Required citation:
Flores Rojas, M., Houmy, K., Fawole, O., eds. Post-harvest management: bridging gaps and embracing innovations. Rome, FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/cd1185en

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned.

ISBN 978-92-5-139349-9
© FAO, 2024

Some rights reserved. This work is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO licence (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO; https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/igo/legalcode).

Under the terms of this licence, this work may be copied, redistributed and adapted for non-commercial purposes, provided that the work is appropriately cited. In any use of this work, there should be no suggestion that FAO endorses any specific organization, products or services. The use of the FAO logo is not permitted. If the work is adapted, then it must be licensed under the same or equivalent Creative Commons licence. If a translation of this work is created, it must include the following disclaimer along with the required citation: “This translation was not created by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). FAO is not responsible for the content or accuracy of this translation. The original [Language] edition shall be the authoritative edition.”

Disputes arising under the licence that cannot be settled amicably will be resolved by mediation and arbitration as described in Article 8 of the licence except as otherwise provided herein. The applicable mediation rules will be the mediation rules of the World Intellectual Property Organization http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/mediation/rules and any arbitration will be conducted in accordance with the Arbitration Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL).

Third-party materials. Users wishing to reuse material from this work that is attributed to a third party, such as tables, figures or images, are responsible for determining whether permission is needed for that reuse and for obtaining permission from the copyright holder. The risk of claims resulting from infringement of any third-party-owned component in the work rests solely with the user.

Sales, rights and licensing. FAO information products are available on the FAO website (www.fao.org/publications) and can be purchased through publications-sales@fao.org. Requests for commercial use should be submitted via: www.fao.org/contact-us/licence-request. Queries regarding rights and licensing should be submitted to: copyright@fao.org.

Cover photograph: © FAO/Belty Lokossa

Contents

Acknowledgements

Methodology

Abbreviations

Glossary

CHAPTER 1.

Introduction to post-harvest challenges and innovations

CASE STUDIES

Green Innovation Centres

CHAPTER 2.

Minimizing post-harvest losses: gaps in post-harvest intervention

CHAPTER 3.

The role of different stakeholders in developing solutions to reduce post-harvest losses

CHAPTER 4.

Gender dynamics in post-harvest management: roles and empowerment opportunities

CHAPTER 5.

Agribusiness and entrepreneurship: perspectives on post-harvest loss production

CHAPTER 6.

Climate change adaptation for post-harvest management

CHAPTER 7.

The way forward: recommendations for further actions

Figures

Chapter 1

Figure 1.1

Locally manufactured cassava grater owned by a women’s cooperative in Benin

Figure 1.2

Soybean mill (top), manual press, and fresh soybean cheese prepared by a women’s cooperative in Benin (bottom)

Case study 1

Figure A1.1

Traditional cassava grating (left) and pressing (right)

Figure A1.2

Mobile cassava grinder (left) and improved cassava press (right)

Case study 2

Figure A2.1

Potato storage in Mali with solar ventilation system

Case study 3

Figure A3.1

Use of multifunctional thresher for maize threshing by young post-harvest service providers

Case study 4

Figure A4.1

Woman using solar dryer

Figure A4.2

Sustainable business model promoted for tomato value chain

Chapter 2

Figure 2.1

Example of a small-scale maize harvester developed in Benin

Chapter 3

Figure 3.1

Mechanized rice threshing immediately after the harvest. The use of the tarpaulin under the thresher allows the recovery of grains that drop to the soil

Figure 3.2

Low efficiency parboiling rice with cast iron drums fueled by firewood (left) Big GEM parboiling with vessels and brick stoves installed on cemented surface (centre) Mini-GEM parboiling system records low energy cost by using rice husk as fuel (right)

Figure 3.3

Engelberg type mills fabricated locally (left) and improved operation using rubber roll mills (right)

Figure 3.4

Women are adding value to rice by using a rice destoning machine (left) final product of rice packed to sale in urban markets in Côte d’Ivoire (right)

Figure 3.5

Rice drying using woven fiver bags place on the ground (left) improved rice drying using tarpaulin placed on raise cemented and enclosed surfaces (right)

Figure 3.6

Cereal storage using non-hermetic bags in open air, which can lead to losses (left) improved practice by using hermetic storage under roof (right)

Chapter 4

Figure 4.1

GEM kit demonstration from GIC Mali

Figure 4.2

Women-led service provision in mechanization in Nepal

Figure 4.3

Woman from a cassava cooperative using an improved manual press in Benin

Chapter 5

Figure 5.1

Agribusiness owned by women adds value to cassava by processing, packing and branding gari in Benin

Figure 5.2

Example of points to consider in the establishment of a service provider business model for rice threshing

Figure 5.3

Agribusiness owned by a young entrepreneur on mechanization hire service in Côte d’Ivoire has created rural jobs for youth

Chapter 6

Figure 6.1

Correlation between climate, post-harvest management and losses

Figure 6.2

When farmers access information and communication tools (ICT) and early warning systems farmers can increase crop resilience

Boxes

Chapter 2

Box 2.1

Leasing schemes in Zambia: accessing credit with small collateral

Chapter 4

Box 4.1

The GEM Rice Parboiler: an example mechanization solution adapted to women’s needs

Box 4.2

Locally manufactured cassava grinder and press

Box 4.3

Private sector role in manufacturing of gender-sensitive equipment: lessons learned from Rohit Krishi Industries

Box 4.4

Gender and food loss in sustainable food value chains

Box 4.5

The GRAST tool: assessing the gender sensitivity of service providers

Box 4.6

Gender transformative learning by doing and community engagement methodologies

Chapter 5

Box 5.1

Women and Youth in agribusiness in Africa

Acknowledgements

©FAO/Belty Lokossa

This FAO publication is the result of a collaborative effort involving dedicated development partners who have generously contributed to the success of the mechanization working group of the Green Innovation Centres for the agriculture and food sector (GICAFS). We extend our sincere appreciation to the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) for their invaluable financial support, making this initiative possible.

Mayling Flores Rojas from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) provided the over-all technical vision and leadership for the collaboration of this publication. Joseph Mpagalile (FAO) contributed by proposing its structure and connecting with various authors for its preparation. Mayling Flores Rojas together with Karim Houmy (FAO) and Prof. Olaniyi Fawole conducted a detailed and extensive technical review and editing of each chapter and case study included in this work.

We would like to express our gratitude to Josef Kienzle (FAO) for his trust, encouragement and support throughout the development of this publication.

The authors of the chapters deserve special mention for their outstanding contributions. We extend our thanks to Sylvanus Odjo from the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Heike Ostermann from GIZ Germany, Sali Atanga Ndindeng from the Rice Sector Development Programme, Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice), Flavia Grassi and Maurizio Furst from FAO; Prof Jeremia Makindara from the Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA); Sebastian Romuli and Joachim Müller from the University of Hohenheim; Rabe Yahaya from CIMMYT and Joseph Mpagalile (FAO).

We express our sincere gratitude to the authors of the case studies, including Alex Kouasi from GIZ in Côte d’Ivoire; Daouda Sanogo from GIZ in Burkina Faso; Albert Barro, from “Centre Régional de Recherches Environnementales et Agricoles” in Burkina Faso; Sylvanus Odjo CIMMYT in Mexico; Sashi Kumar from GIZ in India; and Yaya Ballo and Jeroen Roovers from GIZ in Mali.

Our thanks to Lucia Albanese for editing and proofreading this publication, and to Lucia Fabiani for the design and layout.

This collaboration showcases the power of partnerships and collective dedication to advancing sustainable agriculture and food systems.

Methodology

This publication was created by assembling a team of experts in post-harvest and mechanization from various organizations and institutions (refer to the list below). The initial phase involved proposing chapter titles, outlining their content, and assigning these chapters based on the specialized knowledge of the team members. The team collaborated through numerous virtual meetings to ensure a comprehensive and well-informed approach. Subsequently, the methodology employed for crafting each chapter centred around a desk review, utilizing existing literature, research, and insights pertinent to the respective topics. This approach ensured a thorough exploration of the subject matter, drawing upon the wealth of knowledge within the expert team.

To enhance the rigor and quality of the publication, three reviewers were selected to provide invaluable feedback and insights. Their expertise and critical perspectives contributed to refining the content, ensuring its accuracy, coherence, and relevance. This robust review process aimed to elevate the overall quality and credibility of the publication, reflecting a commitment to delivering a valuable and authoritative resource.

Technical reviewers and editors

Mayling Flores Rojas, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Rome, Italy

Karim Houmy, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Rome, Italy

Prof. Olaniyi Fawole, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa

Chapters and case studies contributors

CHAPTER 1

Introduction to post-harvest challenges and innovations
Joseph Mpagalile, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Rome, Italy
Sylvanus Odjo, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Texcoco, Mexico

CHAPTER 2

Minimizing post-harvest losses: gaps in post-harvest intervention
Sylvanus Odjo, CIMMYT, Texcoco, Mexico, C.P. 56237
Heike Ostermann, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), Bonn, Germany

CHAPTER 3

The role of different players in developing solutions to reduce post-harvest losses
Sali Atanga Ndindeng, Rice Sector Development Programme, Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice), M’be Research Station, BP 2551 Bouake, Côte d’Ivoire
Joseph Mpagalile, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Rome, Italy

CHAPTER 4

Gender dynamics in post-harvest management: roles and empowerment opportunities
Flavia Grassi and Maurizio Furst, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Rome, Italy

CHAPTER 5

Agribusiness and entrepreneurship: perspectives on post-harvest loss reduction
Prof. Jeremia Makindara, Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA), Morogoro, the United Republic of Tanzania

CHAPTER 6

Climate change adaptation for post-harvest management
Sebastian Romuli and Joachim Müller, Institute of Agricultural Engineering, Tropics and Subtropics Group, University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany
Sali Atanga Ndindeng, Rice Sector Development Programme, AfricaRice, M’be Research Station, Bouake, Côte d’Ivoire
Rabe Yahaya, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

CHAPTER 7

The way forward: recommendations for further actions
Karim Houmy, Joseph Mpagalile and Mayling Flores Rojas, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Rome, Italy
Sylvanus Odjo, CIMMYT, Texcoco, Mexico

Case study 1

Improving cassava processing: a success story of presses and mobile grinders in Côte d’Ivoire
Alex Kouasi, GIZ, Côte d’Ivoire

Case study 2

Reduction of post-harvest losses of potatoes in Mali: example of storage facility with solar ventilation system
Yaya Ballo and Jeroen Roovers, GIZ , Bamako, Mali

Case study 3

Post-harvest service provider business model: using a multifunctional thresher to minimize losses in Burkina Faso’s rice value chain
Daouda Sanogo, GIZ , Burkina Faso
Albert Barro, Centre Régional de Recherches Environnementales et Agricoles du Centre-Station de Saria B.P., Burkina Faso
Sylvanus Odjo, CIMMYT, Mexico

Case study 4

Solar dryer for post-harvest management of tomatoes in India
Sashi Kumar, GIZ , Karnataka, India

About the publication

This publication is a collaborative effort of development partners who have collectively contributed to the mechanization working group of the GIZ programme Green Innovation Centres for the agriculture and food sector (GICAFS), made possible through the financial support of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development. Experts from FAO, GIZ, CIMMYT, AfricaRice and Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA) collaborated to compile the major challenges, solutions, technologies and approaches in the field of post-harvest management for post-harvest loss reduction, as well as value addition for job and income creation.

This publication contributes to ongoing initiatives aimed at reducing post-harvest loss (PHL) through capacity development and knowledge sharing. It aims to enhance understanding of the gaps in post-harvest management and how to address them. The publication highlights the importance of reducing post-harvest losses (PHL) in developing countries by integrating gender perspectives, providing support to agribusiness and entrepreneurship, and promoting climate change adaptation. Additionally, the publication provides recommendations for further actions.

It targets practitioners, including extension staff, non-governmental organization (NGO), community-based organizations (CBOs), and academic institutions involved in providing technical support to farmers and policymakers, particularly those engaged in gender and climate change issues. Furthermore, the publication will benefit, guide, and inspire current and future FAO field projects that incorporate a post-harvest component.

Abbreviations

CHC

custom hiring centres

CIMMYT

International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center

CLP

critical loss points

FAO

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

FFS

Farmer Field School

F-SAMA

framework for Sustainable Agricultural Mechanization

GDP

gross domestic product

GEM

grain quality enhancer, energy-efficient and durable material

GHG

greenhouse gas emissions

GIC

Green Innovation Centre

GIZ

The Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit

GICAFS

Green Innovation Centres for the agriculture and food sector

GRAST

gender and rural advisory services assessment tool

IoT

Internet of Things

LLP

low loss points

PHL

post-harvest loss

PHM

post-harvest management

SDGs

Sustainable Development Goals

SSA

sub-Saharan Africa

Glossary

Agribusiness is a term used to describe all commercial activities related to the production, processing, and distribution of agricultural products, encompassing farming operations, food processing, marketing and related services within the agricultural supply chain.

Agricultural resources include natural elements such as water and land; technologies such as seeds, and equipment; and rural infrastructure such as on-farm buildings, storage, and processing facilities for agricultural, livestock, and food production (DEC, 2023). In addition, vital resources for agricultural production include fertile and suitable soils for agricultural production systems and adequate water from rainfed or irrigation sources.

Bio-functionality refers to the specific functions or activities exhibited by biological entities, such as molecules, cells, or organisms, often within the context of biology, biochemistry, or biotechnology.
Bookkeeping is the systematic process of recording, organizing, and maintaining financial transactions and information accurately and systematically. It involves keeping track of all financial activities and transactions, including purchases, sales, receipts, and payments. Bookkeeping is an essential part of the accounting process and provides the foundation for financial reporting, analysis, and decision-making. In addition, it helps businesses to monitor their financial performance, track expenses and revenue, and ensure compliance with tax laws and regulations (Olukotun et al., 2012).

Business models are a conceptual framework that outlines how an organization creates, delivers, and captures value, detailing the key aspects of its strategy, operations, and revenue generation (Olofsson and Farr, 2006).

Costs for a business are the expenses to produce goods, provide services or both. It refers to the monetary value of all the resources needed to run a business including labour, materials, equipment, and overheads. There are different categories, including direct costs, indirect costs, fixed costs, and variable costs. Understanding and managing costs is essential for businesses to operate efficiently and maximize profit (Olukotun et al., 2012).

Critical loss points (CLPs) are the points in the food supply chain where food losses have the highest magnitude, the highest impact on food security, and the highest effect on the economic result of the food supply chain (FAO, 2014).

Custom hiring centres provide mechanization services for a fee to customers. These centres are owned by individuals, NGOs or groups and can be formally registered as businesses (FAO, 2021).

Enterprises refers to organizations or businesses engaged in commercial or industrial activities to make a profit. They can be either private or public and sizes range from small businesses to large multinational corporations. Enterprises can be classified into different types based on ownership, such as sole proprietorships, partnerships, corporations, and cooperatives. Enterprises may also specialize in different industries, including manufacturing, retail, services, and agriculture. They typically involve various functions, such as production, marketing, finance, and management, which are carried out by a team of employees. Enterprises play a significant role in the economy by generating income, creating jobs, and contributing to economic growth and development (Mendoza, 2015; Olukotun et al., 2012).

Entrepreneurship refers to the ability and readiness to develop, organize and manage a business enterprise, along with any of its uncertainties with the aim of generating profit. The most prominent example of entrepreneurship is the starting of new businesses.

Gender equality is a state in which women and men enjoy equal rights, opportunities, and entitlements in civil and political life (FAO, 2021).

Gender dynamics encompass the interactions, roles, and relationships among individuals of various genders within a specific social, cultural, or organizational context. This concept often includes power dynamics, expectations, and societal norms related to gender (Faridul, 2020).

Gender-transformative approaches examine, question, and change gender social norms, attitudes, behaviours and social systems that reinforce inequalities. These approaches are designed to transform gender roles, power dynamics, and the mindsets of individuals, from an organization’s staff to household members, communities and stakeholders in the market and state (FAO, 2021).

Humidity refers to the amount of water vapour in the air.

Labour-saving technologies and practices address specific labour constraints and can reduce the time and effort needed to carry out specific tasks. Labour-saving technologies and related services can contribute to freeing up women’s time and improving their quality of life, enabling them to engage in activities of their own choice (FAO, 2019a; FAO and CARE, 2019).

Low Loss Points are segments along the value chain where losses are not significant, and these segments are not crucial for targeting loss reduction interventions. However, they offer essential insights into reducing losses in other segments of the value chain (FAO, 2014).

Post-harvest handling refers to the various activities and practices involved in the care, processing, and transportation of agricultural products from the point of harvest to the end consumer. This includes sorting, cleaning, packing, storage, and transportation, with the goal of preserving product quality and minimizing losses.

Post-harvest loss is the reduction of quality and/or quantity of food production during harvest, post-harvest management and transport. It can result from natural causes, such as microbial attack, enzymatic action, and chemical degradation, or from human factors, such as poor harvesting, storage, transportation, and marketing practices. Post-harvest food loss can affect the nutrient/caloric composition, acceptability, and edibility of a given product.

Post-harvest management includes planning, implementing, and coordinating activities to maintain the quality, safety, and market value of agricultural products after harvest. This encompasses handling, storage, processing, and distribution practices.

Profit refers to the financial gain or benefits a business or individual earns from their commercial or investment activities. It is the difference between the total revenue generated from the sale of goods or services and the total costs incurred in producing or delivering them. Profit is usually expressed as a monetary value or percentage of the revenue. A business or individual earns a profit when revenue exceeds the costs incurred in producing or delivering goods or services. Profit is an essential indicator of the financial performance of a business, and it is a critical factor in determining its ability to grow and sustain itself over time. It is also essential for investors, who look at a company’s profitability when making investment decisions (Mendoza, 2015; Olukotun et al., 2012).

Qualitative food loss refers to the deterioration of the nutritional value, acceptability or edibility of a food product (Kiaya, 2014).

Quantitative food loss “is a loss in terms of physical substance, meaning a reduction in weight and volume that can be assessed and measured” (Grolleaud,. 2002).

Value chain is a concept that covers all operations to bring a product to the final market destination, starting from the input-supply stage, production, and post-harvest management, including processing, transport, etc. (UNIDO, 2015).

Women’s empowerment refers to women’s increased control over their lives through economic advancement and enhanced power and agency (FAO, 2021).

Women’s work burden and time poverty refers to the excessive drudgery experienced by many rural women due to the unequal gender division of labour. This division assigns them multiple roles including productive, reproductive and community management responsibilities, often confining them to labour-intensive manual work. Consequently, they face time poverty, a scarcity of time to dedicate to other activities (Sommacal and Hani, 2023).

Glossary references

Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). 2023. Question 8 - Impact on Agricultural Resources - Full EAF (Part 2). Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF) Workbook. New York State, Department of Environmental Conservation. Site accessed January 2023. www.dec.ny.gov

Faridul, H.S.M.Choudhury Afrina, C., Adam Rahma, A., McDougall Cynthi, M. 2020. Rapid assessment on gender dynamics: Barriers, opportunities and risks in aquaculture and agriculture sector in northwest Bangladesh. Scoping study technical report. BILL MELINDA GATES foundation, CGIAR. https://digitalarchive.worldfishcenter.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12348/4420/8862496fa81bf7e0e80ce7e912f447bd.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y

FAO and CARE. 2019. Good Practices for Integrating Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment in Climate-Smart Agriculture Programmes. Atlanta. http://www.fao.org/3/ca3883en/ca3883en.pdf

FAO, 2014. Food Loss Analysis: Causes and Solutions: Case studies in the Small-scale Agriculture and Fisheries Subsectors. Methodology. https://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/food-loss-reduction/Methodology_-_Food_Loss_Analysis_-_Causes_and_Solutions_Aug2014.pdf

FAO. 2019. Fostering the uptake of labour-saving technologies and practices. How to develop effective strategies to benefit rural women. Rome. www.fao.org/3/CA2731EN/ca2731en.pdf

FAO. 2021. Review of and recommendations for Custom Hiring Centers for mechanization in Nepal and the Asian region. Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb7964en

Grolleaud, M. 2002. Post-Harvest Losses: Discovering the Full Story. Overview of the Phenomenon of Losses during the Post-Harvest System. FAO Rome

Kiaya, V. 2014. Post-Harvest Losses and Strategies to Reduce them. Technical paper. Scientific & Technical Department. ACF https://www.actioncontrelafaim.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/technical_paper_phl.pdf

Mendoza, R. R. 2015. Financial Performance of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMES) in The Philippines. International Journal of Business and Finance Research. Vol. 9, No. 4, 2015, pp. 67-80

Olofsson, L., Farr, R. 2006. Business model tools and definition a literature review. VIVCE. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272813909_Business_Model_Tools_and_Definition_-_a_Literature_Review

Olukotun, A.G; James, S.O & Olore, I. 2012. The Roles of Record Keeping In the Survival and Growth of Small Scale Enterprises in Ijumu Local Government Area of Kogi State. Global Journal of Management and Business Research.12(13).

Sommacal, V. and Hani, M. 2023. Promoting gender-sensitive farm business schools-A companion guide. Rome, FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc5015en

UNIDO. 2015. Global Value Chains and Development. UNIDO’s Support towards Inclusive and Sustainable Industrial Development. https://www.unido.org/sites/default/files/2016-03/GVC_REPORT_FINAL_0.PDF

CHAPTER 1.
Introduction to post-harvest challenges and innovation

©FAO/Belty Lokossa

Abstract

Approximately 14 percent of the food produced globally is lost during post-harvest stages before reaching retail stage (FAO, 2019a). Post-harvest losses (PHL) pose significant challenges for farmers in developing regions, particularly sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Food losses in SSA occur across a wide spectrum, including up to 50 percent of fruit and vegetables and 10 to 20 percent for grains and pulses (FAO, 2019a). In light of this, it is imperative to enhance efforts to reduce PHL, particularly among small-scale farmers. This urgency is driven by the need to bolster food availability and optimize resource utilization. Smallholder farmers, constituting the majority of farms, bear the greatest impact of PHL, underscoring the critical importance of targeted intervention. Developing smallholder agriculture through PHL mitigation can effectively reduce poverty and hunger in low-income countries. Experience has demonstrated that the causes of PHL are multifaceted and vary across different types of value chains. However, common contributing factors include insufficient investments to facilitate the adoption of improved technologies, inadequate post-harvest management practices and institutional weaknesses. Additionally, in SSA, there is a lack of well-developed mechanization hire services for post-harvest operations. This publication consists of seven chapters with primary focus on mitigating PHL in developing regions. It covers various produce such as roots and tubers, grains, fruits, and vegetables. The inclusion of case studies from the Green Innovation Centres (GIC) for the agriculture and food sector aims to showcase various innovations and their impact on post-harvest loss education, increased income and job creation. Additionally, this publication explores the role of gender in efforts to reduce loss, agribusiness and entrepreneurship, and climate change management in post-harvest and provides recommendations for further action.

Keywords:

Post-harvest, post-harvest losses, gender, agribusiness, innovation, mechanization, smallholder

Unveiling the impact of post-harvest losses: A comprehensive look at the situation in sub-Saharan Africa

Food and nutrition insecurity persist as some of the most daunting challenges facing sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) countries, contributing to the depletion of natural resources. Over the years, there has been significant prevalence of post-harvest losses (PHL), exacerbating the challenges of low agricultural productivity and food security. FAO (2012) highlighted that PHL are highest in developing countries primarily due to limited access to and use of improved technologies, poor post-harvest management and institutional challenges. An additional emerging contributing factor is climate change (refer to chapter 6 for more details. Challenges in post-harvest handling, combined with other production obstacles like poor soil fertility and seed quality, as well as diseases and pests such as fall army worms (FAW), have left farmers grappling with the urgent need to sustain, increase and enhance crop productivity.

According to the State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World Report released in 2022 (FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP & WHO, 2022, p. xiv), “Around 2.3 billion people in the world were moderately or severely food insecure in 2021, or nearly 30 percent of the global population”. Many factors contribute to this situation, including low crop productivity and high PHL, especially at the small-scale farmers’ level.

The State of Food and Agriculture (SOFA) report released by FAO (2019a) revealed that around 14 percent of food produced globally is lost during post-harvest stages before reaching retail level. Furthermore, the report highlighted a wide spectrum of food losses occurring in on-farm post-harvest operations in SSA, reaching up to 50 percent for fruit and vegetables and approximately 17 percent for cereals and pulses. Losses during storage of cereals and pulses range up to 22 percent, and for fruit and vegetables up to 35 percent (FAO, 2019a). In a previous report produced by FAO in 2011, it was estimated that if all value chain stages up to consumption are considered, approximately one-third of all human food produced yearly is wasted or lost. On average, this amounts to around 1.3 billion tonnes of food, valued at nearly USD 1 trillion (FAO 2016 and 2019a), a figure that is unacceptable. In another report published by the World Bank and FAO (2011), the value of grain PHL in SSA was estimated at USD 4 billion per year. This is substantial amount underscores the urgent need for action to reduce PHL.

In many SSA countries, PHL is influenced by various factors dependent on the specific value chain. Overall, these causes are linked to complex issues that hinder farmers’ access to improved post-harvest management practices, innovations, and essential technologies, including equipment, machinery, and technical and business skills. The lack of these resources contributes significantly to elevated post-harvest losses as farmers are forced to resort to age old tools and practices. Many farmers in SSA countries lack skills on proper post-harvest handling. Additionally, adverse weather conditions have forced farmers in some cases to harvest crops such as grains with a high moisture content. Consequently, subjecting these harvests to threshing, results in increased damage, such as breakages. Moreover, the absence of technology to measure moisture content and facilitate proper drying of crops before storage results in crops entering storage structures with elevated moisture levels. This contributes to high PHL, especially through fungal growth during storage.

The use of inappropriate storage materials, facilities and conditions also contributes to losses due to pest infestation. In areas with underground storage of grains, such as Ethiopia, farmers face PHL due to mould growth when the ground becomes wet, and the storage pits dampen. Fluctuations in market prices can also lead to post-harvest losses for farmers. In summary, PHL at the smallholder level are primarily a result of a combination of internal and external factors.

Addressing this situation is imperative, particularly as SSA is experiencing high population growth, which is estimated to reach 1.5 to 2 billion by 2050 (FAO, 2019a), leading to an increase demand for food. Substantially reducing PHL is crucial for improving food security and creating income opportunities for smallholder families. This is aligned with the African Union (AU) target to reduce food losses by 50 percent by 2025 in Africa, as stated in the Malabo Declaration (AUC, 2014). Solutions for smallholders that could help reduce PHL in SSA and, at the same time increase market access and opportunities, involves improvement in post-harvest handling practices as well as improved access to technology. Addressing this issue requires collaborative initiatives to support farmers and other stakeholders along the food value chain, promoting improved post-harvest management practices, and mitigating PHL. Improved post-harvest management has the potential to generate employment opportunities in rural areas and increase incomes while tackling PHL problems/challenges. According to Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ, 2013), experts agree that investing in reducing PHL is one of the critical interventions for enhancing food security. However, successful implementation requires the careful planning and dedicated commitment of inclusive actions.

