likely that product availability could be
attributable to disruptions to the food supply chain rather than decreased
production (Mahajan K, Tomar S, 2020).
On the demand side, the COVID-19 crisis could create social panic, and
consumers may hoard food in some cases. Therefore, it may lead to a vicious
cycle of increasing food prices (Vercammen J and Yu et al, 2020). However, in
the Indian case, since most consumers are poor, panic-buying is less likely. But
food hoarding may be witnessed at the sellers’ level due to the rent-seeking
behaviour of processors or wholesalers (Mahajan K, Tomar S, 2020). Finally, a
product’s nature being storable (e.g., rice and wheat) and perishable (e.g.,
onions and tomatoes) could be one of the main reasons for unexpected price
behaviours of essential commodities in India.
Uncertainty about the future and limited information cause abnormal behaviors
of consumers and lead to limited food availability in the market (Xu and
Sattar 2020). Mixed news with pictures of empty shelves, circulating on social
media, contributes to a nervous atmosphere of panic buying, thus sharply
increasing market prices (Devereux, Béné, and Hoddinott 2020). 
A number of studies analysing the lockdown impact on food prices in the Indian
context have focused mainly on the availability and prices of food commodities.
Arrivals of food items in wholesale markets dropped by 62 per cent in the three
weeks following the nationwide lockdown in March-April 2020 whereas
wholesale prices rose by 8 per cent and this correlation has more to do with

8|Page
state-level lockdown policy variation than local responses of those in the food
supply chain (Lowe, Nadhanael and Roth, 2020).
The impact of the lockdown differed across non-perishable (rice,atta,wheat) and
perishable (tomato and onion) commodities and the extent of adverse shocks are
mitigated by the adoption of a greater number of agricultural market reform
measures (Varshney, Roy and Meenakshi, 2020). The fall in product availability
and quantity of arrivals is larger for items that are cultivated or manufactured
farther from the retail centers indicating that long-distance food supply chains
have been hit the hardest during the pandemic (Mahajan and Tomar, 2020).
Using the daily prices data released by the Department of Consumer Affairs
(DCA), Narayanan and Saha (2020) point out that average retail price increases
were to the tune of over 6 per cent for several pulses, over 3.5 per cent for most
edible oils, 15 per cent for potato and 28 per cent for tomato in the 28 days post-
lockdown (March 24-April 21, 2020) compared to the month preceding the
lockdown. The paper also constructed aggregate wholesale and retail food price
indices and found that the gap between these two increased during the lockdown
period which was attributed to higher transaction costs faced by traders
primarily due to transport restrictions.
The COVID-19 pandemic, along with the associated lockdowns, mobility
restrictions and physical distancing rules, has not only led to a significant
increase in unemployment and considerable income losses for many people, but
has also altered the spending patterns of consumers and the level of price
inflation that they face. In particular, the lockdown measures have affected the
supply of and demand for certain products and, hence, their prices (ILOSTAT,
2020).
The disruption of the food supply chain caused by the lockdown measures are
expected to result in higher food prices that could further aggravate the food
insecurity concern. Weinberg and Bakker (2014) argue that food price is the
most important measure of individual well‐being and provides a more accurate
assessment of food scarcity than any other indicators.
High food prices are also found to cause social unrests (Bellemare 2015),
extreme and moderate poverty, nutritional deficiency and psychosocial stress,
and the decline of social capital (Headey and Fan 2008; Hadley et al. 2012;
Ferreira et al. 2013). Beyond the immediate impact of higher food prices on the
cost of the food purchased by households, there is evidence that higher overall
price inflation hurts the poor the most (Easterly and Fischer 2001; Wodon and
Zaman 2008; Chen et al. 2020; Fan, Si, and Zhang 2020; Siche 2020). The price

9|Page
theory implies that a distorted high price and/or high price variation over space
are key indicators of market inefficiency (Jensen 2007; Aker 2010).
More importantly, the COVID-19 pandemic created a price spike in primary
staple food markets (FAO, 2021). For instance, the price of rice, a staple food
for the globe and India, increased by 25–30% between March and May 2020
relative to the same period in 2019. Despite a good production year in 2020 and
high commodity stocks, product availability in the market fell, which could be
due to increased demand from panic-buying (Mahajan K and Tomar S et al.,
2020). Surprisingly, food prices in India increased at a higher rate than what
was observed in the world. A recent global study noted that COVID-19-induced
changes in income and food prices could alter global food security (Beckman J,
Baquedano F, Countryman A, 2021).

