This study examines the differences between two major Mid-day Meal implementation models: the decentralized model where food is cooked and served within the schools premises, and the centralized model where an external organization, often through a public-private partnership, cooks and delivers the meal to schools. Since both programmes engender enthusiasm amongst activists, scholars and policy makers, this research aims to understand the similarities and differences between them in terms of fostering social equity, building community participation, increasing transparency and accountability, providing adequate quality and quantity of food to children, and serving as a source of employment for women or lower caste individuals. The researchers observed nine schools and three centralized kitchens in New Delhi, where the centralized model operates; and nine schools in Ahmedabad, Gujarat, where the decentralized model operates, the food being cooked in kitchens within each school’s premises. In both Delhi and Gujarat, the researchers interviewed over 100 people involved in the cooking, delivery, distribution, overseeing, and consuming of the Mid-day Meal. This study finds that most cities are moving towards centralization, which has drawbacks in terms of employment of women, food spoilage, community participation, and transparency. On the other hand, decentralized programmes have drawbacks in terms of infrequent monitoring, corruption, and hygiene issues. The pros and cons of each model require continued study to reexamine the urban trend towards centralization.