Understanding post-harvest loss challenges in sub-Saharan Africa’s smallholder farming

According to FAO and IFAD (2020), there are around 33 million smallholder farms in SSA, constituting 80 percent of all farms in the region (FAO, 2012 and FAO, 2017). These smallholder farms contribute up to 90 percent of food production in certain SSA countries. Wiggins and Keats (2013) indicated that developing smallholder agriculture can effectively alleviate poverty and hunger in low-income countries. However, this achievement hinges on more than just enhancing smallholder productivity; concerted efforts must be directed towards reducing the PHL experienced by smallholder farmers through improved post-harvest management.

It is essential to ensure that food produced by smallholders is not lost during post-harvest handling, marketing, and trading stages. This is particularly important for perishable crops such as fruit and vegetables, which are prone to rapid deterioration under warm tropical conditions (FAO and CIRAD, 2021). Unfortunately, the lack of improved post-harvest management and equipment under smallholders’ conditions continues to contribute to high PHL for fruits, vegetables, roots, tubers, and grains.

Studies conducted by FAO (2019a and 2019b) confirm that most crop losses occur during harvesting and post-harvest handling stages. For grains such as maize and beans, insect infestation and mould growth are notable contributors to loss. This is mainly due to storing grains with high moisture content or using damp structures for storage, particularly underground storage. In the case of other crops such as fruits, vegetables, roots, tubers, and grains, farmers face many challenges. These challenges include the use of inadequate or inappropriate harvesting equipment as well as the use of inappropriate field containers such as sacks and buckets. In addition, damage is caused by abrasion, vibration and impact as the crop moves along the food value chain from harvest to final use. Moreover, failure to implement maturity indices for selected crops results in significant losses from harvesting both immature and over-mature fruits. Pest and disease attacks during production as well as during post-harvest stages continue to cause high losses among smallholders. Another challenge arises from the weather, including rain during harvesting (Kiaya, 2014) and poor temperature management between harvesting and consumption or export. Farmers tend to harvest crops, including perishables, even during hot days throughout the year, resulting in prolonged exposure of commodities to significant field heat. Other heat-related post-harvest challenges include using bags to transport harvested perishable produce, storing commodities in open areas and storing commodities in storage areas where temperatures exceed ambient conditions. Improper infrastructure for post-harvest handling, including storage at farm level, tends to lead to high losses.

Small-scale farmers face many challenges regarding post-harvest handling because of the nature and scale of their operations. For example, most smallholder farmers in SSA have relatively small farms, relying on both food production for sustenance and surplus for income generation. The quantity of food produced by smallholder farmers is relative to their land size and is usually not large in quantity. Therefore, any amount of food lost during post-harvest handling significantly affects their livelihoods.

While various technologies such as cassava graters, chipping machines, maize threshers, and others have been developed focusing on smallholder farmers, the promotion of these technologies must be context specific by considering the local conditions. It is also important to assess the availability of institutional support when selecting the right technology at the right scale for smallholder farmers. Many technologies have been introduced to the smallholders and their success is dependent on their suitability and appropriateness to the specific needs of farmers in the targeted areas. Support services are critical to ensure sustainability. This includes local repair shops, availability of spare parts and skilful mechanics who can maintain and repair the machines. Similarly, skilful operators are essential to ensure the efficient and safe use of the machinery and equipment.

Despite farmers in SSA countries registering high PHL over the years, this problem has not received the attention it deserves. Instead, efforts continue to be directed towards increasing productivity or expanding the land under crop production to increase crop yield (Baudron et al., 2021). Efforts by extension officers and others supporting farmers are generally only directed towards increasing crop productivity to compensate for the lost crops by increasing production or imports. Preventing or reducing PHL is crucial. It is, therefore, essential to understand and address the extent and causes of PHL before arriving at decisions on how to prevent them. There remains a continued need for more effort to reduce PHL, particularly among smallholder farmers.

Figure 1.1. Locally manufactured cassava grater owned by a women’s cooperative in Benin

©FAO/Belty Lokossa

Innovations and technologies promoted by the Green Innovation Centres to improve postharvest management and reduce post-harvest losses

This section focuses on crops that were covered by the Working Group (WG) on mechanization under the Green Innovation Centres (GIC) for the agriculture and food sector. These crops included roots and tubers (mainly cassava and potato) and cereals such as rice, maize, and sorghum. Other commodities covered included perishables like cashew nuts and apples. GIC is a programme launched in 2013 by the German development agency GIZ aiming to increase food production, smallholder farmer income and create off-farm employment opportunities through technical and organizational innovations in agriculture in sixteen countries, mostly located in SSA.

In Côte d’Ivoire, the GIC team focused on cassava, a vital crop for food security and income, especially among the resource-poor, rural-based smallholder farmers in developing African countries. Despite its significance, FAO (2019b) estimated that cassava yield in Africa is far lower at 8 to 9 tonnes per hectare compared to the world average of 11.9 tonnes per hectare and the yield observed in Asia at 13.3 tonnes per hectare. Cassava farmers in SSA face various challenges during harvesting and post-harvest handling. Harvesting is done manually by digging the roots using a hand hoe. Peeling is another time-consuming activity which is done manually using hand knives. Although small-scale mechanization technologies exist for the post-harvest handling of cassava, they still need to be promoted and disseminated widely. The case study on cassava (Case study 1) illustrates the impact of increased processing capacity and product quality when farmers can access sustainable mechanization technologies and enhance their skills through group governance. Potato was the other crop covered by various teams in Cameroon, Mali and Nigeria. In the case of potatoes, the main challenge addressed by the GIC was post-harvest storage to extend the shelf life of the harvested crop. Traditional pit storage methods used by farmers to extend the shelf life of potatoes proved to be inadequate and led to high losses. Alternative and innovative storage methods have the potential to significantly prolong the shelf life of potatoes as seen in the case study from Mali (Case study 2).

Post-harvest handling of grains such as maize, rice and sorghum still pose a challenge for many small-scale farmers. While mechanized post-harvest technologies exist for different operations, affordability issues lead many farmers to use manual tools. Mechanization hire service provisions are not widely developed or applied in rural communities, denying farmers access to these technologies (Case study 3). Overall, the losses for grains such as maize and rice are the result of many challenges faced by farmers during post-harvest management, including inadequate drying of grains before storage; poor storage practices, including storing grain in damp underground pits; and inadequate storage facilities. In Benin, the GIC team, in collaboration with local partners, promoted innovations for soybeans. These innovations included processing kits that comprised a manual press and soybean mill. The introduction of these processing kits enabled women-led cooperatives to produce a higher quantity and quality of fresh and smoked soybean cheese and soybean flour.

Fruit and vegetables, being highly perishable, face many challenges during post-harvest handling and are vulnerable to food loss and waste (FAO and CIRAD 2021). The lack of post-harvest management knowledge among farmers leads to poor post-harvest handling and food losses. Insufficient cold chain facilities, poor storage conditions and inadequate post-harvest handling contribute to rapid deterioration and high losses. For instance, in tropical regions, fruit and vegetables are often exposed to high temperatures during harvesting due to limited access to cold storage.

Furthermore, infrastructure, particularly agroprocessing and value addition facilities, as well as roads to facilitate transportation, are underdeveloped in rural areas of developing countries. This poses a threat to farmers growing perishable products such as fruit and vegetables. To address this, solar-powered dehydration systems have been introduced to transform vegetables and fruit into non-perishable products, thereby increasing their shelf life. The case study 4 focuses on the use of solar dryers for the post-harvest management of tomatoes, highlighting the impact of reduced energy and production costs.

FAO (2022) advocates for more efforts to address challenges related to affordability, capacity development, rural infrastructure, information communication technologies, and conducive environments for technology promotion and mechanization interventions.

Figure 1.2. Soybean mill (top), manual press, and fresh soybean cheese prepared by a women’s cooperative in Benin (bottom)

All photos ©FAO/Belty Lokossa

Conclusion

In sub-Saharan Africa, the pervasive impact of post-harvest losses on food security and nutrition persists as a critical challenge. This is exacerbated by inadequate post-harvest management practices and limited access to technologies and infrastructural deficiencies. Despite efforts to reduce post-harvest loss, significant amounts still occur among smallholder farmers. Collaborative interventions, customized to local contexts and backed by initiatives such as the Green Innovation Centres, hold promise in reducing losses and enhancing market access. Sustained commitment, investment, and targeted strategies are crucial to reducing losses, enhancing food security, and promoting sustainable agriculture in the region. These efforts align with the African Union’s goal to curb food losses by 2025. Stakeholders in sub-Saharan Africa can create resilient food systems and promote socio-economic growth by working together and innovating.

References

AUC. 2014. Malabo Declaration on Accelerated Agricultural Growth and Transformation for Shared Prosperity and Improved Livelihoods. African Union Commission. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Baudron, F., Govaerts, B., Verhulst, N., McDonald, A and Gérard, B. 2021. Sparing or sharing land? Views from agricultural scientists. Biol. Conserv. 259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109167

FAO and CIRAD. 2021. Fruit and vegetables – Opportunities and challenges for small-scale sustainable farming. Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb4173en.

FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP and WHO. 2020. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2020. Transforming food systems for affordable healthy diets. Rome, FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9692en.

FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP and WHO. 2022. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2022. Repurposing food and agricultural policies to make healthy diets more affordable. Rome, FAO.

FAO. 2011. Global food losses and food waste – Extent, causes and prevention. Rome

FAO. 2012. Smallholders and family farmers. Sustainability pathways. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. https://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/nr/sustainability_pathways/docs/Factsheet_SMALLHOLDERS.pdf.

FAO. 2016. Food loss analysis: causes and solutions, case studies in the small-scale agriculture and fisheries sub-sector. Methodology, May 2016. Rome, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (Unpublished).

FAO. 2017. Strategic work of FAO to reduce rural poverty. United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Rome, Italy.

FAO. 2019a. The State of Food and Agriculture 2019. Moving forward on food loss and waste reduction. Rome. License: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.

FAO. 2019b. Cassava yield In Africa. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. FAOSTAT Statistical Database. Rome.

FAO. 2022. The State of Food and Agriculture 2022. Leveraging automation in agriculture for transforming agrifood systems. Rome, FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb9479en.

GIZ. 2013. Reducing post-harvest losses conserves natural resources and saves money. Report of GFFA Expert panel discussion held on 18 January 2013 in Berlin, 30p. – Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH.

Kiaya, V. 2014. Post-harvest losses and strategies to reduce them. Technical paper on Post-harvest losses. Action Contre la Faim (ACF). Member of ACF International.

Wiggins, S. and Keats, S. 2013. Leaping and Learning: Linking smallholders to markets in Africa. London: Agriculture for Impact, Imperial College and Overseas Development Institute.

World Bank, FAO & NRI. 2011. Missing food: the case of post-harvest grain losses in sub-Saharan Africa. In: Economic Sector Work Report No. 60371-AFR. Washington, D.C. The World Bank; Rome, FAO and Natural Resources Institute.

CASE STUDIES. Green Innovation Centres

©FAO/Belty Lokossa

Case study 1. Improving cassava processing: a success story of presses and mobile grinders in Côte d’Ivoire

Overview

Cassava is a vital food crop in Côte d’Ivoire, both in production and consumption volume. According to studies conducted in 2017, it accounts for nearly 12 percent of agricultural Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and 2.8 percent of national GDP. Cassava production has grown significantly in the last decade, with an annual increase of 8.5 percent between 2005 and 2015, putting it second only to yam (Mendez Del Villar et al., 2017). In 2017, Côte d’Ivoire produced 5.3 million tonnes of cassava, making it the third-largest producer in West Africa (FAO, 2017). The cassava sector is important for employment, particularly for women, who represent about 80 percent of producers, almost 100 percent of processors and 90 percent of traders (Mendez Del Villar et al., 2017).

Main problem addressed

Small-scale cassava farmers face several post-harvest handling challenges, including difficulties in acquiring modern equipment. This leads to poorly mechanized cassava processing, with 75 percent of processing done using artisanal methods, only 20 percent involves semi-industrial techniques and only 5 percent employs industrial processes (Mendez Del Villar et al., 2017). Therefore, innovative grinders and presses were introduced for small-scale cassava processing in selected villages.

Figure A1.1 Traditional cassava grating (left) and pressing (right)

© GIZ / Alex Kouasi
© GIZ / Alex Kouasi

Figure A1.2 Mobile cassava grinder (left) and improved cassava press (right)

© GIZ / Alex Kouasi
© GIZ / Alex Kouasi

The innovation(s)

Cassava grinders and presses are equipment used to process cassava into a paste (Figure A1.1). are used for grating cassava into a fine, homogeneous paste, while the press is used to extract water from the paste. The equipment is usually made from stainless steel or aluminium and can be manually operated or powered by electricity. Cassava grinders and presses are used at different scales depending on their processing capacity, ranging from small processing units for individual producers to small facilities for women’s groups. The average grinding capacity is about 600kg/h of fresh cassava, and fuel consumption is low, with a tank volume of 4 litres. The press has a 240 kg/h capacity and is operated manually. Additionally, the presses’ collection system for the expressed liquid allows for proper disposal, reducing its environmental impact.

Results

The equipment has significantly reduced the need for artisanal and manual cassava processing into a paste, increasing the quality and quantity of attiéké produced. Training on maintenance, good production and hygiene practices, and community engagement have contributed to the success of this technology. One user testified “Before obtaining the mobile grinder and press, the production of attiéké was very low and difficult. I had to carry the cassava on my head to the mill for processing, and I could not produce much attiéké. Today, with the crusher and press I have at home, I can produce more than double the initial quantity of attiéké. I am less tired and earn more money to meet my needs”.

Lessons learned and impact

While larger solutions may exist, they can be difficult to access, costly, underutilized and neglected even when installed as part of a project. Cassava presses and grinders, however, have proven to be more effective because they are tailored to the groups’ needs and supported by capacity building, not only on the equipment but also on group governance. These efficient and cost-effective technologies have significantly improved productivity, profitability and living conditions.

Conclusion and recommendations

The introduction of mobile grinders and presses has successfully improved cassava processing, reducing labour, improving product quality and increasing production capacity. However, further efforts are needed to develop a business plan and a technical data sheet for the equipment. It is recommended that the equipment be properly sized and accompanied by specialized technical training for maintenance and good governance.

References

FAO. 2017. Agriculture Data. In: FAOSTAT. Rome. [07 November 2023]. https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#home

Mendez del Villar, P., Adaye, A., Tran, T., Allagba, K., Bancal, V. 2017. Analysis of the cassava chain in Côte d’Ivoire. Report for the European Union, DG-DEVCO - Value Chain Analysis for Development Project (VCA4D CTR 2016/375-804).

https://agritrop.cirad.fr/588006/1/Rapport%20Chaine%2de%20 valeur%20Manioc%20Cote%20d%27Ivoire%2020180210%20.pdf

Case study 2. Reduction of post-harvest losses of potatoes in Mali: example of storage facility with solar ventilation system

Overview

In the southern, non-desert regions of Mali, the agricultural landscape is dominated by cereal crops that are dependent on rainfall, rendering them vulnerable to climate change. Recognizing this vulnerability, the Malian government is increasingly developing alternative strategies and solutions to mitigate these increased risks to food security. Alongside irrigated rice production, the potato sector has emerged as a promising alternative for dietary diversification, reducing pressure on cereal production, creating jobs and generating income (Toure and Dembele, 2013). The Agricultural Development Policy (2013) and the National Agricultural Investment Plan (2014) have identified the potato as a priority crop for development in Mali.

Main problem addressed

Despite its potential, the potato sector in Mali faces significant challenges, including limited governance, inadequate capacity building among stakeholders in the sector, and high rates of post-harvest losses. Storage and preservation are major challenges facing this sector (Diakité and Zida, 2003). The lack of sufficient and/or suitable storage facilities results in a large portion of potato production sold immediately after harvesting to limit losses. In the Sikasso region for example 60 percent of the production is sold directly after harvest and 40 percent is kept (Diakité and Zida, 2003). Upon observation, the traditional method of preserving potatoes under trees causes more losses compared to cold storage rooms, despite the latter being susceptible to thermic shock and increased losses during interruptions in the electricity supply.

The innovation

To face the challenge of sustainable potato storage and reduced loss due to rotting, the Green Innovation Centre (GIC) for agriculture and food sector in Mali and its partners have established an improved potato storage facility with a solar ventilation system. This innovative solution was implemented following an innovation competition launched in 2016 by the GIC, the Zangaradougou potato producers’ association “Faso Kanu” and the Regional Directorate of Rural Engineering of Sikasso. The storage facility is used individually or collectively by small-scale producers and traders. The objective of the technology is to increase the income of potato producers and traders by reducing the rot rate, minimize losses and increase selling price. The constructed storage facility has a capacity of 30 tonnes with dimensions measuring 10m in length, 6-7m in width, and 3.5-4m in height (Figure A2.1).

Figure A2.1 Potato storage in Mali with solar ventilation system

© GIZ /Yaya Ballo

The storage facility was constructed using mud or cement bricks and features a corrugated iron or slab roof with a wooden ceiling underneath. Solar-powered equipment, including batteries, solar panels, fans, hoovers, voltage regulators, wires, and switches, are used to ventilate the hut and regulate the inside temperature. Potatoes are stored in 25 kg plastic crates to facilitate air circulation. Storage management includes quality monitoring at entry, during storage, and at the exit. A resource management mechanism is in place to ensure ongoing upkeep and maintenance. The facility can be individually owned or collectively managed, with a designated manager overseeing the technical, administrative and financial aspects. In the case of the Faso Kanu cooperative in Zangaradougou, potatoes are received at a rate of 0.04 USD/kg* . The funds received are allocated for the maintenance, upkeep or construction of the storage facility.

Results

Significant achievements in reducing post-harvest losses included i) a 15 percent decrease in decay rate compared to conventional practices ii) a shelf life increase from three to five months, in contrast to the one to two months for traditional storage without ventilation iii) a 100 percent price increase (from 0.41 USD/kg in February to 0.83 USD/kg in July) resulting in a substantial income boost for small-scale producers and iv) the creation of employment opportunities for young rural masons involved in facility construction and young urban electricians responsible for the installation and maintenance of the electrification network.very low and difficult. I had to carry the cassava on my head to the mill for processing, and I could not produce much attiéké. Today, with the crusher and press I have at home, I can produce more than double the initial quantity of attiéké. I am less tired and earn more money to meet my needs”.

Conclusion and recommendations

In conclusion, the potato storage facility featuring a solar ventilation system offers a compelling solution to reduce post-harvest losses and increases income for potato producers and traders in Mali. While the technology is efficient and effective, not all producers have the financial resources to adopt it independently. Larger traders or farmers’ organizations may find it easier to adopt the innovation as they can often find financial solutions through working capital or loans. Small and medium-sized producers, however, may require external support to invest in this technology. Collaboration and cost-sharing among producers may be a viable approach for scaling up the technology to maximize its impact on reducing post-harvest losses and increasing economic opportunities. Thanks to its demonstrated effectiveness in this pilot, many private sector and farmers’ organizations have adopted this innovation. However, the main challenge is gaining access to solar equipment.

To ensure the successful implementation of the potato storage technology in other regions, a multi-faceted approach should be adopted, incorporating the following strategies i) participatory process involving local communities and stakeholders ii) private sector and Farmer Based Organization (FBO) ownership iii) access to financial resources iv) agronomic considerations v) provide training and education on conservation practices to ensure the long-term sustainability of the technology and vi) accessibility of solar technology and maintenance.

* UN exchage rate as at 15 January 2024: 598.883 (XOF) CFA Franc in Mali equals one United States Dollar (USD)

References

Diakité, L., Zida, M., 2003. Diagnostic study of the potato sector in three West African countries: Volume II the case of Mali https://hubrural.org/IMG/pdf/mali-pommedeterre.pdf

Ministry of Rural Development (Republic of Mali). 2014. National Investment Plan in the Agricultural Sector https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/mli198371.pdf

Republic of Mali. 2013. The Agricultural Development Policy of Mali. https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/mli145852.pdf

Toure, M., Dembele, K. 2013. Analysis of the elasticity of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) production in the Kati district, Mali

Case study 3. Post-harvest service provider business model: using a multifunctional thresher to minimize losses in Burkina Faso’s rice value chain

Overview

Rice is the fourth most important cereal in Burkina Faso and the demand for rice continues to increase, driven by population growth and urbanization (FW Africa, 2023). Understanding this situation, the Green Innovation Centres in the agri-food sector project has been supporting the Ministry of Agriculture of Burkina Faso since 2016. The project focuses on disseminating innovations aimed at improving the rice value chain (VA) and value chain performance. This includes the “young service providers in agricultural mechanization” approach.

Main problem addressed

Rice production and commercialization in Burkina Faso face several challenges not least a labour shortage due to the migration of young people from rural areas to urban centres. Other challenges in the rice value chain include poor access to agricultural inputs and post-harvest losses. The African Post-harvest Losses Information System (APHLIS) estimates post-harvest losses at around 14 percent (APHLIS, 2023) in the rice value chain in Burkina Faso in 2021, with harvesting, threshing, and winnowing as the main loss points. Strengthening local stakeholders’ technical, logistical, and organizational capacities is necessary to overcome these constraints.

The innovation

The innovation promoted aims to facilitate access to mechanization services within community-based agriculture, creating employment for rural youth (both men and women). This strategy also aims to minimize threshing losses and increase incomes for smallholder farmers and service providers. The youth participating in this approach receive a multifunctional thresher that can process several crops including rice, maize, and sorghum. The thresher is an autonomous machine manufactured by a local company with three wheels for mobility (Figure A3.1). It is powered by a 24hp diesel engine with a threshing capacity of one tonne per hour and a threshing rate of 98 percent. Tests conducted in Burkina Faso have demonstrated that percentages of broken grain and impurities are almost nil, with a total percentage of losses estimated at around 0.8 percent. This stands in stark contrast to manual threshing practices, where losses can exceed 10 percentenvironmental impact.

Figure A3.1. Use of the multifunctional thresher for maize threshing by young postharvest service providers.

GIZ/ Daouda Sanogo

Results

A total of 43 young rural service providers have been trained in the use of the multifunctional threshing machines. These services, provided by the multifunctional thresher, are tailored to the needs of smallholder farmers and beneficiaries in the western region of Burkina Faso. These farmers have expressed high levels of satisfaction with the quality of the grain and the efficiency of the equipment. Several payment methods (cash or in-kind) are accepted by the service providers, allowing a wide range of farmers to access these mechanization services. This approach has enabled thousands of smallholders (more than 65 000 farmers) to access timely threshing services. It addresses labour shortages and significantly reduces post-harvest losses, decreasing workload while saving time. Implementing this approach not only motivated farmers to increase their production but also led to increased productivity and income. Socioeconomic analysis indicates that these threshers are profitable with a minimum of 67 hours of use per year, which can be achieved easily, considering the thresher can be used for various commodities.

Conclusion and recommendations

Overall, the youth-led threshing service provision approach has demonstrated a positive impact on the livelihoods of the young men and women participating in the pilot, as well as farmers hiring this service. The locally made multifunctional thresher promoted by the Green Innovation Centre in Burkina Faso helped to reduce quantitative and qualitative losses related to rice threshing operations and other commodities. The success of this approach can be attributed to several factors including the existence of market demand, the multi-crop feature of the thresher and its mobility, the rigorous selection process of the participating youth, and the technical and managerial training they have received. To ensure the widespread dissemination of this innovation, it is important to monitor and improve the technical and financial skills of the providers. In addition, efficient after-sales and maintenance services for agricultural equipment must be organized and guaranteed. Finally, the implementation of financing schemes will contribute to the scaling up of this innovation.

References

APHLIS (The African Postharvest Losses Information). 2023. APHLIS. Africa. [cited on 12 November 2023] https://www.aphlis.net/fr/data/tables/value-chain/BF/rice/2021?metric=prc)

FW Africa. 2023. FW Africa. Nairobi. [cited on 12 November 2023] https://www.millingmea.com/burkina-faso-forced-to-depend-on-imports-as-rice-demand-outstrips-production/)

Case study 4. Solar dryer for post-harvest management of tomatoes in India

Overview

The Green Innovation Centre (GIC) for the agriculture and food security in India has successfully piloted a woman entrepreneurship programme, which has been scaled up to different parts of the country. India is the second-largest global producer of tomatoes, onions and potatoes (Jha et. al., 2015). However, India faces challenges in marketing vegetables due to their perishable nature and seasonality, as noted by Shankari and Singh (2016). This can lead to qualitative and quantitative losses, with tomato post-harvest losses accounting for approximately 12percent (Jha et. al., 2015). To address these food losses in the tomato value chain, a solar dryer and a sustainable business model were promoted and introduced in India, specifically involving women farmers.

Main problem addressed

There is a lack of a holistic approach to address the following problems

I) high post-harvest losses in the tomato value chain

II) limited understanding of the types of business models to improve post-harvest management and

III) limited inclusion of women farmers on programmes targeting these problems.

Figure A4.1 Woman using solar dryer

GIZ/Sashi Kumar

The innovation

The GIC in India, in collaboration with a social enterprise called Science for Society Technologies (S4S) piloted a sustainable business model for women enterprises (WE) on tomato value chains. This initiative facilitated the production of raw materials (fresh tomatoes), access to finance, technology (such as a solar dyer), and a secure market (Kumar, 2023). WE utilized the solar dryer to dehydrate the tomatoes which were then sold to S4S (Kumar, 2023). Thanks to the promotion of the business model and technology WE reduced food losses by increasing the shelf life of the tomatoes, whilst also creating and sustaining a secure market for selling their products.

Figure A4.2. Sustainable business model promoted for tomato value chain. Source: Adapted from Kumar, S. 2023. Women entrepreneurs engaged in reducing the post-harvest loss

Results

The pilot programme successfully trained 750 women farmers in tomato drying techniques and facilitated access to adapted technology (solar dyers) for 500 women-led enterprises, with an annual processing capacity of 600 tonnes. Market linkages were established with the private sector S4S (Kumar,2023) ensuring a steady market.

Lessons learned and impact

Adopting a holistic approach to tackle multi-facet problems is of critical importance. In the case of promoting the sustainable business model led by women, success factors included the technical training of women in tomato drying, soft skills development for business, access to tailored finance for smallholder farmers lacking collateral, establishment of a secured market for dried tomatoes, and the promotion of technology adapted to users’ needs and market demand.

Conclusion and recommendations

The promotion of the sustainable business model enabled women farmers to diversify and increase their sources of income. The solar dryer promoted the use of renewable energy while adding value to low-grade tomatoes that would have otherwise been wasted. Access to finance for women was key for the business model’s sustainability and potential to scale (Kumar, 2023). It is recommended to adopt a holistic approach when promoting sustainable business models, encompassing training, technology promotion, finance, and the inclusion of the main stakeholders in the value chain (Kumar, 2023).