1.5 RATIONALE OF THE PROJECT

In order to effectively contain the spread of the COVID‐ virus, lockdown

measures and shelter‐in‐place orders have been widely adopted within the State.
Although these lockdown measures are necessary and effective, the economic
cost of such measures could be exorbitant.
This study aims at evaluating the effects of lockdown measures adopted by the
local government on the level and dispersion of prices of food items and the
impact it has on selected households within Lunglei locality.
This paper further confirms that the disruption of the supply chain mechanism is
the driving force triggering the price surge. Three pieces of evidence are
consistent with this hypothesis. First, we find that the lockdown policy led to a
significant and substantial increase in price dispersion, implying that the
markets selling basic and fresh food itmes across and within Lunglei are more
disintegrated because of the disruption of traffic flow. Second, data on labour
mobility intensity and freight volume showed a considerable decline and the
shipment of goods after the lockdown measures did not meet the requirements
of the people, which is a more direct indication of supply chain disruption.
Third, we also find that the price surge is more pronounced in vegetable‐
importing provinces than in vegetable‐producing areas and in provinces that
grow more vegetables than those growing less vegetables.

10 | P a g e
1.6 OBJECTIVE OF THE PROJECT

1) To evaluate the effects of COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent

lockdown measures adopted by the local government on the availability and
price of fresh and basic food items in the market.
2) To highlight the importance of designing more flexible policies that
prioritize the smooth flow of fresh and basic food items that are essential to
people's diet and health from producing provinces to importing provinces
during the lockdown times.
3) To reinforce the importance of capacity and quality of warehouse
infrastructure. A larger storage capacity as well as improved preservation
and cold‐storage facilities would help in reducing the price shock caused by
the lockdown measures.
4) To suggest the local government in designing pandemic relief programs to
help their citizens, earmarking a certain amount of funds to help the poor
cover additional financial burden resulting from the price increases of food
items.
5) To guide the design of complementary policy measures of the local
government to mitigate the negative effects of lockdown measures on the
level and variability of food prices.

1.7 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

1.7.1 Data Collection: The study is based on primary data and secondary data.
The primary data has been collected by using a questionnaire and the
secondary data is collected from various published and unpublished
sources including articles, research papers, e-journals, etc.
1.7.2 Sampling Method: The study is conducted among selected households in
Lunglei. The study is conducted by giving out questionnaires (the
questionnaires consisted of multiple choice questions) to households
residing within Lunglei locality through Google forms link.
1.7.3 Data Processing: The primary data received is processed by using
Microsoft Word presented in the form of frequency tables and
percentages.

11 | P a g e
1.8 CHAPTER PLAN
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Analysis and Interpretation of data
Chapter 3: Summary of Findings

12 | P a g e
 CHAPTER 2
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

General analysis of the data is presented as under:

2.1 Age of the respondents

Table 2.1: Age of the respondents
Age No. of respondents Percentage
Under 18 years 4 10
18-30 years 27 67.5
31-65 years 7 17.5
Over 65 years 2 5
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
From the analysis of Table 2.1, the table shows that among 40 respondents,
highest number of respondents, i.e., 27 of them are between 18-30 years of age,
followed by 7 respondents within 31-65 age group.
Range of age among the respondents is under 18 to over 65 years of age.