References

Jha, S.N., Vishwakarma, R. K., Ahmad, Tauqueer., Rai, Anil., Dixit, Anil K. 2015. Report on assessment of quantitative harvest and post-harvest losses of major crops and commodities in India. ICAR-All India Coordinated Research Project on Post-Harvest Technology, ICAR-CIPHET, P.O.-PAU, Ludhiana-141004.

Kumar, S. 2023. TUEWAS (Women entrepreneurs engaged in reducing the post-harvest loss). https://tuewas-asia.org/2023/08/28/women-entrepreneurs-engaged-in-reducing-the-post-harvest-loss/

Shankar, T., Singh, K.M. 2016. An analysis on problems of vegetables marketing in farmers’ market of Jharkhand: A case study in Ranchi district. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/78721/1/MPRA_paper_78721.pdf

CHAPTER 2.
Minimizing post-harvest losses: gaps in post-harvest intervention

©FAO/Belty Lokossa

Abstract

In developing countries, post-harvest losses (PHL), which represent the quantitative, qualitative, nutritional, or economic loss of food commodities from harvesting to consumption, remain an important challenge and affect the food security of millions of people. Despite increased attention to PHL, a structural change in PHL is yet to be achieved. This is partly because PHL is a multidimensional challenge with multiple direct and indirect causes linked to the socioeconomic context. This chapter highlights notable gaps in post-harvest interventions regarding technology, management, finance, capacity building, innovations, and weak data availability. The importance of sustainable business models is also demonstrated as post-harvest technologies need to be profitable in the long term to facilitate adoption and scalability. This chapter also stresses the importance of using a system approach to achieve a sustainable reduction of losses, involving stakeholders from the beginning through a value chain approach. This approach enables the definition of a common vision, identification of gaps from different perspectives, collaborative creation and design of inclusive interventions, and promotion of collaboration, coordination and co-learning. Strong public and private sector investments are needed to achieve a sustainable reduction of PHL. This chapter concludes by reiterating there are no universal solutions to addressing PHL, and the technologies promoted must be adapted to the local context or sourced locally.

Keywords:

post-harvest loss mitigation; technologies; business models; finance; system approach; value chain

Introduction

Post-harvest losses (PHL) are a global issue with a significant impact on food security, livelihoods, and the environment. Post-harvest losses can result in a decrease in the quantity of food available for consumption, which can lead to increased food insecurity and malnutrition. Additionally, PHL leads to a reduction in food quality through deterioration of nutritional quality due to poor food handling and storage practices. This is particularly problematic in developing countries where food and nutrition insecurity is already a significant concern. PHL also has environmental consequences as resources used to produce this food (agrobiodiversity, soil, water, fuel, labour etc.) are wasted. This results in economic losses for farmers and other factors in the food supply chain. Furthermore, improper drying, due to irregular post-harvest dry spells, has led to high aflatoxin infestations in cereals, nuts, and pulses, jeopardizing the health of the consumers and making it more difficult for farmers to protect their crops from post-harvest losses. Minimizing PHL is considered a priority and is aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly 12.3 which aims to halve global food waste by 2030 at retail and consumer levels as well as reducing PHL losses along production and supply chains. This target recognizes the pivotal role that reducing food waste and losses plays in achieving sustainable development, especially in food and nutrition security, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and improving the use of resources. Achieving this target would mean more food available for consumption, thereby alleviating pressure on already strained food systems, and helping to ensure that food is used efficiently. Food loss and waste also impact other SDGs, such as SDG 2 (zero hunger), SDG 13 (climate action), and SDG 15 (life on land).

The SDGs report of 2022 highlighted that too much food continues to be lost, particularly in sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries, that have the highest food insecurity and the highest percentage of food loss (UN, 2022). A study by the United Nations in 2022 reveals a relatively constant percentage of food loss in SSA since 2016, indicating a lack of structural changes in patterns of food loss. Hanson and Mitchell (2017) revealed that decision-makers are either unaware or sceptical of the business case for reducing food loss and waste.

Delgado et al. (2021a) highlighted the challenges in addressing PHL, among them being the lack of accurate data on the amount of food lost (including quantitative and qualitative loss). There is also a lack of evidence on the drivers and root causes of PHL. There is a risk that without understanding the root causes of post-harvest losses, interventions may only scratch the surface and leave the root causes unaddressed. Organizations such as FAO have emphasized the importance of understanding and developing solutions to address these challenges.

The absence of international consensus on terminologies where ‘post-harvest loss’, ‘food loss’, ‘food waste and food loss and waste’ are used interchangeably poses a challenge. Additionally, methodologies used to appraise PHL vary in objectives and scopes adding to the complexity (Delgado et al., 2021a; Kok et al., 2021). The causes of PHL are context dependent and could be associated with different factors including climate, technology and innovations, infrastructure, socioeconomic, environmental, and the type of commodities involved. However, as stated by Rosegrant et al. (2018), the reduction of PHL is not a low-cost alternative, it requires large investments and needs to be part of long-term strategies. One important challenge is the lack of evidence of the current level of losses, which is crucial for designing effective and appropriate long-term interventions and policies. In the last decade, efforts have been made to conduct food loss assessments in countries such as Cameroon, Ethiopia, Kenya, and Uganda (FAO, WFP and IFAD, 2019; FAO & Ethiopian Statistics Service, 2023; FAO, 2018a; FAO, 2018b). Following these assessments, efforts were made to introduce technologies aimed at minimizing losses. However, as reported by Stathers et al. (2020), these interventions primarily focus on the farm level and mainly limited to cereals, particularly maize storage. There is a notable lack of information on the impact of pre-harvest practices and other post-harvest operations such as field drying, harvest, drying, threshing, and cleaning.

Even though the mitigation of PHL has become a mainstream topic in the last decade, there is a lot to be done. In this chapter, we have highlighted four important gaps that need to be addressed in any intervention to meet the challenge of PHL:

- Gaps in data readiness;

- Gaps in technical innovations;

- Gaps in sustainable investment for the promotion of post-harvest technologies; and

- Gaps in comprehensive and system approaches to mitigate PHL.

Gaps in data readiness

It is imperative that any solution or decision taken by farmers and those working to reduce PHL is based on data. Unfortunately, in many countries, particularly SSA, data on PHL along value chains is not readily available. As highlighted by (Stathers et al., 2020) there is an “urgent need for a systematic assessment of (post-harvest) interventions across the entire value chain over multiple seasons and sites, targeting stakeholders beyond farmers”. With the use of reliable data, it is possible to develop solutions that will better target all PHL occurring along the food value chain. Therefore, FAO advocates that any effort to reduce PHL must be preceded by an assessment of the post-harvest losses along the value chain. An assessment is vital to obtain a clear understanding of the root causes and identify key stakeholders. According to FAO (2018c), the post-harvest loss assessment serves the additional purpose of pinpointing critical loss points (CLP) as well as areas of minimal loss, known as low loss points (LLP). This strategic identification enables the effective direction of resources and effort toward reducing PHL where it is most needed.

Gaps in technical innovations

Generally, PHL interventions are designed to address a specific problem in a given region encompassing potential losses along the chain from harvesting to home consumption. Data from loss assessment studies conducted in different countries have been recently published and highlight various points of loss across value chains (FAO, 2018a, 2018b, 2018c; FAO, WFP, IFAD, 2019; Totobesola et al., 2022). These reports have highlighted harvesting as the most frequently reported loss point while drying, including field drying, and shelling or threshing have been identified as loss points for cereals and pulses. PHL could also occur during packaging, retailing and transportation, particularly for roots and tubers, as well fruit and vegetables.

As the first step of the post-harvest activities chain, harvesting is one of the main stages of PHL. Any damage incurred during this stage can lead to a significant loss of commodities during the later stages. Damage during harvesting could be linked to the timing of harvest or improper handling, including the use of non-adapted tools, equipment and machinery, leading to mechanical damage or product loss. In the case of grain, PHL arising from harvesting timing could also be related to prolonged field drying, creating conditions conducive to insects and fungal infestation. In addition, adverse weather conditions such as high humidity and unexpected rain, stemming from climate variation could exacerbate the situation. Regarding perishable goods, mechanical damage may occur due to improper handling during harvesting or packing due to the use of poor-quality materials and equipment (Yahia et al., 2019).

Harvest related gaps encompass the lack of standard guidelines and training for determining the appropriate harvest date for different crops in different contexts (Dumont et al., 2016). It is important to understand the underlying drivers of losses during post-harvest. Factors such as late or improper harvesting can stem from lack of labour or workforce shortages during peak agricultural activity or bottlenecks in the provision of mechanization services, such as limited access to harvesting machinery. Socioeconomic factors are also indirect causes of PHL. For example, in Southern Africa, farmers may harvest maize early to mitigate the risk of crop loss due to cattle invasion, in doing so, farmers risk further loss through humidity by storing the grain with a moisture level above 18 percent. (Ncube et al., 2021). Other socioeconomic factors contributing to PHL are inefficient marketing systems, marked by lack of communication between farmers and buyers, as well as ineffective supply chains and transportation infrastructures (Yahia et al., 2019).

Other gaps include the lack of small-scale combine harvesters and other post-harvest equipment that smallholder farmers could use to prevent PHL and maintain commodity quality such as dryers, shellers, threshers, sorters or storage containers for grains, harvesters, small-scale refrigerated vehicles, and packaging materials for perishables. In addition, post-harvest technologies are not often readily available locally to meet the demand, and their importation comes with high costs and subject to government regulations, thereby restricting farmers’ access to these technologies (Yahia et al., 2019). Adaptation of innovations to local contexts is important for effectiveness. This can be achieved through a co-creation process involving key stakeholders (Figure 2.1). For example, training local artisans in upscaling technology, as seen in the deployment of metal silos in Central America and Africa (Tefera et al., 2011; FAO, 2021). This training should include basic post-harvest and business aspects, enabling artisans to start and successfully run small-scale businesses, thereby contributing to the transfer of post-harvest technologies. Practical training guidelines, such as those developed by Van Loon and Flores Rojas (2022) for machine operators, extensionists, technicians, and mechanics on the operation, maintenance and basic repair of farm machinery are a good example. FAO and CIMMYT (2018) have prepared a training manual on hire services as a business enterprise for small-scale mechanization service providers. Online modules on this topic are available in the FAO e-learning Academy in English and French.

Figure 2.1. Example of a small-scale maize harvester developed in Benin (left) Design of the small-scale maize harvester (right). Source: Vodounnou, J., Ajav, E., Bagan, G., Chegnimonhan, V. 2020. Development and performance evaluation of a small-scale maize harvester for developing countries. Journal of Experimental Agriculture International 42.8 (2020): 144-156)

© GIZ Benin/Julus Vodounnou

Another important aspect of the technological challenge in mitigating PHL is the capacity development of farmers. As highlighted by Stathers et al. (2020), only a few studies have evaluated the impact of training on PHL mitigation. Capacity development programmes in PHL mitigation interventions generally focus on individuals. However, there is a need to consider other levels, such as organizational, cooperation and enabling environment levels. An important gap is the lack of a framework to design and implement a capacity development programme to achieve cumulative effects and strengthen collaborators’ organizational and institutional capacity (Woltering et al., 2022). Another aspect that is often overlooked is gender, as women frequently represent the main driving forces behind post-harvest activities. Gender aspects are discussed in Chapter 4.

Gaps in in sustainable investment for the promotion of post-harvest technologies

Despite the existence of technologies for PHL mitigation, many farmers lack access to them due to the scarcity of sustainable investment for their acquisition. Common commercialization of post-harvest technologies involves demonstrating the benefits of the technology to farmers, with the aim of convincing them to invest in it, followed by direct sales. For example, cost-benefit analyses of the use of maize shellers and storage cribs in Uganda, hermetic bags for maize storage in Kenya or plastic crates for tomato handling in Nigeria have demonstrated the profitability of these technologies for smallholder farmers, making them sound investments (Balana et al., 2022; Mwebaze and Mugisha, 2011; Ndegwa et al., 2016). However, the decision to invest in post-harvest technology also depends on socioeconomic factors such as land ownership, the quantity of commodities produced and access to training (Bokusheva et al., 2012). Yet, the profitability of post-harvest technologies depends largely on commodity prices, even though appropriate storage facilities can overcome volatility. In this context, important challenges remain in the initial cost of acquisition, farmers’ risk perception, and access to (micro) credit. This is mainly due to the lack of collateral, financial illiteracy, high transaction costs, short repayment schedules unsuitable for farming characteristics and inadequate communication between the supply and demand side. Although there are leasing schemes adapted to smallholder farmers, they are relatively scarce, with one example being AgLeaseco located in Zambia (Box 2.1).

Gaps in comprehensive and system approaches to mitigate post-harvest losses

Post-harvest losses are not confined to a single segment or node within a food value chain, instead, they occur along the value chain. Consequently, effective strategies to address these losses require a varied approach involving both technical and non-technical solutions disseminated along the food value chain. Initiatives that focus solely on a single node within the food value chain are not likely to succeed.

Box 2.1. Leasing schemes in Zambia: accessing credit with small collateral

Established in 2017, AgLeaseco is an agricultural leasing company focused on improving farmers’ access to agricultural mechanization by providing access to finance to acquire machinery. The business model is premised on the provision of equipment together with a set of services that include tailored financing, delivery, and training in equipment maintenance and repair. To establish a financing scheme, AgLeaseco partnered with three companies supplying agricultural machinery in Zambia (SARO Agro Industrial Ltd, BHBW Zambia Ltd and AFGRI). The scheme is based on a fixed interest of 28 percent (interest does not change) in which the leased asset (i.e. agricultural machinery or equipment) is the collateral. Farmers and entrepreneurs use them to finance agricultural machinery.

Source: Mkomwa, S., Mutai, W., Kamwendo, M., Mpagalile, J. & Jiang, S. 2020. What opportunities for investments? Proceedings Sustainable Agricultural Mechanization Hire Service Provision Workshop, 9–12 December 2019, Kampala, Uganda. 53 pp. Rome, FAO, and Nairobi, African Conservation Tillage Network (ACT).
Houmy, K., Flores Rojas, M. and Side, C. 2021. Agri-hire in sub-Saharan Africa – Business models for investing in sustainable mechanization. Rome, FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb5071en

Typically, post-harvest interventions are generally technology-driven, demonstrating the effectiveness of specific technology in mitigating PHL. Some interventions may include pilot phases, involving the training of farmers and other stakeholders, along with direct support to farmers or cooperatives in acquiring technology. However, these technologies often struggle to reach the intended scale for many reasons, including reliance on external resources and leadership, narrow scope, and limited incentives for scaled or biased collaborations (Woltering et al., 2019). As highlighted by Delgado et al. (2021b), PHL origins are multifaceted, which therefore requires an approach that considers the economic, social, ecological, and political dimensions of the PHL challenge. Partnerships and collaborations are also key in achieving the goal of reducing post-harvest losses.

A system approach and consideration of the whole agrifood value chain are imperative for the sustainable integration of technological innovations. Critical loss points (CLPs) in post-harvest losses, also referred to as hotspots of PHL, represent key stages in the value chain where significant losses such as quantity, quality, nutritional, or economical occur compared to other steps in the value chain. (Strecker et al., 2022). However, there are existing gaps in conducting a thorough analysis of critical loss points within a given value chain to identify the most impactful leverage points, which is crucial for effective interventions.

Various methodologies, such as the FAO Food Loss Analysis (FLA) methodology (FAO, 2016) or the GIZ Rapid Loss Appraisal Tool (RLAT) (GIZ, 2021) can be employed to determine critical loss points. These methodologies generally adopt a value chain approach, yet differences in approaches across studies have been reported, making data comparison difficult (Affognon et al., 2015; Delgado et al., 2021a; Kok et al., 2021). Even if loss data exists at the national or sub-national level (for example, The African Postharvest Losses Information System APHLIS), detailed knowledge of loss points within a given value chain in a specific region and their economic importance remains unavailable. Without adopting a comprehensive value chain approach encompassing all relevant stakeholders, there is a significant risk of making incorrect investments and misallocating limited resources. Examining the whole value chain, identifying the critical loss points and their economic dimension are important initial steps for deciding on appropriate technologies, innovations and intervention types.

Successful examples of the application of a value chain approach to mitigate PHL in literature are limited. A recurrent flaw encountered in post-harvest interventions is the insufficient engagement of local stakeholders and their relationships in the context of the local food system (Affognon et al., 2015; Rolker et al., 2022). Various stakeholders within the value chain generally have different perspectives and interests. For instance, farmers may place more value on high yields, while marketers value high-quality products with market value and low transaction costs. Therefore, any intervention designed to mitigate PHL should consider these diverse stakeholders from the outset, incorporating them into the design, planning, execution, and evaluation through a participatory approach. It is important to consider the existing PHL knowledge that stakeholders have while favouring a process of co-learning and information sharing (Gardeazabal et al., 2021). Plaisier et al. (2019) proposed a framework for designing context-specific solutions to reduce PHL. This framework includes the selection of value chain stakeholders; the mapping of value chains (including information flows); the identification of bottlenecks; the selection of solutions with promising potential; the training of participants; the implementation of a pilot phase; and evaluation of outcomes. This approach was applied to tomato value chains in Nigeria, demonstrating a positive impact, particularly in reducing weight loss with the use of return plastic crates. However, it also highlighted important challenges that need to be addressed for successful scaling.

Scaling up post-harvest technologies, like any agricultural innovation, is a complex challenge with implications in other domains. For example, adopting hermetic technologies to avoid aflatoxin contamination has repercussions in the health domain. Therefore, any scaling intervention needs to consider the complex dynamics of agrifood systems. According to Woltering and Jacobs (2019), scaling aims to increase the use of innovations, encompassing new technologies or practices to impact many people. Therefore, tools like the “Scaling Scan” by Woltering and Jacobs (2019) and “Scaling Readiness” by Sartas et al. (2020) can be used to evaluate the scaling ambitions of a specific post-harvest project and devise actions for a sustainable scaling of innovations.

Examples of the scaling of post-harvest technologies are scarce. However, some success stories such as the post-harvest programme in Central America featuring metal silos for grain storage, the promotion of hermetic bags in sub-Saharan African countries, and the Yield Wise Initiative in the United Republic of Tanzania have been reported (Sonka, 2020).

All these examples included a strong and long-term involvement of development partners (USAID, Feed the Future Lab, The Swiss Cooperation and the Rockefeller Foundation) as well as governments and the private sector. Baributsa et al. (2014), highlighted the importance of initial financial support for market building when introducing a new post-harvest technology, demonstrating the benefits associated with farmers and other value chain stakeholders. Finally, long-term investments are imperative to achieve structural changes regarding PHL and to achieve the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 12.3.

Conclusion

PHL is now part of the international development agenda, particularly in developing countries, prompting investments in the last decade to mitigate them. Despite this, achieving the desired sustainable change remains a challenge, necessitating a continued commitment to reduce PHL. Several gaps have been identified in the post-harvest stages, notably during harvesting, drying, and processing, and are influenced by factors such as inadequate tools, equipment, and machinery, adverse weather conditions, and socioeconomic issues.

Additionally, limited farmer access to proven-profitable post-harvest technologies persists due to challenges like the scarcity of sustainable investment. Post-harvest losses have multiple causes and occur at various stages along the food supply chain, from harvest to retail and consumer levels. Therefore, it is imperative to ensure a value chain approach is adopted. Moreover, we need to consider that even though technologies exist to minimize losses, there are no universal solutions. Promoted technologies must be adapted to the local context or sourced locally. Addressing PHL will require a system approach and the engagement and collaboration of multiple stakeholders, including farmers, governments, the private sector, civil society, and consumers at a local level. Sustainable changes will only occur if all the stakeholders of a specific value chain in a given context collaboratively shape a new configuration that allows sustainable PHL mitigation, considering the three pillars of sustainability: economic, environment and social.

Future investments in post-harvest should prioritize long-term and sustainable changes, focusing on gathering evidence regarding critical points of losses, the direct and indirect causes of losses, and evidence regarding successful interventions using a value chain approach embedded in a conducive environment.

References

Affognon, H., Mutungi, C., Sanginga, P., Borgemeister, C. 2015. Unpacking post-harvest losses in sub-Saharan Africa: A Meta-Analysis. World Dev. 66, 49–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.08.002 Balana, B.B., Aghadi, C.N., Ogunniyi, A.I. 2022. Improving livelihoods through post-harvest loss management: evidence from Nigeria. Food Secur. 14, 249–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-021-01196-2

Baributsa, D., Tahirou Abdoulaye,T., Jess Lowenberg-DeBoer, J., Dabiré, C., Moussa, B., Coulibaly, O., Baoua, I. 2014. Market building for post-harvest technology through large-scale extension efforts. Journal of Stored Products Research. ScienceDirect. ELSEVIER. https://biblio.iita.org/documents/S14ArtBaributsaMarketInthomDev.pdfbb9563a5e0f10e5c09faeb42e50d8386.pdf

Bokusheva, R., Finger, R., Fischler, M., Berlin, R., Marín, Y., Pérez, F., Paiz, F. 2012. Factors determining the adoption and impact of a post-harvest storage technology. Food Secur. 4, 279–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-012-0184-1

Delgado, L., Schuster, M., Torero, M. 2021a. Quantity and quality food losses across the value Chain: A Comparative analysis. Food Policy 98, 101958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.101958

Dumont, M.J., Orsat, V., Raghavan, V. 2016. Reducing Post-harvest Losses, in: Madramootoo, C. (Ed.), Emerging Technologies for Promoting Food Security: Overcoming the World Food Crisis. Elsevier Ltd, pp. 135–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-78242-335-5.00007-X

FAO & Ethiopian Statistics Service. 2023. Report on off-farm post-harvest loss assessment survey in Ethiopia. Rome and Addis Ababa. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc3896en

FAO, WFP and IFAD. 2019. Food loss analysis: causes and solutions – The Republic of Uganda. Beans, maize, and sunflower studies. Rome. 212 pp. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.

FAO. 2016. Food Loss Analysis: Causes and Solutions Case studies in the Small-scale Agriculture and Fisheries Subsectors. Methodology. Rome, Italy

FAO. 2018a. Étude diagnostique de la réduction des pertes après récolte de trois cultures : manioc – tomate – pomme de terre. Rapport de synthèse: Cameroun. Rome.

FAO. 2018b. Food loss analysis: causes and solutions - Case study on the maize value chain in the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. Rome. 46 pp. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.

FAO. 2018c. Food loss analysis: causes and solutions - Case study on the mango value chain in the Republic of Guyana. Rome. 44 pp. https://www.fao.org/3/I9607EN/i9607en.pdf

FAO. 2021. FAO Ethiopia Newsletter Gardeazabal, A., Lunt, T., Jahn, M.M., Verhulst, N., Hellin, J., Govaerts, B. 2021. Knowledge management for innovation in agrifood systems : a conceptual framework ABSTRACT. Knowl. Manag. Res. Pract. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/14778238.2021.1884010

GIZ. 2021. Rapid Loss Appraisal Tool (RLAT). Assessing hot spots for food loss in agricultural value chains. User guide. https://www.academia.edu/83902556/Rapid_Loss_Appraisal_Tool_RLAT

Hanson, C., Mitchell, P. 2017. The business case for reducing food loss and waste. Washington DC, USA.

Kok, M.G., Castelein, R.G., Broeze, J., Snels, J.C.M.A. 2021. The EFFICIENT protocol A pragmatic and integrated methodology for food loss and waste quantification, analysis of causes and intervention design. Wageningen, The Netherlands.

Lipinski, Brian. 2022. SDG TARGET 12.3 ON FOOD LOSS AND WASTE: 2022 PROGRESS REPORT An annual update on behalf of Champions 12.3 https://champions123.org/publication/sdg-target-123-food-loss-and-waste-2022-progress-report

Mwebaze, P., Mugisha, J. 2011. Adoption, utilisation and economic impacts of improved post-harvest technologies in maize production in Kapchorwa District, Uganda. Int. J. Post-harvest Technol. Innov. 2, 301–327. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPTI.2011.043328

Ncube, E., Mavunganidze, Z., Ostermann, H. 2021 Identifying losses in smallholder farming. SA Graan, Grain. https://sagrainmag.co.za/2021/06/03/identifying-losses-in-smallholder-farming/

Ndegwa, M.K., De Groote, H., Gitonga, Z.M., Bruce, A.Y. 2016. Effectiveness and economics of hermetic bags for maize storage: Results of a randomized controlled trial in Kenya. Crop Prot. 90, 17–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2016.08.007

Plaisier, C., Sibomana, M., van der Waal, J., Clercx, L., van Wagenberg, C.P.A., Dijkxhoorn, Y. 2019. Approach for designing context-specific, locally owned interventions to reduce post-harvest losses: Case study on tomato value chains in Nigeria. Sustain. 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010247

Rolker, H., Eisler, M., Cardenas, L., Deeney, M., Takahashi, T. 2022. Food waste interventions in low-and-middle-income countries: A systematic literature review. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 186, 106534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106534

Rosegrant, M.W., Magalhaes, E., Valmonte-Santos, R.A., Mason-D’Croz, D. 2018. Returns to Investment in Reducing Post-harvest Food Losses and Increasing Agricultur al Productivity Growth, in: Lomborg, B. (Ed.), Prioritizing Development: A Cost Benefit Analysis of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. Cambridge University Press, pp. 332–336.

Sartas, M., Schut, M., Proietti, C., Thiele, G., Leeuwis, C. 2020. Scaling Readiness: Science and practice of an approach to enhance impact of research for development. ScienceDirect. ELSEVIER. Volume 183, August 2020, 102874.

Stathers, T., Holcroft, D., Kitinoja, L, M. Mvumi, B., English, A., Oluwatoba, O., Megan Kocher, M., Jessica Ault, J., Torero, M. 2020. A scoping review of interventions for crop postharvest loss reduction in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Nature Sustainability | VOL 3 | October 2020 | 821–835. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-020-00622-1.

Stathers, T., Holcroft, D., Kitinoja, L., Mvumi, B.M., English, A., Omotilewa, O., Kocher, M., Ault, J., Torero, M. 2020. A scoping review of interventions for crop post-harvest loss reduction in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Nat. Sustain. 3, 821–835. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-00622-1

Strecker, K., Bitzer, V., Kruijssen, F. 2022. Critical stages for post-harvest losses and nutrition outcomes in the value chains of bush beans and nightshade in Uganda. Food Security (2022) 14:411–426. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12571-021-01244-x

Sonka, S.T. 2020. Post-harvest losses of cereals and other grains: opportunity among issues and challenges. Advances in postharvest management of cereals and grains. 1st Edition. Burleigh Dodds Science Publishing. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.1201/9781003047988-1/post-harvest-losses-cereals-grains-opportunity-among-issues-challenges-steven-sonka?context=ubx&refId=0e9fdc7a-cef7-4fb8-be22-3efb77673d69

Tefera, T., Kanampiu, F., De Groote, H., Hellin, J., Mugo, S., Kimenju, S.C., Beyene, Y., Boddupalli, P.M., Shiferaw, B., Banziger, M. 2011. The metal silo: An effective grain storage technology for reducing post-harvest insect and pathogen losses in maize while improving smallholder farmers’ food security in developing countries. Crop Prot. 30, 240–245.

Totobesola, M., Delve, R., Nkundimana, J. d’Amour, Cini, L., Gianfelici, F., Mvumi, B., Gaiani, S., Pani, A., Barraza, A.S., Rolle, R.S. 2022. A holistic approach to food loss reduction in Africa: food loss analysis, integrated capacity development and policy implications. Food Secur. 14, 1401–1415. https://doi.org/10.1007s12571-021-01243-y

United Nations. 2022. The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2022. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2022/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2022.pdf

Van Loon, J. and Flores Rojas, M. 2022. Training of trainers manual on the operation, maintenance and repair of farm machinery. Rome, FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb9549en

Woltering, L. and Jacobs, F. 2019. The Scaling Scan: A practical tool to determine the strengths and weaknesses of your scaling ambition. CIMMYT and SNV Development Organization.

Woltering, L., M. del Refugio Boa Alvarado, J. Stahl, J. Van Loon, E.Ortiz Hernández, B. Brown, M. Kumar Gathala, Thierfelder C. 2022. Capacity development for scaling conservation agriculture in smallholder farming systems in Latin America, South Asia, and Southern Africa: exposing the hidden levels. Knowl. Manag. Dev. J. 1–23.

Yahia, E.M., Fonseca, J.M., Kitinoja, L. 2019. Post-harvest losses and waste, in: Yahia, E.M. (Ed.), Post-harvest Technology of Perishable Horticultural Commodities. Elsevier Inc., pp. 43–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813276-0.00002-X

CHAPTER 3.
The role of different stakeholders in developing solutions to reduce post-harvest losses

©FAO/Belty Lokossa

Abstract

Reducing post-harvest loss will improve productivity, increase food availability, and reduce the impact of agriculture on climate change. It will require the engagement of all stakeholders of agricultural value chains, including government (public), private sector, research institutions, academia, and development organizations. These stakeholders will need to collaborate to properly assess losses, prioritize value chains and interventions, and evaluate the effectiveness of post-harvest loss reduction interventions. Governments must focus on infrastructural development, such as roads, energy, water, drying and storage facilities, especially in rural areas, to improve production and connect farmers to downstream activities. Additionally, they should provide training to value chain stakeholders through their extension services and reinforce regulations related to quality standards. The private sector is expected to engage in various partnership arrangements including public-private or private-private partnerships to adopt and implement effective and best-fit post-harvest loss reduction innovations. A farm-to-fork approach should be considered. In partnership with public and private sectors, research and academia are expected to lead the development of loss assessment protocols, loss assessment studies and prioritization of value chains and segments for loss reduction interventions. Academia and research institutions should also focus on the development of best-fit post-harvest loss reduction innovation packages, testing and demonstrating these innovations with value chain stakeholders. In addition, these institutions are expected to enhance the skills of future post-harvest scientists in developing countries through degree-orientated applied research programmes. Development partners can contribute by providing grants to research and academic institutions to support post-harvest loss reduction actions. Establishing a guarantee fund is essential to enable smallholder farmers to easily access loans to fund post-harvest operations. Non-governmental organization are expected to play a key role in upgrading the functionality of value chain stakeholders, improving working efficiency and assisting these stakeholders in accessing credit facilities from banks, microfinance institutions and community savings and loan schemes.

Keywords:

Post-harvest loss, infrastructural development, partnerships, private sector and value chain.

Introduction

According to FAO (2019), reducing food loss and waste is widely recognised as an important way to reduce production costs, increase the efficiency of a food system, improve food security and nutrition, and contribute towards environmental sustainability. Efficient management of post-harvest losses is critical for building sustainable food systems. Addressing the multifaceted challenges posed by PHL requires collaborative effort, with one pivotal approach being the establishment of public-private partnerships (PPPs). This model combines public and private resources to comprehensively address the complexities of PHL. In this chapter, we explore the dynamics of public-private partnerships aimed at reducing post-harvest losses. We clarify the distinct roles of governments, private enterprises, and research institutions in successfully implementing PHL reduction programmes. By understanding the synergies among stakeholders, we can unleash the potential for transformative change in global food systems, promoting resilience, sustainability, and increased food security. Reducing PHL to the barest minimum using best-fit available innovations should be a top priority in developing countries. Governments, the private sector, research institutions, academia, and development partners should collectively engage in achieving this goal.

Public-private partnership towards postharvest loss reduction

Both public and private sectors play an important role in reducing post-harvest losses. Their impact can be significantly amplified through enhanced collaboration. Creating a conducive environment for the private sector to thrive is key for the public sector as it facilitates increased engagement and support for PHL reduction efforts. Moreover, by engaging and undertaking actions on the ground, the private sector stands a great chance of implementing effective solutions. A more impactful approach involves the collaboration of the public and private sectors to address the PHL losses through such arrangements as public-private partnerships (PPPs). The Africa-wide rice task force on post-harvest and value addition, coordinated by the Africa Rice Center has proposed different ways in which PPPs could contribute to reducing PHL, as outlined below (Ndindeng, 2021a):

I

Establishing a multi-sectoral PHL reduction task force at the country and regional level, comprising policy-makers, researchers, academia, development partners (donors and non-governmental organization) and representatives from key segments of the value chain.

II

Conducting high-level consultation among task force members to gain a better understanding of the problem, reaching a common ground and prioritizing value chains for targeted interventions.

III

Developing quantitative and qualitative standards along each targeted value chain to serve as references for PHL quantification and implementing a reward for quality systems.

IV

Creating loss quantification protocols that consider both quantitative and qualitative losses for each targeted value chain to ensure comparability of data across different sites. The quantitative and qualitative losses should be reported as monetary values.

V

Identifying critical and low-loss points (LLP), determining their causes and quantifying the losses at each point for each targeted value chain and site.

VI

Prioritizing value chains and loss reduction interventions at different points along each targeted value chain.

VII

Selecting the best-fit innovations packages to mitigate the PHL at each point of loss.

VIII

Developing gender responsive business models around post-harvest innovations.

IX

Implementing site-specific PHL reduction interventions at different points along the value chain or along the entire value chain through demonstrations of innovation packages and establish farmer field and business schools to create model value chain villages.

X

Establishing a system that reinforces standards, rewards good quality and penalizes poor quality products.

XI

Evaluating PHL reduction interventions through quantifying PHL two or three years after the intervention.

The role of governments in the implementation of post-harvest loss reduction programme

The government needs to support the implementation of PHL reduction programmes by creating a conducive environment to attract PHL solutions from the government itself, the private sector, farmers and other key stakeholders. One way of achieving this is by establishing a multi-sectoral task force to ensure that the government prioritize infrastructural development, such as roads, energy and water, especially in rural areas. This will improve production and connect farmers to downstream activities in the food value chain. Moreover, the government can set up innovative financial instruments to mitigate investment risks, encouraging private sector financing, creating an enabling environment for agriculture and agri-businesses to thrive (African Development Bank, 2016). Policies and strategies are also required to guide and provide a roadmap for the efforts to reduce PHL. This involves conducting PHL assessments to understand the extent of losses and introduce targeted solutions. Additionally, the public can play an important role in capacity development. This includes providing training and support for piloting and demonstrating technologies developed and disseminated by the private sector.

Development of roads, energy, and water infrastructure

Agricultural production takes place mostly in rural areas due to the availability of cheaper land and labour. However, in most cases, these rural areas are poorly connected to roads, water and electricity networks and are far from agroprocessing sites. Consequently, produce needs to be transported over long distances before reaching the value-addition sites or markets. However, this presents challenges due to the potential damage of fresh produce during transit. (Al-Dairi et al., 2022). This is exacerbated by roads in poor condition, inadequate packaging materials and methods and the absence of refrigerated transport systems. Poor road infrastructure also leads to higher transport costs for agricultural produce, increasing the overall cost of production, making locally produced products uncompetitive against imported counterparts. When products become non-competitive, they often spend extended periods on market shelves, leading to increased PHL. Clean water and electricity supply are essential for post-harvest treatments such as washing, cutting and waxing fresh produce. These treatments can extend the shelf-life of produce and reduce losses (Wang and Teplitski, 2023). A stable electricity supply is also required to power cold storage rooms, drying units and processing facilities. These are some of the areas requiring the support of the government to reduce PHL.

Facilitation access to credit, crowdfunding, and de-risking investments in agricultural sector

Access to credit has been shown to increase agricultural productivity especially when those credits are invested in agricultural production (Elahi et al., 2018). However, in most developing countries, access to credit, especially for agricultural activities, including post-harvest management, is poor because financial institutions consider agriculture in general as a high-risk investment. In addition, most value chain stakeholders in the agricultural sector are smallholders who lack guarantees to secure loans from financial institutions (Channa et al., 2022) and specific actions are required to support them. This makes it more challenging for them to invest in both pre-and post-harvest operations. Therefore, the public sector has an opportunity to create innovative financial instruments to both remove investment risk and encourage private sector financing and investment to ensure that these funds are not diverted to other purposes. This will go a long way in reducing PHL.

Creation of an enabling environment

In some developing countries, certain government policies have created unfavourable conditions for the local agricultural sectors, often favouring imported products. One notable example is the case of urban bias, as conceptualized by Bezemer and Headey (2008). This refers to a systemic bias against agriculture and the rural economy in government policies and the allocation of developmental resources. “Urban bias is believed to be one of the largest institutional impediments to the competitiveness of food sectors in developing countries around the world” (Demont, 2013, p.3). To reduce PHL that may result from the market failure of local produce, governments must create an enabling environment for agriculture and agri-businesses to thrive. This can be achieved through allocating more resources to value-addition and demand-lifting investments (Demont, 2013). While many solutions to address PHL have been developed, not all of them have been successfully adopted by farmers and other stakeholders along the food value chain. In many countries, extension services have concentrated more on the production side, neglecting post-harvest management and handling.

Roles of the private sector to support reduction of post-harvest loss

The active involvement of the private sector in post-harvest management (PHM) plays a critical role in reducing PHL, which is widespread in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). The private sector here is considered in its widest sense as referring to the whole spectrum of private stakeholders, including farmers, processors, marketers, off-takers, suppliers of equipment and storage bags, and so on. These are the ones carrying out actions and enhancing investments to reduce PHL. They select, purchase, and use different technologies, such as harvesting, threshing, milling and storage innovations as part of the effort towards reducing PHL. They also participate in training to develop and improve skills needed to address PHL. More importantly, they invest along the food value chain in various equipment and machinery. The financial component is also a highly important area that the private sector can support by lending or investing more funds towards actions to reduce PHL.

Create and facilitate multi-stakeholder innovation platforms in major production sites

For value chains to be sustainable, especially in developing countries, a systems approach is needed to tap into existing strengths and opportunities and respond to their weaknesses and threats (United State Agency of International Development, 2023). This entails better organization and linkages, experience sharing and learning, as well as enhanced governance among and between the diverse value chain stakeholders. Multi-stakeholder platforms composed of microfinance institutions, seed suppliers, agro-input dealers, growers, production advisors, processors, aggregators/marketers, consumers, equipment fabricators, and policymakers should be facilitated in growing sites in developing countries. Mutually beneficial contractual arrangements for suppliers and buyers of products and services within such platforms should be encouraged. These contractual arrangements will also ensure demand-driven production, which will meet both quantity and quality requirements for products and services, thus reducing PHL. Since 2015, AfricaRice has facilitated the creation of rice multi-stakeholder platforms in specific sites in African countries, including Benin, Côte d’Ivoire, Madagascar, Niger, Nigeria, and Togo around the Mini-GEM parboiling facility (Ndindeng et al., 2015a). This has resulted in better economies of scale, cleaner and healthier practices, reduced fuelwood consumption or substitution of wood with rice husk (Ndindeng et al., 2019), and better product quality that provides better returns, especially for women and youth who dominate the rice parboiling industry in SSA (Akoa-Etoa et al., 2016; AfricaRice, 2020).

Mitigating post-harvest losses: mechanized solutions and optimal practices

Late and manual harvesting results in quantitative loss before and during harvest as well as quality depreciation, especially for grains like rice, wheat, and maize. Late harvesting is mainly due to labour scarcity during harvesting season and the laborious and time-consuming nature of manual harvesting. The use of combine harvesters is not feasible for smallholders in developing countries due to the small farm sizes (0.4-1.0 ha per farmer), heterogeneity in the varieties cultivated within a given site and poor synchronization in the cropping schedule amongst farmers. Demonstrating techniques through training and facilitating the acquisition of scale-appropriate and efficient harvesting equipment, such as a motor scythe or walk-behind reaper, a reaper attached to two- and four-wheeled tractors, or mini-combined harvesters coupled with optimum harvesting time and mechanized threshing, can have a positive impact on the reduction of PHL and increase efficiency of the operations (Figure 3.1). Furthermore, drudgery will be reduced, and time will be saved, particularly benefiting women who tend to dominate these operations. The use of machines for post-harvest operations has been shown to reduce quantitative losses (Gu et al., 2019; Ndindeng et al., 2021a) especially when optimum machine settings and product characteristics are used correctly.

Figure 3.1. Mechanized rice threshing immediately after the harvest. The use of the tarpaulin under the thresher allow the recovery of grains that drops to the soil.

© AfricaRice/Sali Atanga Ndindeng

Support the setting up of modern small and medium-scale processing facilities close to primary production sites

Simple small and medium-scale processing facilities for undertaking post-harvest handling (washing, cutting, and waxing) of fresh produce at the production site can extend the shelf-life of produce and reduce loss (Wang & Teplitski, 2023). In some cases, rice drying, parboiling and milling technologies are available in rice production sites, but the processing capacity or quality is inadequate. For example, although parboiling rice improves the physical and nutritional quality (Zohoun et al., 2018a; 2018b) and market value (Demont et al., 2012; Akoa-Etoa et al., 2016) of rice, it can lead to high quantitative and qualitative losses if the equipment and procedures are sub-optimal, as shown in several studies (Ndindeng et al., 2015a). Facilitating the acquisition of improved parboiling technologies (such as the GEM parboiler coupled with training on parboiled rice production) can contribute to reducing both quantitative and qualitative PHL during parboiling (Figure 3.2, and box 4.1 in chapter 4).

Figure 3.2. Low efficiency parboiling rice with cast iron drums fueled by firewood (left) Big GEM parboiling with vessels and brick stoves installed on cemented surface (centre) Mini-GEM parboiling system records low energy cost by using rice husk as fuel (right)

© AfricaRice/Sali Atanga Ndindeng
© AfricaRice/Sali Atanga Ndindeng
© AfricaRice/Sali Atanga Ndindeng

Milling systems are available in almost every rice-growing site in African villages, with the majority being smallscale Engelberg or rubber roll types (Figure 3.3). However, most mills are not equipped with de-stoners, graders and colour sorters. This leads to the production of rice of low quality compared to imported brands. Soullier et al. (2020) demonstrated evidence of rice millers in West Africa upgrading to industrial and semi-industrial mills with concomitant improvement in the physical quality of rice. For example, upgrading the existing small-scale rubber roll mills with standalone de-stoners, graders, and colour sorters of similar capacity can be an efficient alternative. However, some upgrades may face many challenges related to technology and vertical coordination along the value chain. Furthermore, millers should receive training on spillage reduction techniques during milling, and milling facilities should be equipped with cemented surfaces to facilitate the recovery of dropped grains. Finally, although sun-drying is still the most convenient and cheapest method for cereal drying, it is poorly exploited in developing countries, leading to high-quality loss. Constructing improved sun-drying surfaces for cereal drying, accompanied by crop specific training can address this issue (Figure 3.4).

Figure 3.3. Engelberg type mills fabricated locally (left) and improved operation using rubber roll mills (right)

© AfricaRice/Sali Atanga Ndindeng
© AfricaRice/Sali Atanga Ndindeng

Figure 3.4. (left) Women are adding value to rice by using a rice destoning machine (right) final product of rice packed to sale in urban markets in Côte d’Ivoire

© AfricaRice/Sali Atanga Ndindeng
© AfricaRice/Sali Atanga Ndindeng

Figure 3.5. Rice drying using woven fiver bags place on the ground (top) improved rice drying using tarpaulin placed on raise cemented and enclosed surfaces (bottom)

© AfricaRice/Sali Atanga Ndindeng
© AfricaRice/Sali Atanga Ndindeng

Promote hermetic packaging and storage systems for cereal grains

The construction of grain storage facilities and use of hermetic storage systems is urgent in SSA. This is because of the high risk associated with the use of jute bags to store cereals such as maize, rice, sorghum, wheat, and beans. This also creates favourable temperature and humidity for mycotoxigenic fungal growth and poor grain quality. The absence of improved storage facilities in rural areas also contributes to this issue.

Several hermetic storage technologies, such as the Purdue improved crop storage (PICS) bags (Purdue Post-harvest, USA), the SuperGrainbag®, GrainSafe® and GrainProCocoons® (GrainPro Inc., Nairobi, Kenya), have been developed and are being commercialized. In addition, hermetic systems for cereals can also be designed at village level with minimal training using locally available containers like polyethylene and metal drums with a holding capacity of up to 300 kg per drum. However, as with other post-harvest technologies, their adoption has been low. Governments and other developmental partners will need to support the construction of temperature and humidity-controlled warehouses for storage while facilitating credits for acquiring hermetic storage systems. Farmers and processors, including women, who use improved storage technologies have demonstrated lower risks associated with storage as well as a higher bargaining power and reap the benefits of storage during the off-season when prices are relatively high (Missiame et al., 2021). In addition, some of these farmers have used their stored rice as collateral for agricultural credits. In Ethiopia, FAO has been promoting the use of hermetic technologies at household level and many farmers have benefitted from this technology. Youth artisans are now involved in fabricating and selling metal silos made of simple galvanized sheets and input suppliers are stocking PICS bags for sale to farmers (FAO, 2021).

Figure 3.6. (left) Cereal storage using non-hermetic bags in open air which can lead to losses (right) improved practice by using hermetic storage under roof

© AfricaRice/Sali Atanga Ndindeng
© AfricaRice/Sali Atanga Ndindeng

Promotion of cold chain transportation and storage

Cold chain transportation and storage are critical for the preservation of the quality of fresh produce. Fruit and vegetable cold chain logistics refers to a supply chain system that keeps products under suitable temperature conditions from the beginning of picking, processing, storage, transportation, and sales to consumers, to ensure product quality and safety and reduced losses. Common cold chain transportation equipment includes incubators, refrigerated trucks, and containers (with storage functions). With increasing energy costs and carbon emissions linked to cold chains, phase change materials (PCM) that enhance energy use efficiency are now being tested for use (Qi et al., 2022). Cold transportation chains require improvement in road infrastructure, while cold storage requires the availability of electricity or the setting up of solar energy generators to run the cooling systems.

Value-addition to low-grade produce and by-products

Several by-products are generated along the crop production chains that can be valorized through value-addition technology demonstration, coupled with training. For example, low-grade products may include physically damaged produce and grains, while by-products include peelings, straw, husk, bran and fine broken rice. The poor utilization of these products reduces the productivity of the entire value chain and resource-use efficiency. In developing countries, bran is mainly used as an ingredient in livestock feed, while fine broken rice, for example, is used for preparing rice porridges, paste and snacks in certain parts of the continent after proper cleaning. Straw and husk are either used as feed for cattle, especially in arid and semi-arid regions, or litter in poultry farms in humid and sub-humid regions, and as substrates in mushroom production (Tang et al., 2019b). Most straw and husks are abandoned or openly burned in the field, causing land, water, and air pollution (Ndindeng et al., 2019; Migo-Sumagang et al., 2020). Phan et al. (2019) proposed two methods for oil extraction from rice bran and germ that can increase the extractability whilst preserving quality: ultrasonic pre-treatment combined with coldpressed extraction and thermal cooking pre-treatment combined with cold-pressed extraction. Cold-pressed rice bran oil supplemented with omega-3 (linolenic acid) has health promoting effects. Large-scale rice bran oil production technologies are not common in developing countries, probably due to a lack of technology mastery and high operational costs. Fine broken rice can be ground into flour and used as a partial substitute for wheat in the production of biscuits, cookies and cakes, as demonstrated by Eyenga et al. (2020). Migo-Sumagang et al. (2020) recently demonstrated a furnace for efficiently generating heat from rice straw for drying paddy or other food crops. Rice husk has also been demonstrated as a clean, renewable energy source for cooking processes in Africa when used with fan-assisted gasifier cook stoves (Ndindeng et al., 2019) or in improved wood stoves after briquetting (Ndindeng et al., 2015b). Rice husk fan-assisted stoves have been piloted in Côte d’Ivoire and Nigeria for rice parboiling. Its out-scaling in rice-growing environments across SSA will add value to rice husks and reduce climate change and health-related risk associated with the use of open field burning of husks and traditional wood stoves. Activated biochar, a potent organic fertilizer, can be produced from efficient rice husk or straw burning in fan-assisted gasifier cook stoves or furnaces.

Role of research, academia and development partners in post-harvest loss reduction

Research, academia and development partners, in collaboration with other value chain stakeholders (farmers, processors, traders, and consumers), will have to implement the following context-specific PHL reduction innovations - detailed below. The supporting institutions in research, academia and development should focus on piloting best PHL reduction innovation packages, training post-harvest equipment fabricators, training trainers on the use of post-harvest technologies, supporting large-scale training of end-users and facilitating the acquisition of credits for the purchase of pre- and post-harvest equipment.

Academia

Academia has an important role to play in developing capacities and education for post-harvest management in SSA through targeted training. Such training must be offered at different levels, including certificate, diploma and degree levels, or vocational training, depending on the needs of each country. Key areas where capacity development is needed include PH handling, PH management, storage along the food value chain, as well as measurement and assessment of the PHL levels. It is important that such training is practically oriented so that the trainees can quickly gain skills that will be useful in the field and bring employment opportunities to them. However, the challenge is that facilities and infrastructure such as laboratories are needed to ensure that practical-oriented training is offered. It is worth noting that FAO, in collaboration with CIMMYT, has developed online eLearning courses on small-scale agricultural mechanization hire services as a business enterprise, which includes a module on post-harvest .This course offers materials that are free of charge and could be utilized in training at the country level as part of the capacity development efforts. The trainees from such courses would, in turn, train other stakeholders along the food value chain, such as farmers, small-scale processors and operators of small-scale equipment, providing post-harvest handling to other farmers.

Research

Research is another important component of the overall effort to reduce PHL. There are several areas which require more research to collect data to help develop solutions and recommendations for PHL reduction, especially in developing countries. Such areas include:

I

Developing food varieties with good post-harvest handling characteristics. For example, improved and preferred rice varieties should record high yields (low shattering loss translated as yield increases) and short growing duration. Two traits that are most attractive to farmers. For grain milling quality, millers demand varieties with high milling recovery and white translucent endosperm, while the majority of consumers in West and East Africa want rice with a slender grain, aromatic and nonaromatic with the texture being slightly sticky and soft to a medium hardness (Ndindeng et al., 2021b, Twine et al., 2022). Rice with such characteristics that are sorted and well packaged will not be down graded at the point of sale due to quality dedifferentiation from imported brands (Demont et al., 2012; Demont and Ndour, 2015; AKoa-Etoa et al., 2016). This, in turn can reduce qualitative PHL. The demon stration of such varieties through the training of private and community-based seed producers, who are members of the rice multi-stakeholder platform, will facilitate the scaling of the new varieties and varietal turnover in farmer’s fields.

II

Research into the best methods and approaches to conduct PHL assessment. This may include developing tools and apps, which may simplify and enhance the efficiency of data collection, analysis and interpretation.

III

Developing and testing innovative post-harvest management technologies suitable for small-scale post-harvest handling operations. This may include developing efficient methods and equipment, machinery for harvesting, post-harvest handling and storage.

* English version https://elearning.fao.org/course/view.php?id=711 and French version https://elearning.fao.org/course/view.php?lang=fr&id=765

Development partners

The development partners have a great role to play in reducing PHL. They can support efforts to assess the extent of PHL in a country so that appropriate strategies, policies and actions can be developed and implemented. Another area is capacity development through training so that stakeholders along the food value chain can be equipped with skills on PHM, required to reduce PHL. Support in developing training infrastructure and facilities, which could enhance the country’s capacities in addressing post-harvest losses is required. In addition, the development partners could provide both financial and technical support towards the development of local innovations that could be well suited to reduce post-harvest loss.

Conclusion

Post-harvest loss reduction strategies should take a value chain approach to be effective.

Key stakeholders, including government bodies, private enterprises, research institutions, academia, and development partners, each play distinct yet interconnected roles. Government entities must foster an enabling policy environment that supports and incentivizes post-harvest loss reduction initiatives. Private enterprises, on the other hand, are crucial in providing the necessary infrastructure, facilities and technologies that can streamline the post-harvest processes. Moreover, research institutions and academia must continually contribute to understanding the nuanced dynamics of post-harvest losses, identifying critical points and their root causes, as well as highlighting the factors leading to low losses.

A cornerstone of progress lies in fostering improved collaboration through private-public and multi-stakeholder partnerships. Strengthening these partnerships along the targeted value chains will increase the impact of post-harvest loss reduction initiatives. By collectively addressing the challenges at each stage of the value chain, we can not only minimize losses but also strengthen the resilience and sustainability of our global food systems.

References

African Development Bank (AfDB). 2016. Feed Africa: Strategy for Agricultural Transformation in Africa 2016-2025. Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire: 30 pp.

Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice). 2018. Continental Investment Plan for accelerating Rice Self-Sufficiency in Africa (CIPRiSSA), Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire, 204 pp.

Al-Dairi, M., Pathare, P. B., Al-Yahyai, R., & Opara, U. L. 2022. Mechanical damage of fresh produce in postharvest transportation: Current status and future prospects. Trends in Food Science & Technology.

Akoa Etoa, J. M., Ndindeng, S. A., Owusu, E. S., Woin, N., Bindzi, B., & Demont, M. 2016. Consumer valuation of an improved rice parboiling technology: Experimental evidence from Cameroon. African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 11(311-2016-5648).

Bezemer, D., & Headey, D. 2008. Agriculture, development, and urban bias. World development, 36(8), 1342-1364.

Channa, H., Ricker-Gilbert, J., Feleke, S., & Abdoulaye, T. 2022. Overcoming smallholder farmers’ post-harvest constraints through harvest loans and storage technology: Insights from a randomized controlled trial in Tanzania. Journal of Development Economics, 157, 102851.

Demont, M. 2013. Reversing urban bias in African rice markets: A review of 19 National Rice Development Strategies. Global Food Security, 2(3), 172-181.