2.2 Gender of the respondents

Table 2.2: Gender of the respondents
Gender No. of respondents Percentage
Male 16 40
Female 24 60
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
From the above Table 2.2, it can be seen that among the respondents accounted
for, 60% are female and the remaining 40% are male.

13 | P a g e
2.3 Annual Income of the respondents
Table 2.3: Annual Income of the respondents
Annual Income range No. of respondents Percentage
Below ₹ 1 lakh 18 45
₹ 1-₹ 3 lakhs 10 25
₹ 3-₹ 6 lakhs 5 12.5
Above ₹ 6 lakhs 7 17.5
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
From the analysis of Table 2.3, it shows that among the 40 respondents, highest
number of respondents, i.e., 18 of them earns annual income below ₹ 1 lakh,
followed by 10 respondents earning yearly income which ranges between ₹ 1 to
₹ 3 lakhs.
The range of annual income earned among the respondents is below ₹ 1 lakh
and above ₹ 6 lakhs.

2.4 Do you (or other members of your household) have access to the
markets?
Table 2.4: Access to the markets by the household members
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Always available 25 62.5
Partially/sometimes 14 35
available
Not available 0 0
Do not know 1 2.5
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
From Table 2.4, it is evident that most of the households in Lunglei have access
to the markets.

14 | P a g e
2.5 Are fresh food items (example: pulses, onion, vegetables, fruits)
currently available in the markets/stores?
Table 2.5: Availability of fresh food items in the markets/stores
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Always available 25 62.5
Partially/sometimes 15 37.5
available
Not available 0 0
Do not know 0 0
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
From the Table 2.5, the data shows that fresh food items mainly pulses, onion,
vegetables and fruits are always available in the nearby markets/stores in
Lunglei.

2.6 Are basic food items (example: rice, edible oils) currently available in
the markets/stores?
Table 2.6: Availability of basic food items in the markets/stores
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Always available 34 85
Partially/sometimes 5 12.5
available
Not available 0 0
Do not know 1 2.5
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
Table 2.6 shows that basic food items, for example, rice and edible oils are
always available in the markets/stores of Lunglei.

15 | P a g e
2.7 How often do you (or your household) buy and restock fresh food items
from the market/stores in a week?
Table 2.7: Frequency of buying and restocking fresh food items from the
markets/stores in a week
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Once a week 12 30
1-2 times a week 17 42.5
2-3 times a week 9 22.5
More than 3 times a 2 5
week
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
It is evident from Table 2.7 that fresh food items are frequently bought and
restocked by households since majority of the respondents, i.e., 17 (42.5%) of
them bought and restocked fresh food items 1-2 times a week from the
markets/stores.

2.8 How often do you (or your household) buy and restock basic food items
from the markets/stores in a week?
Table 2.8: Frequency of buying and restocking basic food items from the
markets/stores in a week
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Once a week 17 42.5
1-2 times a week 13 32.5
2-3 times a week 6 15
More than 3 times a 4 10
week
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
From the Table 2.8, it shows that basic food items are mainly bought and
restocked only once a week from the markets/stores by the households in
Lunglei.

16 | P a g e
2.9 Have there been any changes in the cost of fresh food items (example:
pulses, onions, vegetables, fruits) compared to the past years, specifically
before the COVID-19 pandemic?
Table 2.9: Have there been any changes in the cost of fresh food items when
compared before the pandemic?
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Fresh food prices have 38 95
increased
Fresh food prices have 1 2.5
decreased
No changes 1 2.5
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
The above Table 2.9 clearly shows that when the fresh food prices before the
COVID-19 pandemic are compared to the prices of today, it has increased. This
result is arrived at because among the 40 respondents, 38 of them, i.e., 95% of
the respondents agrees that the fresh food prices have increased.

2.10 Have there been any changes in the cost of basic food items (example:
rice, edible oils) compared to the past years, specifically before the COVID-
19 pandemic?
Table 2.10: Have there been any changes in the cost of basic food items when
compared before the pandemic?
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Basic food prices have 35 87.5
increased
Basic food prices have 1 2.5
decreased
No changes 4 10
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
From the Table 2.10, the data shows that majority of the respondents, i.e., 35 of
them have agreed on the price mark up of basic food items since the COVID-19
pandemic.