Demont, M., & Ndour, M. 2015. Upgrading rice value chains: Experimental evidence from 11 African markets. Global Food Security, 5:70–76.

Demont, M., Zossou, E., Rutsaert, P., Ndour, M., Van Mele, P., & Verbeke, W. 2012. Consumer valuation of improved rice parboiling technologies in Benin. Food Quality and Preference, 23(1), 63-70.

Elahi, E., Abid, M., Zhang, L., Ul Haq, S., & Sahito, J. G. M. 2018. Agricultural advisory and financial services; farm level access, outreach and impact in a mixed cropping district of Punjab, Pakistan. Land use policy, 71, 249-260.

FAO. 2021. Ethiopia envisions Food Systems Transformation by 2030, FAO Ethiopia Newsletter, 2nd Quarter 2021 - Issue #3, https://www.fao.org/3/cb7453en/cb7453en.pdf

Gu, R. L., Huang, R., Jia, G. Y., Yuan, Z. P., Ren, L. S., Li, L. I., & Wang, J. H. 2019. Effect of mechanical threshing on damage and vigor of maize seed threshed at different moisture contents. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 18(7), 1571-1578.

United State Agency for International Development. 2023. Value Chain Development Wiki. Marketlinks. Ac cessed 26 March 2023. https://www.marketlinks.org/using-value-chain-development-wiki

Migo-Sumagang, M. V. P., Van Hung, N., Detras, M. C. M., Alfafara, C. G., Borines, M. G., Capunitan, J. A., & Gummert, M. 2020. Optimization of a downdraft furnace for rice straw-based heat generation. Renewable Energy, 148, 953-963.

Missiame, A., Nyikal, R. A., & Irungu, P. 2021. What is the impact of rural bank credit access on the technical ef ficiency of smallholder cassava farmers in Ghana? An endogenous switching regression analysis. Heliyon, 7(5), e07102.

Ndindeng, S. A., Manful, J., Futakuchi, K., Mapiemfu-Lamare, D., Akoa-Etoa, J. M., Tang, E. N., & Moreira, J. 2015a. Upgrading the quality of Africa’s rice: a novel artisanal parboiling technology for rice processors in sub-Saharan Africa. Food Science & Nutrition, 3(6), 557-568.

Ndindeng, S. A., Candia, A., Mapiemfu, D. L., Rakotomalala, V., Danbaba, N., Kulwa, K., and Futakuchi, K. 2021a. Valuation of rice post-harvest losses in sub-Saharan Africa and its mitigation strategies. Rice Science, 28(3), 212-216.

Ndindeng, S. A., Twine, E. E., Mujawamariya, G., Fiamohe, R., & Futakuchi, K. 2021b. Hedonic pricing of rice attributes, market sorting, and gains from quality improvement in the Beninese market. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 50(1), 170-186.

Ndindeng, S. A., Wopereis, M., Sanyang, S., & Futakuchi, K. 2019. Evaluation of fan-assisted rice husk fuelled gasifier cookstoves for application in sub-Sahara Africa. Renewable Energy, 139, 924-935.

Ndindeng, S. A., Mbassi, J. E. G., Mbacham, W. F., Manful, J., Graham-Acquaah, S., Moreira, J., and Futakuchi, K. 2015b. Quality optimization in briquettes made from rice milling by-products. Energy for sustainable development, 29, 24-31.

Qi, T., Ji, J., Zhang, X., Liu, L., Xu, X., Ma, K., & Gao, Y. 2022. Research progress of cold chain transport technology for storage fruits and vegetables. Journal of Energy Storage, 56, 105958.

Soullier, G., & Moustier, P. 2020. The modernization of the rice value chain in Senegal: a movetowards the Asian quiet revolution? Development Policy Review, 39, O81–O101. https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12459

Tang, E. N., Ngome, F. A., Ndindengc, S. A., Bigoga, J. D., Suh, C., & Moreira, J. 2019. Rice residues can be converted to functional health nutrients through mushroom (Pleurotus ostreatus Jacq. ex Fr.) Kummer production. Agriculture and Natural Resources, 53(5), 506-514.

Wang, L., & Teplitski, M. 2023. Microbiological food safety considerations in shelf-life extension of fresh fruits and vegetables. Current Opinion in Biotechnology, 80, 102895.

Zohoun, E. V., Tang, E. N., Soumanou, M. M., Manful, J., Akissoe, N. H., Bigoga, J., and Ndindeng, S. A. 2018a. Physicochemical and nutritional properties of rice as affected by parboiling steaming time at atmo spheric pressure and variety. Food Science & Nutrition, 6(3), 638-652.

Zohoun, E. V., Ndindeng, S. A., Soumanou, M. M., Tang, E. N., Bigoga, J., Manful, J., and Futakuchi, K. 2018b. Appropriate parboiling steaming time at atmospheric pressure and variety to produce rice with weak digestive properties. Food Science & Nutrition, 6(4), 757-764.

CHAPTER 4.
Gender dynamics in post-harvest management: roles and empowerment opportunities

©FAO/Belty Lokossa

Abstract

Gender equality and women’s empowerment are important factors in post-harvest management. Organizations such as FAO promote gender equality by encouraging participation of women and men in decision-making, granting equal capacity to exercise their human rights. Gender equality also provides equal access to, and control over resources and services, including employment opportunities along agricultural value chains. This helps ensure equal benefits from development opportunities are achieved. Unfortunately, initiatives aimed at improving access to technology access, financial access, capacity building and scaling up innovations tend to overlook gender dimensions and considerations. This chapter will provide examples, tools and approaches for integrating gender perspectives into post-harvest management and value chains. It also explains the importance of empowering women, reducing their workload during post-harvest handling and addressing their key challenges. In addition, it will emphasize the importance of adopting an integrated gender-responsive approach to ensure equal participation of both women and men in all stages of the intervention.

Keywords:

Gender, roles, empower, women, post-harvest management

The importance of a gender perspective in post-harvest management

Efficient post-harvest management and handling operations are essential to combat hunger, raise income and improve food security. Post-harvest management includes a series of interconnected activities from the time of harvest through to crop handling and marketing. At every stage of handling a product post-harvest – including cleaning, packaging, transportation, storage, preparation, and retail – there are risks of contamination or spoilage, both leading to post-harvest losses and potential food safety issues. Effective management of post-harvest activities is therefore crucial. Farmers, whether contributing as family members, employees or entrepreneurs working along the value chain, should have equal access to adequate equipment, tools, knowledge and services. The utilization of a wide range of mechanization options can contribute not only to safeguarding the quality of products but also to improving working conditions and reducing the effort of tedious manual tasks, which often fall upon women. Unfortunately, many initiatives aimed at improving technology, management, access to finance, and capacity building often ignore or underestimate gender-related dimensions.

Integrating a gender perspective in post-harvest management is key, as gender equality, environmental and efficiency goals are complementary and mutually reinforcing. Achieving these goals can often involve trade-offs in striving for sustainable production and food security. “The high level of women’s involvement in the post-harvest stage confirms the relevance of considering gender when examining post-harvest loss” (Nordhagen, 2021, p.4).

Gender dynamics play a significant role in shaping household decisions, with women often driven by different priorities compared to men. Gender relations impact the functioning of value chains at all levels, depending on types of jobs available to men and women, the technology adopted, and their participation in decision-making. (FAO, 2016).

Understanding the division of labour in post-harvest management, comprehending why specific tasks are assigned to women and/or men, and what this implies in terms of opportunities or constraints) as well as how it influences life choices, is very important when trying to achieve sustainable outcomes. It is also essential to assess the enabling environment and explore whether women and men have equal access to key assets, resources and services to support their tasks. Access to financial services, for instance, is a pre-requisite for investing in technologies and equipment, and women often do not own assets they can use as collateral for credit. Access to information or training and learning from peers can contribute to building women’s self-esteem and confidence to start a successful small business. In all regions, gender dynamics at the household level are influenced by culturally defined expectations for women and men. An understanding of these dynamics and implications is, therefore, integral to evaluating why different roles and resources may be allocated based on gender and age. This understanding is essential for designing interventions that can be gender transformative.

Finally, participation and leadership within producer organizations serve as an entry point for voicing different needs and priorities and accessing key services and resources. For example, it is important for organizations to assess the inclusion of women and then determine how to enhance their capabilities and improve resource access. Research in 2019 on post-harvest processors in the fisheries sector in Ghana showed that the inclusion of women in local organizations led to an increase in their capacity, confidence and engagement in fisheries management (Torell et al., 2019). Another example includes the promotion of the parboiling technology known as GEM (grain quality enhancer, energy-efficient and durable material) in Benin, Côte d’Ivoire, Niger, Nigeria and Togo (Box 4.1).

Box 4.1. The GEM Rice Parboiler: an example mechanization solution adapted to women’s needs

Rice parboiling is a transformation process that improves the quality of rice, both physically and nutritionally. The high demand for high-quality parboiled rice in Africa is testimony to its incredible benefits. But, with the advent of modern technologies, traditional rice parboiling methods can now be replaced by more efficient, safer and environmentally-friendly techniques. This can help empower women by freeing them from the laborious and time-consuming task of rice parboiling, enabling them to concentrate on other meaningful activities that can improve their lives and their communities.

Figure 4.1 GEM kit demonstration from GIC Mali

© FAO/Maurizio Furst

AfricaRice, in consultation with women processors from the Glazoué Innovation Platform (IP) in Benin, has developed an improved rice parboiling technology called GEM. It stands for ‘grain quality enhancer, energy-efficient, and durable material’. The aim of this technology is to reduce the drudgery and risk of heat burns and exposure to smoke for women processors. Additionally, GEM produces rice of higher quality compared to traditional methods. Several Green Innovation Centres, including those in Benin, Mali, and Burkina Faso, have adopted different versions of this technology, contributing to the GICAFS project.

The GEM is equipped with hoists and rails for safer lifting and moving of heavy vessels used for steaming paddy. By helping rural women produce cleaner and higher-quality rice, we empower them to enhance their economic opportunities and create a brighter future for themselves and their communities Furthermore, GEM presents a more cost-effective and efficient method compared to traditional techniques, thereby allowing for the processing of larger quantities of paddy rice in a significantly shorter time period. This innovative approach has the potential to offer significant benefits to the broader community. This eco-friendly stove is a shining example of sustainable cooking solutions. It utilizes rice husk, a cost-free and readily available fuel source in rice-producing regions, to power its operations. Additionally, the stove is equipped with a solar-powered fan that ensures it operates at peak efficiency. By opting for this stove, individuals can take active measures to reduce their carbon footprint while also making a practical and wise investment in their household.

Through the training provided on the GEM rice-parboiling system, the women rice processors of Benin, Côte d’Ivoire, Niger, Nigeria and Togo have been empowered with the technical knowledge and skills needed to turn their rice parboiling businesses into profitable enterprises. Their success is not only inspiring but also a testament to the power of education and the potential for positive change in communities.

Sources: AfricaRice. 2020. GEM rice parboiler. https://www.africarice.org/gem-rice-parboiler
AfricaRice. n.d. GEM parboiling: brief on the technology. http://www.ricehub.org/RT/post-harvest/gemparboiling/

Gender roles in post-harvest management

Both women and men actively participate along various stages of the food value chain, including post-harvest handling, but the visibility of their work and the opportunities to access and benefit from resources and services are still unequal. The FAO Policy on Gender Equality 2020–30 highlights the fact that women work in agriculture, serving as contributing family workers, and farmers on their own account. They can also be entrepreneurs running on- and off-farm businesses, and wage workers (FAO, 2020). In all these capacities, women perform post-harvest activities and play an active role in storing of seeds for more agrobiodiverse conservation (Chambers and Momsen, 2007).

Traditionally, in many developing countries, post-harvest and processing operations of staple food consumed within households are viewed as women’s responsibilities, with little to no monetary value or social recognition. However, it’s important to note that women’s processing roles extend beyond merely preparing food for their families. Many women run small cottage industries directly from their homes, often with limited technological support.

Figure 4.2. Women-led service provision in mechanization in Nepal

©FAO/Umong Shahi

The tasks involved in processing various staple crops differ significantly. For instance, cassava roots are processed into several products, including gari, flour, bread, and starch. This involves many time-consuming steps including root peeling, scrubbing, grating, crushing, pressing, paste fermenting, drying, sieving and packing. Other staples, such as cereals (maize wheat, rice, millet, amongst others), require threshing, winnowing and dehusking before they can be milled into flour. For most of these time-consuming tasks, women still use simple manual tools like mortars and pestles or hand-operated mills. The demanding nature of these operations contributes to women’s work burden and time poverty, limiting their ability to manage their time efficiently. Unfortunately, policy makers and practitioners often overlook women’s priorities in terms of mechanization and access to services. Yet, there are successful examples in the field where mechanization initiatives have specifically targeted women (Figure 4.1, Box 4.2 and Figure 4.2).

Box 4.2. Locally manufactured cassava grinder and press

In response to the needs of women regarding income-generation, employment opportunities, improved processing and reduced work burden, FAO and GIZ have introduced two types of cassava processing equipment to women-led farmer cooperatives in Benin, Côte d’Ivoire and Malawi. In all three cases, locally manufactured threshers and grinders have been provided and designed to be easy to operate.

There are small variations in the models. In the case of Benin, the design includes stainless steel parts, which do not rust, guaranteeing the production of high quality “gari”. Additionally, the grinder is on wheels, enabling women to provide processing services to others. In Malawi, tests are underway to manufacture a bicycle and solar power-operated version of this equipment. Meanwhile, in Côte d’Ivoire the introduced models are fuel-generated and very affordable.

Figure 4.3. Woman from a cassava cooperative using an improved manual press in Benin

©FAO/Belty Lokossa

Source: FAO. 2023. Terminal project report “Promotion of sustainable agricultural mechanization for enhanced efficiency, income and resilience among smallholders” (GCP/GLO/1029/GER). Internal document
Justice, S., Flores Rojas, M. 2021. Review of and recommendations for Custom Hiring Centers for mechanization in Nepal and the Asian region. Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb7964en

cultural Infrastructure Development and Mechanization Promotion (CAIDMP) under the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development, has supported women-led custom hiring centres. These centres provide mechanization services for a range of post-harvest operations including threshing and shelling in rural communities (FAO, 2022b). Justice and Flores Rojas, (2021) highlight the need for increased support to enhance the performance of custom hiring centres to achieve their full potential, particularly by enabling women to access sustainable mechanization. Their study compiles a set of recommendations and solutions to this end.

Existing framework and participatory tools for women’s social and economic empowerment in post-harvest management

“Studies estimate global economic gains in the order of 5-6 USD trillion if women started and scaled new agri-businesses at the same rate men do” (WF-FI, 2022, p.5). Despite this, many challenges persist, hindering women’s participation in agribusiness value chains. These issues include employment discrimination, sexual harassment, and lack of voice and agency. (IFC, 2017).

Considering women’s significant participation in the agricultural sector workforce, they stand to benefit from agricultural mechanization. However, there are risks that need to be assessed related to the impact on labour (Daum, 2023). Moreover, women face specific barriers to adopting mechanization, including poor access to finance or subsidies, limited access to knowledge and training, existing social norms that restrict their mobility or even technology use, and lack of tailored machines adapted to women’s needs (FAO, 2015). To address this last point, the Green Innovation Centres for the agriculture and food sector (GICAFS) partnered with the private sector to adapt some machines responding to women’s needs (Box 4.3).

Box 4.3. Private sector role in manufacturing of gender-sensitive equipment: lessons learned from Rohit Krishi Industries

An interesting example of the role of private sector is highlighted by the partnership between an Indian manufacturer Rohit Krishi Industries Pvt. Ltd, and the Green Innovation Centres for the agriculture and food sector (GICAFS) in India where the potato planter and potato digger were adapted for women’s comfort and safety through participatory technology development trials. The modifications included changes in the planter’s footrest, as well as installation of seatbelts, armrests, and comfortable seats.

Source: Green Innovation Centre India (GIC). 2020. NEWSLETTER #5. October 2020. # GENDER EDITION. www.giz.de/en/downloads/GIAE-India-Newsletter-5_Gender-Edition.pdf.

A sustainable mechanization approach that offers equal access to equipment, technologies and related services can contribute to addressing key gender-based inequalities in post-harvest management. Simultaneously, this approach promotes women and youth as entrepreneurs. Mechanization is a critical agricultural input that can increase land productivity along the value chain, with the potential to reduce women’s work burden and tackle labour shortages (Sims and Kienzle, 2016). This is especially true in the context of rural-urban migration, where women often remain in rural communities, taking on additional work burdens while the men migrate (Sims and Kienzle, 2017). When women farmers access agricultural technologies, including mechanization, it translates into higher production, value addition to food products, while reducing risks such as food loss (Doss and Morris, 2001)

The framework for Sustainable Agricultural Mechanization in Africa (F-SAMA), adopted in 2018, recognizes the need to enhance small-scale farmers and their organizations. It highlights the importance of working with women and youth to achieve social sustainability supporting initiatives aimed at overcoming gender barriers (FAO and AUC, 2018). Another valuable additional framework and guideline developed by FAO includes the Gender Sensitive Value Chain Framework and practical guideline (Box 4.4).

Box 4.4. Gender and food loss in sustainable food value chains

The Gender Sensitive Value Chain Framework (FAO, 2016a) and the Guideline for practitioners on developing gender-sensitive value chains (FAO, 2018) can be used to analyze the whole value chain from the gender perspective. Within this framework that includes detailed guidelines to assess gender aspects in value chains, a tool was also developed to conceptualize and raise awareness on the nexus between gender equality and food loss while providing information on the specific gender-based constraints that hinder women’s and men’s ability to efficiently participate in the food value chain that can be used to identify efficient and culturally acceptable mechanization solutions, and other types of interventions to reduce food loss. A set of guiding questions and ideas of technologies for women’s empowerment are available in the practical guideline to help value chains actors to implement gender-sensitive value chains (FAO, 2018).

Source: FAO. 2016. Developing gender-sensitive value chains – A guiding framework. Rome. www.fao.org/3/i6462e/i6462e.pdf. FAO. 2018. Gender and food loss in sustainable food value chains – A guiding note. Rome. www.fao.org/3/i8620en/i8620en.pdf.

FAO has developed a methodology known as GRAST (gender and rural advisory services assessment tool) to assess the gender-sensitivity of rural advisory services. (Box 4.5). GRAST is designed to be used by any organization interested in assessing the delivery of gender sensitive advisory services to identify good practices and areas that require improvement. Over the years, FAO has widely implemented Dimitra Clubs and Farmer Field Schools, two gender-transformative approaches with significant potential to empower women through mechanization (Box 4.6). In 2023, FAO and CIMMYT reviewed the rapid version of the scaling scan methodology to adapt it to the needs of gender-related innovations. This was done to support a workshop that discussed how to scale tested cassava processing equipment (promoted under the Green Innovation Centres GICAFS project) that included a motorized grinder and a press, tested in Côte d’Ivoire, Benin and Malawi. The workshop, held in Benin, convened ten participants, representing key organizations from the private and public sectors (MOA, cassava processors, mechanics, service providers, researchers, and finance). With the help of the adapted tool, they were guided to assess opportunities and constraints linked to the scaling up of the cassava processing equipment. Together, they prioritized actions and accountability to lead them. The findings will be disseminated nationally and amongst partners to guide future projects and initiatives in gender and mechanization. Over the years, FAO has widely implemented Dimitra Clubs and Farmer Field Schools, two gendertransformative approaches with significant potential to empower women through mechanization (Box 4.6). In 2023, FAO and CIMMYT reviewed the rapid version of the scaling scan methodology to adapt it to the needs of gender-related innovations. This was done to support a workshop that discussed how to scale tested cassava processing equipment (promoted under the Green Innovation Centres GICAFS project) that included a motorized grinder and a press, tested in Côte d’Ivoire, Benin and Malawi. The workshop, held in Benin, convened ten participants, representing key organizations from the private and public sectors (MOA, cassava processors, mechanics, service providers, researchers, and finance). With the help of the adapted tool, they were guided to assess opportunities and constraints linked to the scaling up of the cassava processing equipment. Together, they prioritized actions and accountability to lead them. The findings will be disseminated nationally and amongst partners to guide future projects and initiatives in gender and mechanization.

Box 4.5. The GRAST tool: assessing the gender sensitivity of service providers

The FAO gender and rural advisory services assessment tool (GRAST) assesses the gender sensitivity of rural advisory services through seven key questions, examined at three levels of analysis: the enabling environment, the organizational and individual level. At the enabling environment level, it assesses how the national agriculture and extension policies and legal frameworks support gender equality and women’s empowerment. At the organizational level, the analysis focuses on organizational policies and staff training materials. At the individual level, it focuses on the challenges that advisers face in providing services to rural women as well as the experience of clients (women and men farmers) with the provision of rural advisory services to reveal how policies and programmes are implemented in practice, the impact they have on women farmers’ livelihoods, and which approaches have been most effective at reaching rural women.

Source: FAO. 2016b. Gender and Rural Advisory Services Assessment Tool (GRAST). Rome. www.fao.org/documents/card/en/c/700e7286-ea02-4a44-af8c-a894f5b3aa2f.

Box 4.6. Gender transformative learning by doing and community engagement methodologies

“The Farmer Field Schools (FFS) are non-formal education processes characterized by hands-on group learning” (FAO, 2019, p.5) that builds on local knowledge systems, tests and validates scientific concepts, and fosters group cohesion and community decision-making (FAO, 2019). This approach is participative and can be adapted to post-harvest mechanization training.

The Dimitra Clubs constitute a community-led and gender-transformative approach that facilitates rural community empowerment. In sub-Saharan Africa, they triggered changes in gender roles and substantial improvements in rural livelihoods, climate change adaptation, nutrition, social cohesion, and community governance. Dimitra clubs could also sustain conversations and solutions around women’s barriers and opportunities in mechanization.

Source: FAO, IFAD & WFP. 2020. Gender transformative approaches for food security, improved nutrition and sustainable agriculture – A compendium of fifteen good practices. Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb1331en.

Conclusion

This chapter highlights the importance of addressing gender in post-harvest management to promote food security and income generation while reducing work burden and increasing productivity. It recognizes that women play an important role in post-harvest worldwide, as contributing family members, employees and entrepreneurs, despite persistent inequalities still impacting their capacity to thrive. Numerous tasks are carried out manually and women’s access to essential mechanization services, finance, training or information remains inadequate. This insufficiency arises from the oversight of gender dynamics in the planning and development of gender activities and interventions. This chapter provides practical examples, lessons learned, tools and approaches that can be applied incorporating gender considerations into mechanization, post-harvest and value chains.

References

Chambers, K.J. & Momsen, J.H. 2007. From the kitchen and the field: gender and maize diversity in the Bajio region of Mexico. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, 28(1), pp.39-56.

Daum, T. 2023. Mechanization and sustainable agri-food system transformation in the Global South. A review. Available at https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13593-023-00868-x

Doss, C. R. & M. Morris. 2001. How does gender affect the adoption of agricultural innovations? The case of improved maize technology in Ghana. Agricultural Economics 25 (1): 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2001.tb00233.x.

FAO. 2015. Running out of time. The reduction of women’s work burden in agricultural production. Rome. www.fao.org/3/i4741e/i4741e.pdf.

FAO. 2016a. Developing gender-sensitive value chains – A guiding framework. Rome. www.fao.org/3/i6462e/i6462e.pdf.

FAO. 2019. Farmers taking the lead—Thirty years of farmer field schools. Rome, http://www.fao.org/3/ca5131en/ca5131en.pdf

FAO. 2020. FAO Policy on Gender Equality 2020–2030. Rome. www.fao.org/3/cb1583en/cb1583en.pdf.

FAO. 2022b. Women farmers’ access to sustainable agricultural mechanization. A way to reduce drudgery and optimize farm management in Nepal. Rome. www.fao.org/3/cc0005en/cc0005en.pdf. FAO and AUC.

2018. Sustainable Agricultural Mechanization: A Framework for Africa. Addis Ababa. 127pp. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.

International Finance Corporation (IFC). 2017. The Business Case for Women’s Employment in Agribusiness. Washington, DC. © International Finance Corporation. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/28974. License: CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 IGO.

Nordhagen, S. 2021. Gender equity and reduction of post-harvest losses in agricultural value chains.

Sims, B. & Kienzle, J. 2016. Making mechanization accessible to smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. Environments 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments3020011.

Sims, B. & Kienzle, J. 2017. Sustainable agricultural mechanization for smallholders: what is it and how can we implement it? Agriculture 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture7060050.

Theis, S., Krupnik, T.J., Sultana, N., Rahman, S.U., Seymour, G. & Abedin, N. 2019.Gender and agricultural mechanization: a mixed-methods exploration of the impacts of multi-crop reaper-harvester service provision in Bangladesh (Vol. 1837). Intl Food Policy Res Inst.

Torell, E., Bilecki, D., Owusu, A., Crawford, B., Beran, K. & Kent, K. 2019. Assessing the impact of gender integration in Ghana’s fisheries sector. Coastal Management, 47(6), pp.507-526.

WE-FI (Women Entrepreneurs Finance Initiative). 2022. The case for investing in women entrepreneurs.

CHAPTER 5.
Agribusiness and entrepreneurship: perspectives on post-harvest loss production

©FAO/Belty Lokossa

Abstract

This chapter explores the transformative impact that agribusiness and entrepreneurship can have in mitigating post-harvest losses, providing a comprehensive examination of key aspects. It discusses the fundamental reasons for engaging in such ventures, emphasizing their pivotal role whilst examining diverse business models that can be employed. The findings underscore the multifaceted challenges contributing to post-harvest losses, ranging from inadequate storage facilities to low value addition, insufficient skills, and the lack of proper training and collaboration. Recognizing the paramount importance of agribusiness and entrepreneurship, this chapter advocates for the establishment of ventures focused on value addition and market access. These ventures are not only pivotal in reducing post-harvest losses but also contribute to the promotion of sustainable agricultural practices. The exploration further reveals various business models, including contract farming, aggregation, and the establishment of farmer-owned enterprises, that offer diverse approaches to address post-harvest losses. This chapter emphasizes the critical managerial and entrepreneurial skills required, such as strategic thinking, problem-solving, record-keeping, financial management, sales and marketing, and innovation, to effectively manage post-harvest management ventures. This chapter advocates for the adoption of agribusiness and entre-preneurship business models to address post-harvest losses comprehensively. These models, spanning processing, packaging, transportation, storage, and digital solutions, can be strategically implemented at different stages along the food value chain. The result is a substantial reduction in post-harvest losses, the creation of employment opportunities, an increase in income levels, and the overall promotion of economic growth in Africa. The recommendations stress the urgency of interventions and support initiatives to embrace these models, given their potential to significantly enhance agricultural productivity and reduce post-harvest losses in the region.

Keywords:

Agribusiness, entrepreneurship, post-harvest, management, business models

Introduction

Agriculture is a significant contributor to the economies of developing countries, including those in Africa, contributing between 30 to 40 percent of the continent’s gross domestic product (GDP) (World Bank, 2013). Despite this, developing countries, especially in Africa, still face a significant challenge of post-harvest losses, which negatively impact the growth and development of the agricultural sector. Addressing post-harvest losses is a pressing concern for Africa’s agribusiness and entrepreneurship sectors. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO, 2011), up to one-third of all food produced worldwide is lost or wasted, which is particularly acute in Africa. In sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), for example, post-harvest losses for some crops can be as high as 50 percent (Flanagan et al., 2019).

Agribusiness and entrepreneurship skills are important in post-harvest management as they help farmers to add value and market their crops. This chapter aims to explore how the principles and application of agribusiness and entrepreneurship could help to enhance post-harvest management (PHM) and reduce post-harvest losses (PHL). It will also explore the two aspects of entrepreneurship: the managerial skills necessary to start and run a profitable post-harvest farm business that could reduce food loss and the ‘entrepreneurial spirit’. The exploration will initially introduce agribusiness and entrepreneurship aspects and subsequently illustrate their potential value in efforts to reduce PHL. Recognizing that not every farmer or actor along the value chain needs to own post-harvest equipment, this chapter will cover various mechanization hire service business models applicable to post-harvest management. Emphasis will be placed on how agribusiness and entrepreneurship skills can facilitate the engagement of youth and women in mechanization processes for post-harvest handling service provision. Additionally, this chapter will cover other aspects, such as keeping records and data, that are crucial for understanding the extent of PHL or the success of PHM service provision. Overall, this chapter will introduce the agribusiness and entrepreneurial aspects and establish their connection to PHM and the reduction of PHL.

Rationale for engaging agribusiness and entrepreneurship in post-harvest management

Traditionally, post-harvest management processes have been predominantly undertaken by individual farmers or through collective efforts via cooperative societies or farmers’ producer markets. Publicly owned parastatals, such as the former National Milling Corporation (NMC) in the United Republic of Tanzania, have also played a role in overseeing these processes, as highlighted by Bagachwa (1991). However, experiences from these established business models underscore the imperative to integrate more innovative entrepreneurs into post-harvest management (PHM) endeavours. This shift aims to enhance efficiency and cultivate improved strategies for managing agricultural risks. The subsequent exploration delves into the rationale driving the engagement of agribusiness and entrepreneurship in this domain.

Investment in storage, processing facilities and packaging centres is essential to address the primary cause of post-harvest losses in Africa, namely the lack of adequate infrastructure. Traditional storage methods used by small-scale farmers and other players in the food value chain are less efficient, resulting in crop losses of up to 22 percent (Ariong et al., 2023). Entrepreneurs and agribusinesses can make a significant impact by investing in modern storage and processing infrastructures. Improved technologies such as metal or plastic silos, PICS bags and hermetic bags, mainly used for cereals, offer effective alternatives. From the agribusiness perspective, the sector’s pivotal role in infrastructure development, encompassing roads, energy, and processing facilities is underscored. These developments facilitate the efficient transportation of produce to markets, reducing spoilage. Additionally, the agribusiness sector can contribute to reducing post-harvest losses by providing farmers with improved market access. Agribusinesses can act as conduits, connecting farmers to local and international markets, thereby minimizing losses. In addition to infrastructure, entrepreneurs can contribute by developing value-added products from agricultural produce, as highlighted by Merema et al. (2002). This approach reduces food losses while increasing farmers’ income. Value addition is particularly effective for perishable crops with a short shelf life. For instance, cassava can be processed into High-Quality Cassava Flour (HQCF), extending its shelf life and fetching higher prices (Okoko et al., 2019). Similarly, fruits and vegetables can be transformed into juices, jams, and dried fruits, while grains like maize can be processed into flour, commanding a higher market value.

Training is a key aspect of mitigating post-harvest losses as farmers and stakeholders may lack awareness of best practices. Agribusinesses and entrepreneurs can bridge this gap by offering training programmes, covering areas such as Good Agricultural Practices (GAP), post-harvest handling techniques, management, and market access. This knowledge transfer empowers farmers to adopt practices that minimize losses and increase their income. Effective partnership and collaborations are essential components of a comprehensive strategy to tackle post-harvest losses. Agribusinesses and entrepreneurs can join forces with government agencies, NGOs, and other stake-holders to mobilize resources and expertise. This collaborative approach aids in developing and implementing solutions, making a collective impact on reducing post-harvest losses.

Entrepreneurship, a significant driver of economic growth in Africa, can contribute significantly to reducing post-harvest losses through innovative farming practices. Entrepreneurs can introduce technologies such as greenhouse farming, modern storage facilities, and new harvesting techniques to minimize spoilage. Technology adoption, including mobile applications, drones for crop monitoring, and cold storage facilities, offers avenues for entrepreneurs to mitigate post-harvest losses. While individual farmers may find it challenging to own cold storage facilities, entrepreneurs, groups, or cooperatives can collectively own and operate such facilities, providing services for a fee to multiple stakeholders along the food value chain.

The importance of post-harvest management in agribusiness and entrepreneurship

Agribusiness and entrepreneurship weave a compelling narrative of transformation within the realm of post-harvest management, championing innovation and economic empowerment. Drawing insights from Adam et al. (2017), Soetriono et al. (2020), Wangu et al. (2020), and Ninan (2023), their integral roles unfold across various dimensions.

In the pursuit of reducing post-harvest losses, agribusinesses and entrepreneurs are leading the way in the development of mechanization technologies. By implementing cutting-edge practices such as efficient storage, preservation techniques, and advanced packaging, they significantly mitigate spoilage, pests, and damage. This not only safeguards the quality of agricultural products but also enhances the efficiency and sustainability of post-harvest processes. Beyond technological strides, agribusiness and entrepreneurship emerge as a driving force for job creation (Singh, 2023). Entrepreneurs actively engage in post-harvest management activities, offering services that encompass sorting, grading, packing, storage, warehousing, and transportation of agricultural products. This not only injects rural areas with income opportunities but also fosters job growth, contributing to the overall economic vibrancy.

In the quest for Sustainable Agriculture, agribusiness and entrepreneurship become champions of environmental responsibility. Strategic investments in renewable energy technologies, such as solar or biogas, align with sustainable farming practices. This not only reduces the environmental impact associated with agriculture but also paves the way for a more ecologically balanced and resilient agricultural landscape.

Elevating prosperity, agribusiness, and entrepreneurship become architects of increased income and food security. Facilitating improved market access and introducing value addition and processing activities, they uplift farmers’ incomes, contributing to heightened food security. The concerted efforts to reduce post-harvest losses ensure a surplus of available food, mitigating production pressures, particularly during times of scarcity.

On the other hand, post-harvest management acts as a catalyst for entrepreneurial ventures, unlocking various avenues for value addition. Entrepreneurs, inspired by the processing, packaging, and branding opportunities, can initiate businesses that transform raw agricultural products into higher-value goods. For instance, tomatoes can be processed into sauces, maize into flour, or coffee into roasted beans. This not only meets consumer demand for convenience but also creates diversified revenue streams for farmers, contributing to overall economic growth.

In the sphere of input supply, entrepreneurs play a vital role by meeting the demands of post-harvest processes. Providing essential inputs such as quality packaging materials, efficient storage facilities, and reliable transportation equipment not only creates a market for these products but also stimulates entrepreneurship within the supply chain. This symbiotic relationship fosters a dynamic ecosystem supporting the various needs of post-harvest management.

Figure 5.1. Agribusiness owned by women adds value to cassava by processing, packing and branding gari in Benin

©FAO/Belty Lokossa

Innovation emerges as a driving force in post-harvest management. Entrepreneurs can pioneer solutions that address longstanding challenges, such as reducing post-harvest losses and creating new market opportunities. For instance, introducing mobile cold storage units or establishing drying and preservation centres represents innovative approaches that contribute to more sustainable agricultural practices. Entrepreneurs in this domain not only adapt to current challenges but also actively shape the future trajectory of agricultural systems.

Different types of business models for efficient post-harvest management

Various business models facilitate the efficient management of post-harvest losses, offering adaptable solutions suitable for small, medium, and large enterprises. The models described below are categorized based on the business’s value proposition and ownership structure.

a) Business models according to ownership structure

According to Houmy et al., (2021), appropriate and adapted agricultural mechanization has the potential to reduce post-harvest losses, leading to increased food availability and incomes. Post-harvest handling provides many opportunities for youth and women to offer services to other stakeholders along the food value chain. While not all smallholders can own their post-harvest machines or equipment, few entrepreneurs can own post-harvest equipment and provide services to other stakeholders, including farmers. The success of post-harvest mechanization hire service provision hinges on the appropriateness of the machine used, its efficiency, and its throughput. This will ensure profitability for the provider and affordability for the user. Several business models applicable to post-harvest mechanization service provision and those relevant to smallholders are explained below:

- Contract farming: In this model, farmers enter into contractual agreements with agribusiness firms to supply a specific quantity and quality of produce (Will, 2013). In post-harvest management, the agribusiness firm may provide farmers with training, inputs, and equipment for proper handling, storage, and transportation of the produce. This ensures the product reaches the market in good condition in time and reduces post-harvest losses.

- Farmer-individual enterprises: This model involves the establishment of farmer-owned enterprises that handle post-harvest management activities, such as sorting, grading, and packaging. Collaboration among farmers to establish enterprises that offer post-harvest management services can reduce post-harvest losses, create job opportunities, and promote value addition.

- Individual farmers owning post-harvest machines: Farmers owning specific equipment such as rice threshers can provide services to other farmers after completing work on their own farms. Typically, farmers with equipment capable of efficiently completing work on their own farms while others are still undertaking post-harvest operations can generate additional income. According to Hilmi (2018), at this stage, the hire service doesn’t function as a business in its own right but provides occasional services when opportunities arise. However, the service provider model comes with some challenges, susceptible to fluctuations in demand that can impact the business’s revenue and profitability. Furthermore, not all post-harvest technologies are profitable, particularly those failing to demonstrate a marketable difference in the final product or have high opportunity costs. For example, solar dryers effectively reduce grain moisture content, preventing spoilage due to fungi, but are not always profitable compared to conventional farming practices such as open-air drying (De Groote et al., 2021). Diversifying the activities and application of these technologies combined with access to a high-value market could enhance the system’s profitability and sustainability. For example, multigrain threshers or solar dryers could be used for medicinal plants or fruit and vegetable drying, thus increasing profitability.

Overall, the lack of sustainable business models is a significant impediment to promoting post-harvest technologies. To address this challenge, core elements for sound business cases include access to finance, market access, premium prices for quality, maintenance, (public-private) investment partnerships and economic literacy of the value chain stakeholders. According to Schaltegger et al., (2016), a sustainable business model should encompass the following elements (Figure 5.2): a value proposition (which clearly defines the ecological, social, and economic values offered by the technology), a business infrastructure (which highlights the supply chain management), customer interface (detailing relationships between stakeholders, particularly customers), and a finance model (with distributed economic costs and benefits among parties involved). Tools like the business canvas model, together with farmers’ groups, can facilitate the design of these models to promote post-harvest technologies.

Figure 5.2. Example of points to consider in the establishment of a service provider business model for rice threshing (Adapted from Schaltegger, S., Hansen, E.G., Lüdeke-Freund, F., 2016. Business Models for Sustainability: Origins, Present Research, and Future Avenues. Organ. Environ. 29, 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026615599806.)

- Farmers organized in groups or cooperatives: Farmers, including women and youth organized in groups or cooperatives, can engage in post-harvest mechanization initiatives. By collectively acquiring various post-harvest equipment such as harvesters, threshers and millers, the usage of these machines is optimized. Additionally, they can offer mechanization services to individual farmers once their own farming is complete, generating income for the group and providing valuable services to others. This not only boosts the machines’ operational hours but also creates a sustainable source of revenue. Development organizations, governments and non-governmental organization (NGO) generally support farmers’ groups to acquire post-harvest technologies, providing training on their usage. Cooperatives, however, use a pay-per-use model, charging members and non-members a small fee, either in cash or in-kind. The fees collected are then used to cover equipment maintenance and other costs including fuel, lubricants, and the purchasing of additional technologies. Cooperatives aspire to give farmers bargaining power in the market and access to inputs and services. However, challenges arise in the leadership and management of many cooperatives, especially when a group of members jointly own equipment donated or subsidized by the government. In some cases, groups are quickly formed to gain access to subsidies without considering the socioeconomic context and with little commitment of members to the cooperatives’ objectives. Project evaluations have often highlighted that the existence of such groups is short, which often collapse soon after the end of the government or project support. Negative experiences, in some cases, undermine future associative efforts (Stringfellow et al., 1997).

Experiences in Asia have shown that promoting post-harvest technologies through farmers’ groups in the rice value chain has failed. It is evident that the contract service business model seems to be a more effective approach (Gummert, 2013).

b) Business models according to the value proposition

The value proposition is defined as the products and services that are provided to customers to solve an existing problem or need (Osterwalder, 2005). Below are some examples of business models based on value proposition.

- Aggregation and processing: This model involves the collection of produce from smallholder farmers, followed by aggregation and processing for the market. Entrepreneurs can establish collection and processing centres where farmers can bring their produce for sorting, grading, packaging, and storage. Not only does this model promote value addition and enhance market access, it also generates job opportunities in post-harvest management. Furthermore, the facilities provided at these aggregation and processing centres, such as storage and warehousing, often surpass those available to individual farmers and, therefore, help to reduce post-harvest losses and extend the shelf life of harvested crops.

- Entrepreneurs providing hire services in post-harvest handling: Other business models involve entre preneurs in the agricultural sector providing post-harvest mechanization hire services. These models involve the establishment of farmer-owned enterprises that handle post-harvest management tasks, such as sorting, grading, and packaging. Farmers can collaborate to establish enterprises that offer post-harvest management services. This can reduce post-harvest losses, create job opportunities and promote value addition. Some of these entrepreneurs are already involved in selling agricultural inputs such as seeds and fertilizer. They can expand their business by offering services on a fee basis to farmers for operations such as harvesting, threshing, and milling. Such activities help in reducing post-harvest losses. Here are some examples of these business models:

- Mobile cold storage: This model provides services to farmers through the utilization of mobile cold storage units that are available for farmers to rent for produce storage. Entrepreneurs can invest in mobile cold storage units, making them available to farmers at affordable rates. This model ensures that farmers’ produce is kept in good condition, reducing post-harvest losses.

- Drying and preservation: Entrepreneurs can establish businesses that offer drying and preservation services to farmers. These businesses can invest in equipment and technology to dry, preserve, and store products for the market. This model ensures that the quality of farmers’ produce is maintained and kept in good condition. This can increase farmers’ income by offering higher quality products to the market.

Managerial skills and entrepreneurial spirit needed in post-harvest management.

The success of post-harvest management in an agribusiness and entrepreneurial context relies on cultivating strategic thinking, financial management, technological proficiency, leadership skills, problem-solving abilities, innovation, effective communication, and risk management. Entrepreneurs and managers with these attributes are prepared to face the complexities of the agricultural landscape and drive positive change in post-harvest management processes.

In the dynamic field of post-harvest management, a successful manager or entrepreneur is distinguished by a multifaceted skill set and unique qualities that collectively contribute to the triumph of their endeavours. Central to this capability is strategic thinking, an attribute that transcends routine oversight. Adept strategic thinkers excel in identifying critical loss points (CLP) and low loss points (LLP), allowing them to craft sophisticated strategies. These strategies not only mitigate post-harvest losses but also strategically add substantial value to agricultural products, ultimately enhancing overall profitability. This visionary approach sets the stage for a proactive and forward-thinking engagement with the complexities of post-harvest processes, ensuring the enterprise is well-positioned to capitalize on emerging opportunities and navigate challenges with strategic finesse.

In the realm of post-harvest management, effective problem-solving stands as a fundamental skill. The complexities of this field present numerous challenges, ranging from pest infestations to logistical complexities. A successful manager or entrepreneur, adept in problem-solving, goes beyond mere identification of these issues. They exhibit an innovative spirit, actively seeking and implementing solutions that are tailored to the unique challenges presented by post-harvest processes. This ability not only addresses immediate concerns but also fosters a culture of adaptability and continuous improvement, positioning the enterprise to navigate complexities with resilience and ingenuity.

Meticulous attention to detail is another vital attribute in the arsenal of a post-harvest manager or entrepreneur. Beyond a superficial focus on routine processes, this skill ensures an in-depth scrutiny of every facet of the post-harvest journey. From the initial delicate handling of products to the complexities of storage and transportation. The practitioner, with an acute attention to detail, guarantees that agricultural products reach the market in their optimal state. This commitment to precision not only safeguards the quality of the produce but also builds a reputation for reliability and excellence in the eyes of consumers and stakeholders.

Financial management skills are indispensable in the pursuit of success in post-harvest endeavours. It involves strategic management of budgets, cost analyses, and forecasts (Roy, 2022). A skilled financial manager understands the delicate balance between managing costs, setting competitive prices for products, and ensuring sustained profitability throughout the entire post-harvest process. This financial know-how not only fortifies the economic viability of the enterprise but also positions it for long-term growth and resilience against economic fluctuations.

In the domain of marketing and sales, a successful post-harvest manager or entrepreneur is not just a spectator in the market but an active participant. Beyond identifying opportunities, they excel in establishing compelling brands, nurturing enduring buyer relationships, and skillfully negotiating prices. This proficiency goes hand-in-hand with the ability to market services effectively, meeting and exceeding customer expectations. In the dynamic market landscape, this skill set is not just about selling products; it’s about creating a lasting presence and impact in the market. Risk management, an often underestimated yet critical competency, is paramount in post-harvest management. A seasoned professional in this field is well-versed in identifying and navigating diverse risks, ranging from weather-related uncertainties to market price fluctuations and logistical challenges (Sharma, 2022). This skill not only ensures the survival but also the resilience and success of the post-harvest enterprise in the face of uncertainties. In addition, innovation is the driving force behind progress in post-harvest processes. A forward-thinking approach actively seeks out and implements cutting-edge technologies and practices. This commitment to innovation goes beyond just minimizing losses; it aims to increase value addition and explore novel market opportunities. Innovation transforms post-harvest management from a reactive practice into a proactive, dynamic, and sustainable endeavour, placing the practitioner at the forefront of positive change in the agricultural landscape.

Agribusiness and entrepreneurship opportunities for youth and women

In the dynamic landscape of post-harvest management, agribusiness and entrepreneurship play a transformative role, acting as catalysts for empowerment, with a specific focus on engaging the vibrant demographics of youth and women (Box 5.1).

These economic pursuits not only offer valuable opportunities but also serve as avenues for fostering self-reliance, skill development, and economic independence among the younger generation and women engaged in agricultural activities. Through innovative business models, enhanced market access, and skill enhancement, agribusiness and entrepreneurship emerge as powerful agents of change, contributing to the upliftment and empowerment of youth and women in the intricate post-harvest realm. Processing businesses, initiated by youth and women, transcend the conventional agricultural landscape. Whether turning cassava into flour, maize into popcorn, or fruits into jams and juices, these entrepreneurs not only add intrinsic value to raw produce but also participate in creating diverse and marketable agricultural goods. This dynamic approach not only aligns with consumer trends but also opens up new vistas for economic growth.

In the domain of packaging, women and youth entrepreneurs play a pivotal role in the agricultural supply chain (Elbehri et al., 2011). By establishing businesses that provide essential packaging materials like bags, crates, and boxes, they become the architects of presentation and preservation. This not only caters to the practical needs of producers and consumers but also contributes to the visual appeal and marketability of agricultural products.

The establishment of transportation businesses emerges as a tangible opportunity for youth and women to shape the efficiency of the agricultural supply chain. By providing transport services for agricultural products from farms to processing centres or markets, these entrepreneurs become integral connectors in the journey from farm to fork. This not only ensures efficient logistics but also broadens market access for farmers.

Storage businesses initiated by women and youth address a critical need in post-harvest management. By providing storage space and facilities such as cold rooms, warehouses, and silos, these entrepreneurs contribute to the preservation of product quality (GIZ, 2016). This not only extends the shelf life of agricultural goods but also supports extended market access, ensuring that the bounty of the harvest reaches consumers in optimal condition.

Box 5.1. Women and youth in agribusiness in Africa

In Africa, women play a crucial role in agricultural production, contributing to almost 80% of household food, yet they own less than 2% of the land (World Bank, 2014). Meanwhile, around 55% of global youth reside in rural areas, reaching up to 70% in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia (Bennell, 2007). In Africa, where 60% of the population is aged 15 to 24, many survive on less than US$2 per day. However, challenges, such as limited employment opportunities, particularly affect rural youth, with 90% living in low to lower-middle-income countries and facing a shortage of formal jobs.

Despite the agricultural sector’s potential to provide income, obstacles hinder youth participation. Notably, women’s roles are confined to primary production and small-scale marketing, lacking integration into higher-value chain activities. Women’s productivity consistently lags behind men’s by 20–30% (AfDB, 2015).

Agribusiness challenges, such as inadequate education access, limited land and market access, and insufficient policy representation, disproportionately impact youth. Innovative approaches are essential to address these barriers and empower both women and youth in the agricultural landscape.

Source: AU, NEPAD, CAADP. 2019. Breaking Barriers, Research report on policy recommendations to support women and youth in agri-business. Breaking Barriers - Digital v1.pdf

Figure 5.3. Agribusiness owned by a young entrepreneur on mechanization hire service in Côte d’Ivoire has created rural jobs for youth

©Ferm Bio
©Ferm Bio

In the realm of digital solutions, youth entrepreneurs step into the forefront of technological innovation. By establishing businesses that offer solutions to post-harvest management challenges – whether related to market access, product tracking, or price transparency – they contribute to a more transparent and efficient agricultural ecosystem. This not only streamlines processes but also introduces a layer of sophistication to traditional practices.

Collectively, these entrepreneurial initiatives not only provide opportunities for innovation but also play a pivotal role in job creation and economic growth. When youth and women engage in these ventures, they become active agents in reducing post-harvest losses, increasing farmers’ income, and fostering positive economic development in rural areas. The transformative potential of agribusiness and entrepreneurship in post-harvest management stands as a testament to the dynamic and resilient nature of agricultural landscapes. Through these initiatives, a new narrative unfolds—one in which youth and women emerge as the architects of positive change, ushering in a future where agriculture is not just a means of sustenance but a pathway to inclusive and sustainable economic growth.

Record keeping and its importance in post-harvest management

Record keeping emerges as a fundamental practice in the complex landscape of post-harvest management, playing a pivotal role in documenting activities spanning sorting, grading, packing, storage, transportation, and marketing. The significance of this practice is underscored by Olukotun et al., (2012), and here are compelling reasons elucidating why record keeping is indispensable in post-harvest management:

a) Traceability:

Record keeping serves as the cornerstone for traceability, enabling meticulous tracking of agricultural products from farm to market (FAO, 2017). This wealth of information encompasses the product’s origin, quality, and treatment during the post-harvest period. Such traceability becomes instrumental in ensuring food safety and adherence to market or export regulations, fostering transparency throughout the supply chain.

b) Quality assurance:

Detailed records provide post-harvest managers with insights into critical parameters such as moisture content, weight, and grade, offering valuable information for quality assurance. This data is instrumental in ensuring that agricultural products meet required standards and are fit for their intended use, contributing to consumer satisfaction and market credibility.

c) Decision making:

The information gleaned from record keeping becomes a strategic asset for informed decision-making in post-harvest management. Understanding the root causes of post-harvest losses enables farmers and entrepreneurs to pinpoint areas for improvement, whether in storage or transportation, contributing to operational efficiency and resource optimization.

d) Market access:

Recordkeeping serves as a gateway to new markets by providing essential information about the quality and origin of agricultural products. Armed with this data, farmers and entrepreneurs can navigate market demands, unlock new opportunities, and enhance the overall value of their products.

e) Accountability:

Beyond its informational utility, record keeping establishes a framework for accountability. It offers a systematic means to track all activities throughout the post-harvest period, enabling farmers and entrepreneurs to assess their performance and identify areas for enhancement. This fosters a culture of accountability that is instrumental in sustaining and improving post-harvest processes.

f) Monitoring and evaluation:

Record keeping extends beyond static documentation; it involves continuous monitoring and evaluation of key parameters such as environmental conditions, inventory levels, and quality standards (Mercier et al., 2017). This proactive approach enables organizations to swiftly identify deviations from optimal conditions, allowing for timely corrective actions. In the case of perishable goods, monitoring temperature and humidity ensures proper storage conditions, minimizing the risk of spoilage. Regular checks on inventory levels aid in maintaining an equilibrium, avoiding overstocking and shortages.

Record keeping serves as the linchpin in the successful fabric of post-harvest management. It not only ensures traceability, quality assurance, informed decision-making, market access, and accountability but also forms the foundation for a dynamic system of continuous monitoring and evaluation. Farmers and entrepreneurs armed with accurate records not only mitigate post-harvest losses but also unlock the potential for increased product value, proper pricing strategies, and substantial contributions to economic growth in rural areas.

Conclusion

Reducing post-harvest losses is crucial for developing Africa’s agricultural sector. Agribusinesses and entrepreneurs can significantly reduce post-harvest losses by developing infrastructure, developing new business models, providing market access, adding value, introducing innovative farming practices, adopting new technologies, and providing training. With concerted efforts from all stakeholders, post-harvest losses can be reduced, and the African agricultural sector can reach its full potential.

Agribusiness and entrepreneurship play a vital role in reducing post-harvest losses in Africa. This is achieved through various models such as those related to processing, packaging, transportation, storage, and digital solutions. Women and youth are encouraged to capitalize on these opportunities to create employment, promote economic growth and reduce post-harvest losses. Record keeping is also essential to post-harvest management as it ensures traceability, guarantees quality assurance, facilitates decision-making, enhances market access, and enables accountability and monitoring.

Post-harvest management is a critical area that requires significant attention to improve agricultural productivity and reduce post-harvest losses in Africa. Adopting agribusiness and entrepreneurship models for processing, packaging, transportation, storage, and digital solutions can significantly reduce post-harvest losses, create employment opportunities and promote economic growth. Therefore, it is necessary to encourage and support initiatives that promote agribusiness and entrepreneurship and use proper record-keeping practices while dealing with post-harvest management activities in various business models.

References

Adam, R. I., Osano, P., Birika, J., Ndede Amadi, A. A., & Bwisa, H. 2017. The situation of women in the agribusiness sector in Africa. Development in Practice, 27(6), 892-898.

Ariong, R.M., Daniel M. Okello, D.M., Hilary Otim, M., Paparu, P. 2023. The cost of inadequate postharvest management of pulse grain: Farmer losses due to handling and storage practices in Uganda, Agriculture and food security, BMC. https://agricultureandfoodsecurity.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40066-023-00423-7

Bagachwa, M. S. D. 1991. Choice of technology in industry: The economics of grain – milling in Tanzania. IDRC, Canada.