17 | P a g e
2.11 Have you or other member of the household changed your/their
shopping behaviour?
Table 2.11: Have you or other member of the household changed your/their
shopping behaviour?
Response No. of respondents Percentage
No changes 16 40
Buying larger quantities 5 12.5
than usual
Buying smaller 10 25
quantities than usual
Buying cheaper or less 9 22.5
preferred food items
than usual
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
The Table 2.11 clearly shows that the households in Lunglei have not make any
changes in their shopping behaviours of fresh food and basic food items.

2.12 What is the main source of income that your household currently
depend on?
Table 2.12: What is the main source of income that the household currently
depend on?
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Own small business/Income 15 37.5
generating activity
Informal work of one or more 4 10
household members
Temporary/wage work 3 7.5
Formal paid work of one or 5 12.5
more household members in
the private sector
Formal paid work of one or 12 30
more household members in
the public sector
Others (Retirement 1 2.5
allowance)
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
The Table 2.12 shows that among the 40 respondents, majority of them, i.e., 15
of them which accounted for 37.5% currently depends on owning a small
18 | P a g e
business or any other income generating activity as their main source of income.
They are followed by households whose main source of income is dependent on
a formal paid work under the public sector since the percentage of response
accounted for these group is 30%.

2.13 What sector does the main source of income belong to?
Table 2.13: What sector does the main source of income belong to?
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Agriculture 6 15
Formal paid work 20 50
Business 14 35
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
From the above Table 2.13, it is clearly evident that 20 out of the 40
respondents, i.e., the main source of income of 50% of the respondents belong
to the formal paid work sector, followed by the business sector.

2.14 How many household members currently earn income for the
household?
Table 2.14: How many household members currently earn income for the
household?
Response No. of respondents Percentage
One member 15 37.5
Two members 16 40
Three members 7 17.5
Four members 1 2.5
Five members 1 2.5
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
From the Table 2.14, we find that among the 40 respondents, 16 of them have 2
household members who contribute income for the household, followed by 15
of them having 1 member in their household who contributes income.

19 | P a g e
2.15 Have the sources of income/line of work of your household changed
since COVID-19 pandemic?
Table 2.15: Have the sources of income/line of work of your household changed
since COVID-19 pandemic?
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Yes 19 47.5
No 15 37.5
Do not know 5 12.5
Prefer not to answer 1 2.5
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
Table 2.15 shows that as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, majority of the
respondents, i.e., 19 of them (47.5%) have changed the sources of income/line
of work of their household.

2.16 Does your household have enough income to meet daily needs
particularly in terms of food items?
Table 2.16: Does your household have enough income to meet daily needs
particularly in terms of food items?
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Yes 31 77.5
No 4 10
Do not know 4 10
Prefer not to answer 1 2.5
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
From the above Table 2.16, it clearly shows that the households in Lunglei can
afford the daily requirements of food items since 31 respondents (77.5%) out of
40 respondents’ answers are affirmative.

20 | P a g e
2.17 Have you or your household been affected by the recent increase in
food prices?
Table 2.17: Have you or your household been affected by the recent increase in
food prices?
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Yes 28 70
No 7 17.5
Do not know 4 10
Prefer not to answer 1 2.5
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
The above Table 2.17 clearly shows majority of the households, i.e., 28
respondents (70%) have been affected by the recent increase in food prices as a
result of COVID-19 pandemic.

2.18 If you or your household has been affected by the recent increase in
food prices, please rate the severity level of the impact.
Table 2.18: Severity level of the impact of recent increase in food prices
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Somehow impacted 25 62.5
Moderately 9 22.5
Severely 4 10
The increase in prices has not 2 5
affected my household
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
From the Table 2.18, it is evident that the recent increase in food prices have
somehow impacted the households in Lunglei since majority of the respondents,
i.e., 62.5% of them have agreed to it.