De Groote, H., Githinji, P.G., Munya, B.G., Ricker-Gilbert, J.E. 2021. Economics of open-air sun drying in the maize value chain of Kenya. J. Agric. Food Res. 5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2021.100185

Elbehri, A., Lee, M. 2011. Women producer organizations in agricultural value chains, Practical lessons from Africa and India, FAO, IFAD. https://www.fao.org/3/i2438e/i2438e.pdf

FAO. 2017. Food Traceability Guidance. https://www.fao.org/3/I7665EN/i7665en.pdf

Flanagan, K., Robertson, K., & Hansen, C. 2019. Reducing food loss and waste: Setting a global action agenda. World Resources Institute, 10 G Street, NE Suite 800, Washington, DC 20002, USA.

GIZ. 2016. Promoting Food Security and Safety via Cold Chains, Technology options, cooling needs and energy requirements. https://www.giz.de/en/downloads/giz_2016_Food_Security_Cold_Chains.pdf

Gummert, M. 2013. Improved post-harvest technologies and management for reducing post-harvest losses in rice. Acta Hortic. 1011, 63–70. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2013.1011.6

Hilmi, M. (2018). Small-scale actors in agri-food value chains: How and why do they access the services of agricultural mechanization hire enterprises. Middle East Journal of Agriculture Research, 7(4): 1217–1233.

Houmy, K., Flores Rojas, M. and Side, C. 2021. Agri-hire in sub-Saharan Africa – Business models for investing in sustainable mechanization. Rome, FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb5071en

Mendoza, R. R. 2015. Financial performance of micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMES) in the Philippines. The International Journal of Business and Finance Research, 9(4), 67-80.

Mercier, S., Villeneuve, S., Mondor, M., Ismail Uysal, I. 2017. Time–Temperature Management Along the Food Cold Chain: A Review of Recent Developments, Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety Vol. 00, 2017.

Merema G., Rolle, R.S. 2002. Status of the postharvest sector and its contribution to agricultural development and economic growth, 9th JIRCAS International Symposium 2002 - ‘Value-Addition to Agricultural Products’, 13-20. https://www.jircas.go.jp/sites/default/files/publication/intlsymp/intlsymp-11_13-20.pdf

Ninan, G. 2023. Entrepreneurship Initiatives in the Fisheries Post-Harvest Sector through the Agribusiness Incubation Program. In Advances in Fish Processing Technologies (pp. 453-492). Apple Academic Press.

Okoko, J., Alonge, A., Ngoddy, P. 2019. High quality-cassava flour (HQCF) composites: Their thermal characteristics in retrospect, IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 445 (2020) 012043. NIAE 2019. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/445/1/012043/pdf

Olukotun, G., James, S. O. & Olore, I. 2012. The roles of record keeping in the survival and growth of small scale enterprises in Ijumu Local Government Area of Kogi State. Global journal of management and business research, 12(13), 55-66.

Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y. & Tucci, C. 2005. Clarifying business models: Origins, present, and future of the concept. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, Volume 16 [online].

Roy, R., Rahman, M.A. 2022. Assessing training contents, curriculum and process of agri-entrepreneurship development for farmers, Bangladesh J. Agri. 2022, 47(1): 102-112.

Schaltegger, S., Hansen, E.G., Lüdeke-Freund, F. 2016. Business Models for Sustainability: Origins, Present Research, and Future Avenues. Organ. Environ. 29, 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026615599806.

Sharma, J.P., Bhatt, A.2022. Role of Agri-Business Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Value Chains/Networks in Farmer Income Improvement: Models, Policies and Challenges, Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Volume 77, Number 1, January-March 2022. https://isaeindia.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/07-Keynote-paper-4-JP-Sharma.pdf.

Singh, R., Ramappa, K.b., R., Khanna, V., Kumari, T. 2023. Agribusiness and Entrepreneurship. file:///C:/Users/ PC/Downloads/978-981-19-7997-2_27.pdf.

Soetriono, S., Soejono, D., Hani, E. S., Suwandari, A., & Narmaditya, B. S. 2020. Challenges and opportunities for agribusiness development: Lesson from Indonesia. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7(9), 791-800.

Stringfellow, R., Coulter, J., Hussain, A., Lucey, T., McKone, C. 1997. Improving the access of smallholders to agricultural services in sub-Saharan Africa: Farmer cooperation and the role of the donor community. Small Enterp. Dev. 8, 35–41.

Wangu, J., Mangnus, E., & van Westen, A. C. M. 2020. Limitations of inclusive agribusiness in contributing to food and nutrition security in a smallholder community. A case of mango initiative in Makueni County, Kenya. Sustainability, 12(14), 5521.

Will, M. 2013. Contract farming handbook. A practical guide for linking small-scale producers and buyers through business model innovation, Volume I – Manual, GIZ. https://www.snrd-africa.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/GIZ-Contract-Farming-Manual-Vol1.pdf.

World Bank. 2013. Unlocking Africa’s agricultural potential: An action agenda for transformation. Africa Region Sustainable Development. Sustainable Development Series, the World Bank, Washington, DC

CHAPTER 6.
Climate change adaptation for post-harvest management

©FAO/Belty Lokossa

Abstract

Climate change presents a big challenge to post-harvest management and has the potential to cause unpredictable weather patterns, reduce crop yields and increase pest and disease contamination. To address these challenges a comprehensive approach (that considers pre-harvest conditions, integrates strategies along the value chain and utilizes existing post-harvest technological innovations) is necessary. Climate-smart practices include cultivating crop varieties that are resilient to climate change as well as implementing digital agriculture technologies that help reduce post-harvest losses (PHLs). Existing post-harvest technological innovations such as evaporative cooling systems, airtight storage, biological control systems and value addition of agricultural products can also prevent food waste, improve food security, and promote environmental sustainability. These post-harvest technologies share a common goal of preserving the quality and extending the shelf life of crops by controlling pests and diseases, preventing mould and fungal growth and maintaining the freshness of produce during transportation. It is evident that a multidisciplinary approach that incorporates climate-smart practices and existing post-harvest technological innovations is essential for mitigating the impact of climate change on post-harvest management. This multidisciplinary approach can help prevent food loss and waste, improve food security and promote sustainable agriculture, while also reducing the overall carbon footprint of food production and distribution.

Keywords:

Climate change, post-harvest management, climate-smart, value chain, food loss

Introduction

Addressing the impact of climate change on agriculture is crucial in order to fulfil future food demand. Climate change can lead to food insecurity and is closely related to food and post-harvest losses (Srivastava, 2019). The impact caused by climate change on the environment, as well as natural disasters, result in significant challenges to local economies as well as livelihoods worldwide. Due to their extensive reliance on agriculture, developing nations are prone to the impacts of climate change (Chari and Ngcamu, 2022). It is important, therefore, to develop strategies that promote adaptation measures in order to build resilience to climate changes that impact post-harvest losses. Humidity, rainfall, solar radiation, carbon dioxide (CO2), and temperature are all examples of environmental factors that affect both the quantity and quality of agricultural produce (Ali et al., 2020). For example, the early maturity of wheat in the highlands of Ethiopia prevented farmers from successfully harvesting the crop due to continuous rainfall and the lack of mechanization (combine harvesters or threshers) which led to damage to the mature crop. Post-harvest losses are very much related to pre-harvest conditions, particularly for vegetables and fruit (Ippolito and Nigro, 2000; Kyriacou and Rouphael, 2018; Workneh and Osthoff, 2010). For instance, rainfall intensity during the monsoon season and higher temperatures during dry seasons become an issue in fruit and vegetable formation (Moretti et al., 2010). Hussein et al., (2018) reported that poor pre-harvest climatic conditions resulted in bruise damage to fruits during post-harvest handling. In addition, nutritional quality, like vitamin C content of fruit and vegetables, is also affected by pre-harvest conditions and post-harvest operations (Lee and Kader, 2000). Climate changes can also cause many urban farmers to lose produce during harvesting due to pest infestation, deterioration of nutrients, mycotoxin contamination and exposure to yeast and mould (Ali et al., 2020). In rice cropping systems, for example, a high temperature at the stage of grain filling had the greatest influence on rice grain chalkiness (Yamakawa et al., 2007; Mapiemfu et al., 2017). Furthermore, moisture re-absorption of dried grains in the field, due to extremes in day and night temperatures and humidity, resulted in grain fissures (Mapiemfu et al., 2017). In cereal and grain cropping systems (wheat, beans, maize, groundnuts, etc.), different land preparation techniques, along with bulk or random planting, resulted in variations in crop density, nutrient competition, weeding challenges, and varying harvest times. Unprecedented rainfall and labour shortage during harvest time can lead to considerable post-harvest losses as the crops cannot be harvested and dried in time. Therefore, pre-harvest and post-harvest factors cannot be separated, especially when attempting to reduce post-harvest losses caused by climate change.

This chapter presents several examples of existing practices, which could help farmers increase their resilience to climate change. Moreover, this chapter also discusses some technological innovations in post-harvest management (PHM), including adaptation and mitigation strategies, which can potentially minimize the effects of climate change.

Why climate change poses challenges during post-harvest management

Post-harvest losses are frequently caused by high ambient temperatures, rainfall irregularity and other extreme weather events. In addition, inadequate post-harvest handling operations, facilities, and infrastructure can exacerbate post-harvest losses (Chegere, 2018a). Harvesting, handling, transportation, packaging, storage, processing, and marketing are operations that suffer from post-harvest losses. Climate change contributes to higher biological and pest damage to agricultural products, particularly during storage and transportation (Ali et al., 2020).

Climate change can come into effect during floods, droughts, heat and cyclones (Chari and Ngcamu, 2022). Floods and cyclones can result in the destruction of agricultural lands crops and agriculture-related infrastructures. Storms and flooding may also disrupt the transportation of agricultural materials, equipment and products in urban areas. In countries with a high risk of floods and cyclones, these weather conditions can adversely affect supply chain networks and result in the deterioration of agricultural produce. Among these extreme events, rising temperatures are noteworthy because they put stress on electricity grids, air conditioners and refrigeration systems, increasing storage costs. Temperature, relative humidity, wind velocity, and sanitary conditions are just a few environmental factors that affect how quickly nutritional (carbohydrate, protein and fat) quality deterioration occurs. Fresh produce is less safe and consumable at higher temperatures and, as a result, has a shorter shelf life. Higher temperatures accelerate microbial growth, enzyme activity and pathogen proliferation. This contributes to the faster deterioration of fresh produce, reducing its safety and edibility. It is generally accepted that the highest losses of agricultural products occur at extreme temperatures. Therefore, it is imperative to cool down fresh produce before starting any post-harvest processing procedure (Srivastava, 2019).

The transportation systems for urban agriculture are negatively impacted by temperature variations and significant rainfall. For instance, the majority of farmers in Nigeria and Senegal suffer post-harvest losses of up to 40 percent from their dairy products, fruit, and vegetables before they reach the end consumer (Rutta, 2021). Higher temperatures, storms and rainfall variations can affect the growth of pathogenic and spoilage microorganisms when handling and transporting milk from the farm. Bacteria contamination of milk due to fluctuations in temperatures and exposure to sunlight was reported by farmers in Ethiopian cities between production and sales. Poor management in post-harvest handling and lack of refrigerated trucks cause substandard export quality food that does not meet the quality criteria of the product (Chari and Ngcamu, 2022). On the other hand, post-harvest losses generated by humans also contribute to climate change. Food waste and losses generate about 8 percent of greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) (Mariam et al., 2019).

In Ethiopia, for example, the overall wheat post-harvest loss was estimated to be 14-23 percent (with a 17 percent average). The highest loss (up to 16 percent) occurred in wheat harvest because of grain-shattering in the field due to high temperatures (Dessalegn et al., 2017). In maize cropping systems in Ghana, continuous rainfall when maize cobs are mature has a great impact on maize yield, resulting in harvest losses of about 4 percent from the overall cumulated handling losses of about 24 percent (Alhassan & Patrick, 2018). In rice cropping systems, high proportions of grain chalkiness and fissures result in high grain breakages during milling. Consequently, milling efficiency is low (quantitative loss) as well as head rice (qualitative loss) (Ndindeng et al., 2021a), which are considered some of the most important factors influencing rice price (Ndindeng et al., 2021b; Twine et al., 2022).

Some adaptation strategies have already been implemented, but not universally. For instance, climate-smart post-harvest handling practices of maize (such as adjusted harvest time, cleaning of maize, prompt handling and drying, and application of storage protectants) have been introduced by Chegere (2018b) to smallholder farmers in the United Republic of Tanzania. Nevertheless, the benefits of these practices are still not viable, which leads to low dissemination to the farmers and processors (Berck et al., 2018). On the contrary, improved rice parboiling (GEM parboiling) (Ndindeng et al., 2015) has been successfully adopted in West and some parts of East Africa as a climate change adaptation strategy to reduce both quantitative and qualitative losses. Rice parboiling is the hydrothermal treatment of rough rice before milling and has been shown to eliminate chalkiness and improve milling efficiency and head rice (Ndindeng et al., 2021a).

Key effects of climate change on post-harvest handling

Environmental conditions, such as climate, are interconnected with post-harvest handling practices as well as facilities and infrastructures, like warehouses, transportation, and drying facilities. Any changes in these factors, or improper implementation, can lead to post-harvest losses (Figure 6.1). As reported by Berck et al. (2018), the losses can be categorized into four groups, that is biological (rodents, insects, bacteria, mould), chemical (contamination from pesticides, preservatives, and other chemical agents), physical (bruising, fissures, rotten food due to extreme temperature and humidity) and psychological (food waste, natural alteration of nutritional content and shelf life during pre-harvest stage).

Figure 6.1. Correlation between climate, post-harvest management and losses.

Existing practices to address climate challenges during post-harvest handling along the value chain

The adaptation measures to climate change need prompt action along the value chain. The measures refer to sustainable climate-smart systems specifically designed to enhance productivity and increase resilience to climate change and reduce GHG emissions. Some examples of existing practices to address climate change effects in post-harvest system are presented below:

1. Climate resilient crop varieties: Because of imminent climate change effects, the propagation of climate resilient plant varieties is one of the ways to enhance bio-functionality as well as the supply of agricultural produce in horticulture, especially fruit, vegetables and cereals. Climate resilient fruit and vegetables tend to be more resistant to extreme weather conditions and have higher nutrient value. In rice, varieties requiring less water during the crop cycle have been created (New Rice for Africa – NERICA for upland ecologies). Other rice varieties, such as the SAHEL (salinity tolerant) and SUB-1 (submergence tolerant), have also been developed. All these varieties, especially the NERICAs and SAHELs, have been widely adopted in West Africa (Futakuchi et al., 2021). Drought-tolerant maize varieties have been grown successfully in Eastern, Southern and Western Africa, as well as rust-resistant wheat varieties in Ethiopia. Currently, there is an urgent need for resilient crops which are widely consumed such as guava, banana and papaya (Asrey et al., 2021).

2. Digital agriculture: Digital agriculture contributes to sustainable development and resilience against climate change because it can potentially provide the link between food, water, energy and climate to achieve an agricultural transformation. Practices of digital agriculture in combination with precision agriculture and agriculture 4.0 are fundamentally based on monitoring, controlling, prediction and logistics. The practice consists of Internet of Things (IoT), big data, agricultural robots, cloud computing, artificial intelligence, real-time remote monitoring, and early warning systems. These early warning systems are low-cost and are used as a communication platform among different communities. One example of this is the work done under the Africa Climate Exchange (AfClix) project. Through this system, farmers are notified via their mobile phones of any potential droughts or heavy rainfall which could damage their crops (Figure 6.2). This information allows the farmers to react in advance (Cornforth, 2013).

Figure 6.2. When farmers access information and communication tools (ICT) and early warning systems farmers can increase crop resilience

©FAO/Belty Lokossa

Digital agriculture can provide a good synergy with renewable energy integration in agriculture, such as agrivoltaics and solar drying systems. In livestock farming, sensor technologies give real-time information on the condition of animals in barns. A successful application of this technological innovation can reduce input costs, use natural resources efficiently, protect the environment and improve productivity and quality. Moreover, many of the current economic, social, and environmental challenges can be overcome by this digital transformation (Dayioğlu and Türker, 2021). Transformation of mechanization service delivery through a service provider business model can potentially reduce pre-harvest and post-harvest losses for smallholders. This means land preparation, planting, weeding, harvesting, drying, threshing and transportation operations can be ordered using applications by the local agent to perform and accomplish a chosen agricultural task in good time. However, for this to be successful, appropriate machines, along with their implementation and infrastructure, need to be available at affordable commercial charging fees.

Building resilience towards climate change during post harvest management along the value chain

Post-harvest loss (PHL) is strongly related to food loss and deterioration. The formation of mould, bug infestation and moisture loss from food occurs because of inadequate temperature control. Building cold and dry storage, rural roadways, decentralized processing facilities and rural and wholesale market facilities can help reduce post-harvest losses caused by climate change (Chegere, 2018a). Other causes of food loss include poor market accessibility and non-secure storage (Ali et al., 2020). Along the value chain, the effectiveness of technological solutions and the availability of manpower are the two key factors in post-harvest losses. Therefore, training and workshops for farmers are important activities that help transfer knowledge and disseminate adaptation measures (Berck et al., 2018). Since the production process is less automated in developing countries, ineffective post-harvest agricultural systems (such as early harvesting), inadequate storage and processing facilities as well as poor infrastructures, are the primary causes of losses (Berck et al., 2018). Therefore, mechanization also has the potential to improve fresh product quality to decrease losses due to the timeliness of harvesting at times of labour shortage and during the harvesting process. Mechanization increases precision and productivity in the field and beyond (Yahaya et al., 2018) and, if applied appropriately, it is also suitable (Wanyama et al., 2016; Baudron et al., 2015 & 2019; Kahan et al., 2016; Daum, 2023) and profitable (Yahaya et al., 2018; Mupangwa et al., 2017 & 2023) for smallholders.

Several examples of climate-smart post-harvest activities exist. These include i) harvesting and grading to reduce the risk of bringing pests from fields by contamination; ii) efficient drying practices when the products get wet or contaminated by insects and/or mycotoxin; iii) adopting optimal drying products from rain by a close drying infrastructure; iv) adhering to proper storage practices in terms of hygiene, maintenance and monitoring; and v) application of airtight containers or an appropriate protectant for long-term storage (Stathers et al., 2013). Effective use of solar thermal energy for post-harvest processes, like drying, has been intensively promoted since it has become more common due to global warming. Furthermore, major developments of solar thermal dryers include the enhancement of solar collectors and thermal energy storage. Depending on the scale of the industry and the material or product to be dried, the payback period of investing in a solar thermal dryer varies between 0.5 and five years. It has been reported that the application of a solar thermal dryer can decrease up to 34 percent of GHG emissions with less or no fossil fuel requirement (Kamarulzaman et al., 2021).

High post-harvest losses imply reduced grain yield with the same total GHG emission. Therefore, reducing post-harvest losses decreases the yield-scaled global warming potential (total GHG emission per kilogram of grain) and contributes to climate change mitigation and food security. For example, an increase in crop yield without any additional fertilizer and any extra CO2eq emission is estimated to reduce the yield-scaled global warming potential of rice by 0.4 kg CO2eq per kg, a similar estimation applies to wheat. In the Philippines, efforts to prevent losses from typhoons and floods, involves studying a new post-harvest system designed to accelerate the drying time of wet grains from the field. In this study, an innovative drying bag, which serves as both a container and a drying box during the transport of the grains was used (Orge et al., 2020). In Africa, where the negative impacts of climate change on rice quality is high, particularly regarding the proportion of chalky grains, low head rice and low milling returns (Mapiemfu et al., 2017), improved parboiling methods have been introduced as a mitigation strategy. These improved parboiling methods (GEM parboiling) also offer additional benefits such as high nutritional quality, better energy-and water-use efficiencies, and increased digestibility (Ndindeng et al., 2022).

The climate resilience of cassava has been reported by Pushpalatha and Gangadharan (2020). Cassava has built-in mechanisms to deal with water shortages, biotic stress, temperatures of up to 40 °C, salinity and fluctuation of air humidity. Moreover, an increased CO2 concentration can increase cassava’s resilience to water stress and salinity. Furthermore, a combined effect of elevated CO2 levels and high temperatures can increase the yield. These findings demonstrate cassava’s resilience to changing climates, positioning it as a vital crop for ensuring food security and safety in the near future.

The harvest time of fruit and vegetables varies throughout the year depending on the variety and differing pre-harvest factors. Following harvest, the natural respiration of the harvested commodities is a crucial process which must be controlled. Interfering with this respiratory process is complex, as it is heavily dependent on the specific characteristics of the products. To mitigate the effects of climate change, especially during the post-harvest period, several techniques have been introduced to enhance the shelf life of products. These techniques include climate-smart harvesting, storage and transportation under modified environments and controlled conditions, as well as innovative packaging technologies (Moretti et al., 2010).

Many adaptation strategies have already been applied, but in many cases, the challenge of scaling up these operations remains unsolved. These strategies need a high investment, as stated by Stathers et al. (2013) and Berck et al. (2018) and require active support from government and non-governmental organization (NGO). This support includes financial backing of related research activities or projects, incentives for investing in value-added opportunities and equipment, enhancement of weather forecasting, early warning and emergency response system, and promotion of insurance and risk management.

Existing post-harvest technological innovations that could be used to reduce the effect of climate change

Various adaptation strategies to promote climate-smart technologies in post-harvest systems have been identified. Several examples of technological innovations are presented below:

1. Evaporative cooling system: Inadequate post-harvest and storage handling can account for up to 35 percent loss of horticulture produce. To address this issue, utilization of an evaporative cooling system is becoming more common, especially for storing fresh and perishable products directly on a farm, like cassava, fruit, and vegetables. These systems not only cool air temperatures but also increase air humidity. The combined effect of decreased temperatures and humidity plays an important role in keeping the products fresh during storage. Moreover, this system functions well under high temperatures and low humidity, where water is used efficiently, and the air is constantly circulated in the storage chamber. Immediately after harvest, this system is essential to refrigerate and store the products for a short period before transport (Lal Basediya et al., 2013). There are different types of commercially available evaporative coolers to use various materials and meet user demands. The use of solar PV systems as an energy source presents a viable alternative.

Adekanmi Babarinsa et al., (2022) reported the use of this system to store fresh cassava roots in Nigeria. Their results showed that this evaporative cooler could be built locally using low-cost materials. Moreover, the system can be even more acceptable to smallholder farmers as no electricity is required. The potential to scale up the system for a larger storage of cassava has also been identified.

2. Airtight storage: Post-harvest losses are primarily caused by rodents, birds, insects, and mycotoxin contamination. Crops most vulnerable to these contaminants include rice, millets, sorghum, dried cassava, and pulses. In East Africa, particularly in areas with poor storage conditions, post-harvest losses caused by these contaminants can be as much as 30 percent of the total crop. Current grain and pulses storage facilities, such as jute and polypropylene (PP) bags and corn cribs cannot effectively prevent rodents or insect infestation. Such infestations pose a serious risk, especially to smallholder farmers in rural areas. Consequently, airtight, or hermetic storage bags and containers have been used as on-farm solutions, especially in areas exposed to fluctuating temperatures and humidity exacerbated by climate change. Airtight storage systems can be either in the form of normal bags (woven, jute or PP bags sealed with cocoons) or storage bins made from materials such as metal and ferro-cement. The airtight environment created protects the products from any external contact while simultaneously preventing the growth of insect contaminants. This technology is commercially available in various configurations and prices. The price of a hermetic bag is at least USD 3, which is quite high for most farmers in rural areas. However, farmers can use locally available containers, such as plastic drums and jugs to produce hermetic storage systems for grain storage. Unfortunately, this technology is not yet effective for certain types of pests that can survive in low-oxygen conditions, such as the Larger Grain Borer (LGB) that damages maize in many African countries (Coffi et al., 2016). Further developments to this technology are still required. Therefore, training and workshops for smallholder farmers are essential to promote different viable practices and ensure the effective use of airtight bags and other locally available containers (Chegere, 2018a). Chegere et al. (2022) also evaluated the application of this technology to store maize in the United Republic of Tanzania. Farmers were provided with airtight bags and received on-site training on their proper usage. As a result, losses during storage were drastically reduced, and maize quality improved. In addition, the farmers were also able to reduce their operational costs during storage thereby increasing their selling price.

3. Biological control (biocontrol) system: Fungal contamination causes considerable post-harvest losses during harvesting, transportation and storage of fruit and vegetables. Currently, synthetic fungicides are primarily used to control post-production fungal spoilage. However, the emergence of antagonistic microbes in biocontrol methods for fungal diseases presents a sustainable alternative to fungicides, aligning with the global shift towards climate-resilient and sustainable agriculture. Microbial antagonists, which are isolated from diverse natural habitats, can prevent fungal diseases. The application of microbial antagonists is most effective post-harvest rather than pre-harvest for disease control. The development of pathogens resistant to fungicides is a significant drawback of synthetic fungicides to control fungal diseases. Consequently, biological and integrative post-harvest disease control techniques have been rapidly developed in recent years. Many microbe-based products are developed and approved for biological control worldwide. Currently, microbial antagonists’ biocontrol effectiveness is inferior to synthetic fungicides. To control fungal pathogens after harvest on a variety of commodities, some biofungicides have already been tested and commercialized (Dukare et al., 2019).

In production areas in hot climates, aflatoxin contamination is likely to increase. The contamination rate will increase as global warming continues. This means the contaminated products will continue to pose serious health risks to consumers. Biological control is considered the best method to reduce aflatoxin contamination. Biological control has been used commercially for pre-harvest practices of maize, ground nuts, and cottonseed (Udomkun et al., 2017). The use of the toxigenic Aspergillus flavus (A. flavus) to decrease aflatoxin content has been widely recognized. In sub-Saharan Africa, this kind of biocontrol product is known as Aflasafe (Bandyopadhyay et al., 2016). Aflasafe protects the crops from aflatoxin contamination before and after harvest, as well as along the value chain. Biological control using Aflasafe is a viable method in Africa. However, the product still needs further promotion and management programmes which are important for long-term benefits to users.

4. Value addition through processing: Extreme climatic conditions during pre-harvest and early post-harvest operations such as harvesting, threshing, drying, and transportation can negatively impact the quality of produce especially if control measures are not implemented to attenuate these extreme conditions. Failure to implement such measures may result in both quantitative and qualitative losses. Quantitative loss is a loss that cannot be recovered. However, products that suffer qualitative loss can, in some instances, be recovered through processing into other value-added products. For example, rice with a high proportion of broken and chalkiness has a low market price (Ndindeng et al., 2021b, Twine et al., 2022) but when processed into rice flour for porridges, cakes and cookie production (Eyenga et al., 2020), it sells for more than double the price of broken and chalky rice. In addition, low quality products especially fruit, vegetables, cereals and livestock, can be used as raw materials in circular bioeconomy systems, such as Black Soldier Fly-Protein-Frass production, or for renewable energy generation like biogas production. Scaling up this innovation can significantly reduce the impact of climate change on post-harvest losses. Experience in Ethiopia has shown that harvesting, transportation, and threshing/shelling services are quite lucrative for service providers operating in the wheat, barley and maize-growing regions of the highlands. During peak harvesting and post-harvest processing periods such as threshing and shelling, service providers generated the highest income compared with other periods of the year.

Conclusion

Managing the effects of climate change on post-harvest handling requires a comprehensive approach that considers pre-harvest conditions and integrates strategies along the value chain. Climate change has led to unpredictable weather patterns, increased pest and disease incidences, and reduced crop yields, all of which contribute to post-harvest losses.

To reduce the impact of climate change on post-harvest handling, a range of strategies can be implemented, including the adoption of climate-smart practices, such as the cultivation of climate-resilient crop varieties and the implementation of digital agriculture technologies. Biological control systems can be used to control pests and diseases, reducing the need for chemical pesticides and minimizing the environmental impact on agriculture. Existing post-harvest technological innovations, such as evaporative cooling systems and airtight storage of agricultural products, can also help to reduce post-harvest losses and improve the sustainability and resilience of the agriculture sector. These technological innovations are linked by their ability to help reduce food loss and waste, thereby improving food security and reducing the environmental impact of agriculture. For example, evaporative cooling systems can help preserve the quality of fresh produce during transportation, reducing post-harvest losses due to spoilage. Similarly, airtight storage can prevent the growth of mould and fungi, reducing food waste and improving the quality of stored crops.

In summary, managing the effects of climate change on post-harvest handling requires a collaborative effort among farmers, policymakers, and other stakeholders. Such collaboration will help develop and implement strategies that address pre-harvest conditions, integrate practices along the value chain and utilize existing post-harvest technological innovations. By adopting these strategies, farmers can reduce post-harvest losses, improve food security, and promote environmental sustainability in the face of climate change.

References

Adekanmi Babarinsa, O., Babatunde Oluwalana, I., Bolade, M.K. 2022. Climate smart technology for storage of fresh pro-vitamin A bio-fortified cassava. African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development 14, 1494-1499.

Alhassan, Nabila Fuseini & Patrick, Kumah. 2018. Determination of Post-harvest Losses in Maize Production in the Upper West Region of Ghana. American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences. 44.

Ali, S., Ejaz, S., Anjum, M.A., Nawaz, A., Ahmad, S. 2020. Impact of climate change on post-harvest physiology of edible plant products, Plant Ecophysiology and Adaptation under Climate Change: Mechanisms and Perspectives I: General Consequences and Plant Responses, pp. 87-115.

Asrey, R., Barman, K., Prajapati, U., Sharma, S., Yadav, A. 2021. Genetically modified fruit and vegetables - An overview on senescence regulation, post-harvest nutraceutical quality preservation and shelf-life extension. Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology 96, 271-287.

Bandyopadhyay, R., Ortega-Beltran, A., Akande, A., Mutegi, C., Atehnkeng, J., Kaptoge, L., Senghor, A.L., Adhikari, B.N., Cotty, P.J. 2016. Biological control of aflatoxins in Africa: Current status and potential challenges in the face of climate change. World Mycotoxin Journal 9, 771-789.

Baudron, F.; Sims, B.; Justice, S.; Kahan, D.G.; Rose, R.; Mkomwa, S.; Kaumbutho, P.; Sariah, J.; Nazare, R.; Moges, G. 2015. Re-examining appropriate mechanization in Eastern and Southern Africa: Two-wheel tractors, conservation agriculture, and private sector involvement. Food Security. 2015, 7, 889–904.

Baudron, F.; Misiko, M.; Getnet, B.; Nazare, R.; Sariah, J.; Kaumbutho, P. 2019. A farm-level assessment of labor and mechanization in Eastern and Southern Africa. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2019, 39, 17.

Berck, C.S., Berck, P., Di Falco, S. 2018. Agricultural adaptation to climate change in Africa: Food security in a changing environment.

Chari, F. and Ngcamu, B.S. 2022. Climate change and its impact on urban agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa: A literature review. Environmental and Socio-Economic Studies 10, 22-32.

Chegere, M.J. 2018a. Climate change and post-harvest agriculture, Agricultural Adaptation to Climate Change in Africa: Food Security in a Changing Environment, pp. 283-294.

Chegere, M.J. 2018b. Post-harvest losses reduction by small-scale maize farmers: The role of handling practic es. Food Policy 77, 103-115.

Coffi, H., Nyabicha, J., Ouma, J.O. 2016. The use of hermetic bags for on farm storage of grains and pulses against insect pests. Outlooks on Pest Management 27, 231-235.

Cornforth, R. 2013. Weathering the drought in Africa. Planet Earth, 30-31.

Daum, T. Mechanization and sustainable agri-food system transformation in the Global South. 2023. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 43, 16 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-023-00868-x.

Dayioğlu, M.A., Türker, U. 2021. Digital transformation for sustainable future-agriculture 4.0: A review. Tarim Bilimleri Dergisi 27, 373-399.

Dukare, A.S., Paul, S., Nambi, V.E., Gupta, R.K., Singh, R., Sharma, K., Vishwakarma, R.K. 2019. Exploitation of microbial antagonists for the control of post-harvest diseases of fruits: a review. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 59, 1498-1513.

Eyenga, E. F., Tang, E. N., Achu, M. B. L., Boulanger, R., Mbacham, W. F., & Ndindeng, S. A. 2020. Physical, nutritional, and sensory quality of rice-based biscuits fortified with safou (Dacryodes edulis) fruit powder. Food Science & Nutrition, 8(7), 3413-3424.

Futakuchi, K., Senthilkumar, K., Arouna, A., Vandamme, E., Diagne, M., Zhao, D., and Saito, K. 2021. History and progress in genetic improvement for enhancing rice yield in sub-Saharan Africa. Field Crops Research, 267, 108159.

Gebremeskel, G., Tang, Q., Sun, S., Huang, Z., Zhang, X., Liu, X. 2019. Droughts in East Africa: Causes, impacts and resilience. Earth-Science Reviews 193, 146-161.

Hussein, Z., Fawole, O.A., Opara, U.L. 2018. Preharvest factors influencing bruise damage of fresh fruits – a review. Scientia Horticulturae 229, 45-58.

Ippolito, A., Nigro, F. 2000. Impact of preharvest application of biological control agents on post-harvest diseas es of fresh fruits and vegetables. Crop Protection 19, 715-723.

Kahan, D.; Benesta, T.; Matangi, D.; Tadesse, E. Agricultural Mechanization and Small-Scale Agriculture: Case Study Evidence from Eastern and Southern Africa; ACT Working Paper: Nairobi, Kenya, 2016; p. 28.

Kamarulzaman, A., Hasanuzzaman, M., Rahim, N.A. 2021. Global advancement of solar drying technologies and its future prospects: A review. Solar Energy 221, 559-582.

Kingra, P.K., Kaur, R., Kaur, S. 2019. Climate change impacts on rice (Oryza sativa) productivity and strategies for its sustainable management. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 89, 171-180.

Kyriacou, M.C., and Rouphael, Y. 2018. Towards a new definition of quality for fresh fruits and vegetables. Scientia Horticulturae 234, 463-469.

Lal Basediya, A., Samuel, D.V.K., Beera, V. 2013. Evaporative cooling system for storage of fruits and vegetables - A review. Journal of Food Science and Technology 50, 429-442.

Lee, S.K., and Kader, A.A. 2000. Preharvest and post-harvest factors influencing vitamin C content of horticultural crops. Post-harvest Biology and Technology 20, 207-220.

Mapiemfu, D. L., Ndindeng, S. A., Ambang, Zachee., Tang, E. N., Ngome, Francis., Johnson, J. M., and Saito, K. 2017. Physical rice grain quality as affected by biophysical factors and pre-harvest practices. International Journal of Plant Production, 11(4), 561-576.

Mariam, N., Valerie, K., Karin, D., Angelika, W.R. and Nina, L. 2019. Limiting food waste via grassroots initiatives as a potential for climate change mitigation: A systematic review. Environmental Research Letters 15.

Moretti, C.L., Mattos, L.M., Calbo, A.G., Sargent, S.A. 2010. Climate changes and potential impacts on post-harvest quality of fruit and vegetable crops: A review. Food Research International 43, 1824-1832.

Mupangwa,W.; Mutenje, M.; Thierfelder, C.; Mwila, M.; Malumo, H.; Mujeyi, A.; Setimela, P. 2017. Productivity and profitability of manual and mechanized conservation agriculture systems in eastern Zambia. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 2017, 34, 380–394.

Mupangwa, W.; Yahaya, R.; Tadesse, E.; Ncube, B.; Mutenje, M.; Chipindu, L.; Mhlanga, B.; Kassa, A. 2023. Crop Productivity, Nutritional and Economic Benefits of No-Till Systems in Smallholder Farms of Ethiopia. Agronomy 2023, 13, 115.

Ndindeng, S. A., Manful, J., Futakuchi, K., Mapiemfu-Lamare, D., Akoa-Etoa, J. M., Tang, E. N., and Moreira, J. 2015. Upgrading the quality of Africa’s rice: a novel artisanal parboiling technology for rice processors in sub-Saharan Africa. Food Science & Nutrition, 3(6), 557-568.

Ndindeng, S. A., Candia, A., Mapiemfu, D. L., Rakotomalala, V., Danbaba, N., Kulwa, K., and Futakuchi, K. 2021a. Valuation of rice post-harvest losses in sub-Saharan Africa and its mitigation strategies. Rice Science, 28(3), 212-216.

Ndindeng, S. A., Twine, E. E., Mujawamariya, G., Fiamohe, R., & Futakuchi, K. 2021b. Hedonic pricing of rice attributes, market sorting, and gains from quality improvement in the beninese market. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 50(1), 170-186.

Ndindeng, S. A., Futakuchi, K., & Ndjiondjop, M. N. 2022. Screening of Rice Germplasm and Processing Methods to Produce Low Glycemic Rice. Rice Science, 29(2), 101.

Orge, R.F., Sawey, D.A., Leal, L.V., Gagelonia, E.C. 2020. Re-engineering the paddy rice drying system in the Philippines for climate change adaptation. Drying Technology 38, 1462-1473.

Pushpalatha, R., Gangadharan, B. 2020. Is Cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) a Climate “Smart” Crop? A Review in the Context of Bridging Future Food Demand Gap. Tropical Plant Biology 13, 201-211.

Rutta, E. 2021. Stopping Quality Food-Loss in sub-Saharan Africa: Post-COVID-19 Options for Smallholders. Agrilinks. Feedfuture. https://agrilinks.org/post/stopping-quality-food-loss-sub-saharan-africa-post-covid-19-options-smallholders

Srivastava, Y. 2019. Climate change: A challenge for post-harvest management, food loss, food quality, and food security, Climate Change and Agricultural Ecosystems: Current Challenges and Adaptation, pp. 355-377.

Stathers, T., Lamboll, R., Mvumi, B.M. 2013. Post-harvest agriculture in changing climates: Its importance to African smallholder farmers. Food Security 5, 361-392.

Tadesse D., Tesfaye, S., Tesfaye, K., Abiy, S., Shure, S. Yazie, C. 2017. Post-harvest wheat losses in Africa: an Ethiopian case study. 10.19103/AS.2016.0004.18.

Twine, E. E., Ndindeng, S. A., Mujawamariya, G., & Futakuchi, K. 2022. Pricing rice quality attributes and returns to quality upgrading in sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 54(1), 175-196.

Udomkun, P., Wiredu, A.N., Nagle, M., Müller, J., Vanlauwe, B., Bandyopadhyay, R. 2017. Innovative technologies to manage aflatoxins in foods and feeds and the profitability of application – A review. Food Control 76, 127-138.

Wanyama, J., Banadda, N., Kiyimba, F., Okurut, S., Zziwa, A., Kabenge, I., Mutumba, C., Tumutegyereize, P., Komakech, A.J., Kiggundu, N. 2016. Profiling agricultural engineering technologies for mechanizing smallholder agriculture in Uganda. Agricultural Engineering International: CIGR Journal 18, 40-51.

Workneh, T.S., Osthoff, G. 2010. A review on integrated agro-technology of vegetables. African Journal of Biotechnology 9, 9307-9327.

Yahaya, R.; Tadesse, E.; Mupangwa,W. 2018. Appropriate Agricultural Mechanization for Increased Crop Productivity and Income Generation in Rural Ethiopia. In Proceedings of the Global Food Security and Food Safety: The Role of Universities, International Conference on Research on Food Security, Natural Resource Management and Rural Development, Ghent, Belgium, 17–19 September 2018; Margraf Publishers GmbH:Weikersheim, Germany; p. 558.

Yamakawa, H., Hirose, T., Kuroda, M., & Yamaguchi, T. 2007. Comprehensive expression profiling of rice grain filling-related genes under high temperature using DNA microarray. Plant physiol

CHAPTER 7.
The way forward: recommendations for further actions

©FAO/Belty Lokossa

In 2014, the African Union (AU) Summit in Malabo set the ambitious goal to halve post-harvest losses by 2025. However, the challenges and complexities of achieving this target have now been realized. With only one year remaining until this deadline, it is evident that post-harvest loss (PHL) remains a pressing issue in Africa, demanding immediate attention and innovative strategies. This publication details the continual challenges that hinder the reduction of post-harvest losses. A critical barrier is the limited access to improved technologies, hindering the adoption of more efficient and modern practices in various stages of the agricultural value chain. In addition, the non-adherence to a comprehensive value chain approach also contributes to the fragmented efforts in addressing post-harvest losses, necessitating a more holistic and interconnected strategy.

Furthermore, institutional challenges exacerbate the issue, with many countries lacking clear and robust strategies to confront post-harvest losses effectively. This institutional gap underscores the need for coordinated efforts involving governments, the private sector and civil society to establish and implement comprehensive policies to mitigate losses across the food system. As the AU Malabo summit’s deadline approaches, the persistence of these challenges emphasizes the urgency for renewed commitment and innovative solutions. There is a call for a collaborative approach that engages stakeholders at local, national, and global levels. This involves not only acknowledging the multifaceted nature of post-harvest losses but also actively seeking innovative solutions that address the root causes whilst promoting sustainable food security for the African continent.

This publication has shown that despite the ongoing efforts to reduce PHL, it remains a significant challenge for many smallholder farmers in Africa. Several gaps that contribute to increases in post-harvest losses among farmers, especially smallholders, have been identified and recommendations that contribute to the reduction of PHL have been demonstrated and showcased.

Institutional support and capacity development

Prioritize and develop institutional support for smallholder farmers adopting agricultural technologies

Small-scale farmers implementing agricultural technologies require a comprehensive support system. It is essential to ensure that these farmers have access to local repair shops as well as to spare parts and available skilled mechanics who can maintain and repair machines. It is also important to provide training programmes that equip operators with the necessary skills for efficient and safe use of the technology and enhance extension services, ensuring they cover production and post-harvest management and handling. Tailored institutional support will help ensure agricultural technologies are successfully implemented, leading to long-term viability in smallholder farming communities.

Harnessing entrepreneurship and agribusinesses for sustainable post-harvest management

It is essential to encourage agribusinesses and entrepreneurs to participate and engage in post-harvest management for innovation in farming, technology adoption and ownership of facilities as this will help improve efficiency. The development of business and managerial skills as well as entrepreneurial spirit among smallholders should also be encouraged. To help achieve this, a comprehensive training programme should be established that focuses on several key competencies. These include strategic thinking, problem solving, attention to detail, financial management, marketing skills, sales risk management, and innovative thinking. Promoting continuous learning and adaptation to emerging trends and challenges in the agricultural landscape is crucial. Finally, fostering a culture that values creativity, resilience and forward-thinking will help enhance post-harvest management initiatives.

Promoting business models for sustainable post-harvest management in agriculture

It is important to promote and support diverse business models for post-harvest management that cater to the specific needs of smallholder farmers. Initiatives such as contract farming, farmer-individual enterprises, and group-based mechanization can provide effective and affordable services, which can help reduce post-harvest losses. It is essential to emphasize sustainable business practices, access to finance and value addition to help ensure the long-term success of these models. Collaboration between development organizations, governments and NGOs can help support farmers’ groups and cooperatives in acquiring post-harvest technologies. When implementing these initiatives, it’s crucial to consider the socio-economic context and provide ongoing support to enhance the effectiveness of group-based initiatives.

Strengthen technical innovation gaps through localized training, accessible technologies and knowledge sharing

To minimize the loss of crops after harvesting, it is necessary to prioritize training programmes for smallholder farmers that address their knowledge gaps, improve their skills and introduce them to new technologies and innovations. Standard guidelines and training programmes tailored to specific crops and regional contexts should be created. These programmes should emphasize proper harvesting practices, adapted tools and equipment, efficient handling techniques, and machinery and technologies suitable for the local area. The local production and adaptation of post-harvest technologies to make them more accessible and affordable for farmers should also be encouraged. Collaboration with local artisans is essential and they should be provided with the necessary skills to upscale technologies and contribute to the transfer of post-harvest innovations. Finally, knowledge-sharing platforms such as practical training guidelines and online modules that help ensure continuous learning and dissemination of best practices among stakeholders in the agricultural sector must also be facilitated.

Facilitate accessible financing models for smallholder farmers

To promote the use of sustainable investments for post-harvest technologies, it’s essential to create financing models that are not only accessible but also cater to the needs of smallholder farmers. One way to achieve this is by expanding leasing schemes like AgLeaseco in Zambia, which allows farmers to acquire post-harvest technologies without huge costs upfront. Collaboration with financial institutions and microcredit organizations is also crucial to design farmer-friendly loan structures. These structures should have longer repayment schedules, lower transaction costs and flexible terms that align with the agricultural production cycle. Additionally, enhancing financial literacy programmes can empower farmers with the knowledge and skills to make informed investment decisions. It’s also important to create partnerships between governments, NGOs, and the private sector to create subsidy programmes or incentives that reduce the financial burden on smallholders investing in post-harvest technologies. By addressing the financial barriers, sustainable investments in post-harvest technologies can become more accessible and encourage widespread adoption among smallholder farmers.

Establish and support multi-stakeholder platforms

Governments, development agencies and relevant stakeholders should actively support and facilitate the creation of multi-stakeholder platforms in major agricultural production sites. These platforms should include diverse stakeholders along the value chain, such as microfinance institutions, seed suppliers, growers, processors, marketers, and policymakers. Encouraging mutually beneficial contractual arrangements within these platforms will foster collaboration, knowledge sharing and better organization, leading to demand-driven production that meets quantity and quality requirements. Such collaborative efforts are essential for reducing post-harvest losses as well as enhancing the overall sustainability of agricultural value chains.

Promoting robust record-keeping in post-harvest management

Promoting and implementing comprehensive record-keeping systems is essential to post-harvest management practices. To achieve this, training programmes and incentives should be established to encourage farmers and entrepreneurs to adopt efficient record-keeping practices. This will emphasize the importance of traceability, quality assurance, informed decision-making, market access, accountability and continuous monitoring. It is also recommended to integrate digital tools and technologies for record-keeping as this enhances accuracy, accessibility, and ease of data management.

Infrastructure and technology

Infrastructure development

Investment in infrastructure development is essential for the growth of the agricultural sector. Therefore, it is imperative to focus on the development of storage facilities, processing plants, transportation, electricity supply, and road networks. Inadequate storage facilities at the farm level leads to considerable losses, making it necessary to improve storage. Furthermore, the development and maintenance of a robust road infrastructure that connects rural areas directly to markets will ensure efficient and timely transportation of agricultural produce, especially perishable items, thereby reducing post-harvest losses. Establishing processing centres near farms will also increase the shelf life of perishable products and reduce potential losses.

Data-driven solutions for post-harvest loss reduction

To reduce post-harvest losses effectively, it is important to prioritize the collection and analysis of reliable data. This can be achieved by conducting complete assessments of PHL along the entire food value chain. By understanding the root causes of these losses, identifying critical loss points (CLP) and recognizing low loss points (LLP), resources can be allocated strategically. This approach will also enable progress tracking and facilitate necessary corrections to the interventions, if required.

Strengthen technical innovation gaps through training, accessible technologies and knowledge sharing

To minimize post-harvest losses, it is important to prioritize training initiatives for smallholder farmers. These initiatives should address gaps in knowledge, skills, and technical innovation. Standard guidelines and training programmes should be developed and tailored to specific crops and regional contexts. These programmes should highlight proper harvesting practices, adapted equipment, machinery and technologies, as well as efficient handling techniques. Knowledge-sharing platforms, (such as practical training guidelines and online modules) should be facilitated to ensure continuous learning and dissemination of best practices among stakeholders in the agricultural sector. It is also important to promote local production and adaptation of post-harvest technologies to enhance accessibility and reduce costs for farmers. Collaboration with local artisans should be encouraged, providing them with the necessary skills to upscale technologies and contribute to the transfer of post-harvest innovations. For example, the promotion of hermetic packaging and storage systems for grains in sub-Saharan Africa and the development of cold chain infrastructures, including transport and storage facilities, to help preserve fresh produce.

Enhance valorization of by-products

The aim here is to promote the value addition of by-products and low-grade produce generated in crop production chains. This can be done through technology demonstrations, training initiative and identifying market demands. To achieve this, it is necessary to encourage the development of efficient technologies for processing by-products (such as bran, fine broken rice, straw, husk, and peelings). There is also a need to explore oil extraction methods, alternative flour production, as well as energy generation. Maximizing the utilization of by-products can help improve the entire value chain’s productivity and resource-use efficiency which, in turn, can contribute to sustainability and reduce environmental pollution associated with the disposal of these materials.

Fostering innovative technologies for climate resilience in post-harvest management

It is important to promote the adoption of post-harvest technologies to help mitigate losses caused by climate change, by implementing evaporative cooling systems for fresh produce storage and airtight storage solutions. These methods help prevent pest infestation, fungal diseases and value addition through processing to salvage products facing qualitative losses. In addition, farmers should have access to training programmes on how to use these technologies properly so they can be practically applied and used widely.

Facilitating access to weather information, digital tools and adapted crop varieties to increase climate resilience

Access to accurate weather information is crucial for farmers to make informed decisions regarding their crops, such as harvesting time. It is important to establish and expand early warning systems that use mobile technology that alert farmers to potential climate-related threats. This helps farmers implement farming practices that can withstand the effects of climate change and ensures proper management of harvested crops which can improve agriculture’s resilience. It is also vital to enhance agriculture monitoring, control and prediction using digital technologies such as the Internet of Things (IoT) big data, and Artificial Intelligence (AI). Breeding and distributing crop varieties that can withstand climate change, maintain productivity, and improve nutritional value for long-term food security is also important. Encouraging the adoption of climate-resilient crop varieties as well as innovative post-harvest methods is crucial. To help achieve these goals, it is necessary to advocate for government and NGO support, including financial aid, incentives and improved weather forecasting for scalable resilience-building initiatives.

Scaling innovation for socioeconomic gains

The successful implementation of processing kits within women-led cooperatives in Benin provides an excellent model for expanding this innovative solution to other regions. By doing so, more women are empowered, aiding them in increasing both productivity and income. Collaborating with local partners to introduce processing kits, comprising a manual press and soybean mill, enables women-led cooperatives to enhance their production of high-quality fresh and smoked soybean cheese and soybean flour. This initiative not only supports women’s empowerment but also contributes to local economic development. This model can be replicated in similar situations if the adaptation to local needs and conditions is facilitated. Monitoring and evaluating the socioeconomic impact of these innovations can help to inform future scalability and improvements of this innovation.

Collaboration and partnership

Embrace a holistic value chain approach

It is essential to adopt a comprehensive value chain approach involving all stakeholders along the value chain. Tools such as food loss analysis (FLA) or rapid loss appraisal tool (RLAT) can be used to identify critical loss points (CLP) and promote collaboration among stakeholders with diverse interests. Utilizing “Scaling Scan” and “Scaling Readiness” tools can facilitate sustainable scaling. Collaboration with partners is essential for long-term investments, initiating pilot phases with financial backing and focusing on achieving structural changes to reduce post-harvest losses sustainably.

Foster Public-Private Partnerships

Encouraging collaboration between the public and the private sector is crucial to reducing post-harvest losses effectively. Creating a conducive environment for private sector involvement and engaging in joint initiatives should be a priority. It is important to emphasize the potential benefits of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) in reducing post-harvest losses. Implementing recommendations from task forces, such as the Africa-wide Rice Task Force, can help leverage the combined strengths of both sectors for more impactful solutions.

Promoting private sector investment and collaboration

Governments and other stakeholders should take an active role in promoting and facilitating the involvement of the private sector in initiatives aimed at managing post-harvest activities. These include creating a business-friendly environment that encourages private sector investments, providing financial assistance to farmers and small to medium enterprises, and encouraging cooperation along the entire food value chain. By promoting private sector participation, innovative technologies can be adopted and significant reductions in post-harvest losses can be achieved.

Strategic engagement of development partners in assessments, capacity building and local innovation support

Development partners have a crucial role to play in reducing post-harvest losses (PHLs) throughout the food value chain. To achieve this, partners need to actively engage in comprehensive PHL reduction initiatives by providing not only financial assistance but also technical assistance. This should include supporting assessments, capacity development and the development of local innovations. In this way partners can help enhance the skills and infrastructure necessary for effective post-harvest management and loss reduction which, in turn, contributes to improving food security.

Empowerment and equal opportunities

Advancing equal opportunities for both women and men in post-harvest management for sustainable agriculture

To improve the efficiency of post-harvest management, it is recommended to incorporate a gender perspective into programmes which focuses on technology, finance and capacity building. It is important to acknowledge the impact of gender dynamics on roles and opportunities which ensure everyone has equal access to resources. Empowering women is crucial and can be achieved through their active participation in producer organizations and entrepreneurship/entrepreneurial opportunities. This helps foster their capacity and increases confidence and engagement in sustainable agricultural practices leading to a reduction in post-harvest losses.

Empowering women in agribusiness linked to post-harvest management

Inequalities in visibility and opportunities for women and men in post-harvest management should be recognized and addressed. It is important to challenge traditional views that limit women’s roles to household responsibilities and acknowledge their multifaceted contributions in agriculture, including running small cottage industries. To help alleviate women’s work burden, enhance their efficiency and ensure equal access to resources and services in post-harvest and processing, gender-sensitive mechanization initiatives must be prioritized. Supporting the establishment of agribusinesses and entrepreneurship initiatives tailored to youth and women in the post-harvest management sector should be encouraged. This can be achieved by implementing targeted programmes that provide training, financial support, and mentorship to empower youth and women to venture into processing, packaging, transportation, storage, and digital solutions businesses. It is essential to foster an enabling environment that recognizes and celebrates the contributions of these entrepreneurs as this will promote sustainable economic growth, create jobs, and reduce post-harvest losses.