21 | P a g e
2.19 How are you or your household coping with the impact of rise in food
prices since the COVID-19 pandemic?
Table 2.19: How are you or your household coping with the impact of rise in
food prices since the COVID-19 pandemic?
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Reduce the number of daily 19 47.5
needs
Reduce the amount of portions 2 5
during the meals
Purchasing less appreciated 15 37.5
products at lower price
Reduction of fresh food and 5 12.5
basic food consumption
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
Table 2.19 shows that among the 40 respondents, 19 of them (47.5%) have
reduced the number of daily needs as a coping mechanism against the impact of
rise in food prices.

2.20 From the beginning of COVID-19 pandemic until now, have you or
your household received any kind of help from the government or
humanitarian/social institutions?
Table 2.20: Have you or your household received any kind of help from the
government or humanitarian/social institutions?
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Yes 20 50
No 16 40
Do not know 4 10
Prefer not to answer 0 0
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
The above Table 2.20 shows that 20 out of the total 40 respondents, i.e., 20% of
them have received some kind of help or assistance from the government or
humanitarian/social institutions since the beginning of COVID-19 pandemic
until now.

22 | P a g e
2.21 What kind of assistance/help have you or your household received
from the government or humanitarian/social institutions?
Table 2.21: What kind of assistance/help have the households in Lunglei
received from the government or humanitarian/social institutions?
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Delivery of food basket and/or 27 67.5
basic supplies
Financial support for 10 25
fresh/basic food items in the
form of cash, bank income,
vouchers or similar supports
Financial/in-kind support for 0 0
reactivation of your business
No assistance/help 3 7.5
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
Table 2.21 clearly shows that majority of the respondents from Lunglei (67.5%)
has received food baskets containing food items as well as basic supplies from
the government or humanitarian/social institutions in order to cope with the
challenges faced during the COVID-19 pandemic.

2.22 Has the assistance received from the government or

humanitarian/social institutions been enough to meet your basic needs
relating to food?
Table 2.22: Has the assistance/help received been enough to meet basic needs
relating to food?
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Yes 14 35
No 14 35
Partially 12 30
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
Table 2.22 reveals that the assistance/help from the government or
humanitarian/social institutions has been enough and not enough equally since
equal number of affirmative and negative responses, i.e., 14 each (35%) has
been received in regards to the question.

23 | P a g e
2.23 Do you or your household expect the prices of fresh food items and
basic food items to increase in the future?
Table 2.23: Do the households in Lunglei expect the prices of fresh food items
and basic food items to increase in future?
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Yes 30 75
No 6 15
Partially 4 10
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
From the Table 2.23, it can be clearly observed that majority of the respondents,
i.e., 30 respondents (75%) expects the prices of food items, particularly fresh
food and basic food items to increase in the coming future.

2.24 If the food prices does continue to rise, do you or your household have
any strategy to cope with the difficulties that might come along with it?
Table 2.24: Do the households have any strategy to cope with the difficulties
that might come along with if the food prices continue to rise in Lunglei?
Response No. of respondents Percentage
Yes 19 47.5
No 6 15
Partially 15 37.5
Total 40 100
Source: Primary Data
It is clearly observable from Table 2.24 that majority of the respondents from
Lunglei, i.e., 47.5 % of them does have some strategy to cope with the
difficulties involved in case the prices of food items continue to rise in the
markets/stores.

24 | P a g e
 CHAPTER 3
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
General findings of the present study are summarised as under:
 The respondents’ ages vary to a great extent. Respondents are in the age
range of ‘Under 18 years’ to ‘Above 65 years’. The majority of them are
within the age range of 18-30 years old.
 Percentage of female respondents is 60 and that of male respondents is
40.
 Majority of the respondents (45%) earn an annual income below ₹ 1 lakh.
The annual income earned by the respondents range between ‘Below ₹ 1
lakh’ and ‘Above ₹ 6 lakhs’.
 Most of the markets/stores are easily accessible by the households in
Lunglei.
 Fresh food items mainly pulses, onions, vegetables and fruits are always
available in the markets/stores as of now.
 Basic food items mainly rice and edible oils are always available in the
markets/stores of Lunglei as well.
 The households in Lunglei frequently buy and restock fresh food items in
a week since 42.5% of the respondents claim that they buy and retock
fresh food items 1-2 times a week.
 On the other hand, basic food items are bought and restocked by the
households only once a week.
 95% of the respondents agree that the prices of fresh food items
increased, specifically when compared to the price before the COVID-19
pandemic.
 Most of the respondents (87.5%) agree that the basic food prices have
increased drastically with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic as well.
 Despite the rise in food prices, majority of the households (40%) have
not changed their shopping behaviours.
 The households in Lunglei mainly depend on their own income
generating activities as the main source of income or by running small
businesses, followed by those in the formal paid work under the public
sector.

25 | P a g e
 Most of the respondents (47.5%) have not changed their income sources
or line of work since the COVID-19 pandemic.
 In terms of requirements of food items, 77.5% of the respondents can
meet their daily needs.
 Regardless of having enough income to meet their daily requirements of
food items, 70% of the households have been somehow affected (62.5%)
by the recent increase in food prices.
 In order to cope with the challenges arising out of rise in food prices,
47.5% of the respondents have reduces their daily needs/requirements of
food items.
 50% of the households have received some kind of help mainly receiving
food baskets or basic supplies (67.5%) from the government or
humanitarian/social institutions.
 However, the assistance/help from the government or humanitarian/social
institutions have been partly enough and partly not enough (35% each) to
meet the basic needs relating to food items.
 Majority of the households within Lunglei (75%) expects the prices of
fresh food items and basic food items to increase in the near future.
 In regards to this problem that can arise, 47.5% of the respondents claim
that they will be able to cope with the difficulties that may arise out of
price rise while 15% do not have any strategy to cope with it. 37.5% of
households in Lunglei believe that they can partially cope with the
expected rise in price of food items.

26 | P a g e
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

 Planning & Programme Implementation Department (May, 2020),

Study on COVID-19 lockdown and its consequences for the state of
Mizoram (Policy Response – Recommendation &Advisory).
 Valentina Stoevska, ILO, Department of Statistics (December, 2020),
COVID-19 is driving up food prices all over the world.
 RBI Bulletin (August, 2021), COVID-19 Impact on Food Price Mark-ups
in India.
 Ashok K. Mishra, Khondoker A. Mottaleb (March 3, 2022), Impacts of
the COVID-19 pandemic on food prices: Evidence from storable and
perishable commodities in India.
 Jayson L. Lusk, Purdue University (November, 2021),What is driving
the increase in food prices?
 Pradyot Ranjan Jena, Rajesh Kalli and Purna Chandra Tanti (July, 2021),
Impact of Covid-19 on Agricultural System and Food Prices: The Case of
India.
 AG Adeeth Carriapa, Kamlesh Kumar Acharya, Chaitanya Ashok Adhav,
R Sendhil, P Ramasundaram (January, 2021), Impact of COVID-19 on
the Indian agricultural system: A 10-point strategy for post-pandemic
recovery.
 Jianqing Ruan, Qingwen Cai and Songqing Jin (March, 2021), Impact of
COVID‐19 and Nationwide Lockdowns on Vegetable Prices: Evidence
from Wholesale Markets in China.
 Rob Vos, Joseph Glauber, Manuel Hernandez and David Laborde, IFPRI
(February, 2022), COVID-19 and rising global food prices: What’s really
happening?

27 | P a g e
 Dave Mead, Karen Ransom, Stephen B. Reed and Scott Sager, US
Bureau of Labour Statistics (August, 2020), The impact of the COVID-19
pandemic on food price indexes and data collection.

28 | P a g e