A UK Parliamentary Report into tackling postharvest losses and global food waste, on

behalf of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Agriculture and Food for Development

Missing Food

The APPG on Agriculture and Food for Developmentwishes to thank our supporters:

Africa College, University of Leeds

Agriculture for Impact

Bangor University

CABI

CARE International

Christian Aid

Concern Worldwide

Farm Africa

George Rothschild

Leverhulme Centre for Integrative Research on Agriculture and Health

Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich

Oxfam GB

Partnership for Child Development

Save the Children

Small Foundation

Tony Worthington

Tropical Agriculture Association

Claire Hickson, Trio Policy

Photographs in the report have been provided by the

Natural Resources Institute and Agriculture for Impact

Missing FoodThe All-Party Parliament Group (APPG) on Agriculture and Food for Development brings together Parliamentarians concerned with agriculture, nutrition and food security in the developing world. The Group promotes support for the developmental needs of the 450 million smallholder farmers who feed 2 billion people worldwide. It engenders progressive and informed debate within Westminster and beyond by bridging the gap between policy makers, agricultural development specialists and practitioners in the field.The APPG was established in October 2008 in response to growing concerns over the heightened Food Crisis and a steady decline in the funding of agricultural development both by bilateral and multilateral organisations over nearly two decades. Chaired by Lord Cameron of Dillington, the APPG is a cross-party initiative drawing members from both Houses of the UK Parliament which brings together Parliamentarians concerned with both the technical, and social science elements, of agricultural development in poorer parts of the world. It uses its cross-party membership to raise the understanding of developmental needs of smallholder farmers and other stakeholders in developing countries and hence facilitates debate on the level of support given by the British Government and other major donors. In doing this, the APPG recognises the pivotal role that agricultural research outputs have in helping smallholder farmers to increase their productivity and in eliminating global poverty.

Why postharvest losses?It is estimated that 30% of global food harvests are lost, equivalent to 1.3 billion tonnes of food annually. Whilst nearly one billion people go to bed hungry and 40% of all children under five in south Asia and sub-Saharan Africa are stunted due to malnutrition, a third of food produced for human consumption globally is lost. The extent

of the problem of postharvest losses and food waste is undeniable.The world will need about 50% more food by 2030; to produce enough food sustainably is a global challenge. In Africa smallholder farmers produce more than 80% of food but at the same time account for 50% of the food insecure. Food is going missing. It is estimated that 14% of grains are lost, translating into over US$4 billion loss per year in sub-Saharan Africa alone. Postharvest losses are highest amongst fruit, vegetables, roots and tubers with 20 – 30% lost across most regions. Reducing postharvest

losses will help smallholder farmers who are net-deficit producers to produce enough to feed their families and improve their food security, and will help smallholder farmers who are net-surplus producers to produce enough to earn a living and improve their livelihood. At the same time, less food waste in developed countries will help reduce demand for food.Food losses along the postharvest chain have an impact on food and nutritional security, farmer livelihoods, natural resource consumption and agricultural sustainability. Wasted farm production inputs such as labour and seeds, reduced food availability and loss of calories, higher consumer prices and lower incomes for producers all impact on health, food and

nutritional security. Smallholder farmers in particular lose out. Postharvest losses have a substantial environmental footprint too. Greenhouse gas emissions and the vast amount of water, land and fertiliser used producing food that is ultimately lost or wasted contribute to diminished ecosystems and the rapid depletion of natural resources.

How do postharvest losses occur?In developing countries losses of weight and quality accumulate along the postharvest chain, due in part to poor infrastructure. Losses occur from inefficient harvesting, poor on-farm storage, difficult and costly transportation, inadequate on-farm processing equipment, poor collective storage and inadequate market facilities. The loss in quality of the produce means lost opportunities for sales in higher value markets and thus higher incomes, in addition to health and nutritional losses.

Developed countries have much higher losses at the consumption level, where waste is closer to the consumer and retailer. In the UK it is estimated that households throw away 7.2 million tonnes of food every year and of this around 2.9 million tonnes is wasted before ever being cooked or served. Changing diets

in middle-income countries and the growth of supermarkets, accompanied by a decline in traditional wholesale and wet markets, could shift losses away from the post-harvest handling and storage stage to waste at the consumption stage in the supply chain.

What are the solutions to postharvest losses and waste?Throughout the APPG’s meetings, briefings and evidence sessions on postharvest losses and food waste, it was clear that measures must be taken at all levels and by all actors if the amount of food lost between field and fork is to be reduced. A multipronged approach is essential. The interventions explored below must be complementary and receive attention holistically. Measures conducted in isolation will not be sufficient to reduce postharvest losses and waste.The APPG wishes to stress the crucial importance of building the capacity of smallholder farmers, and in particular women, who make up the majority of smallholder farmers, in postharvest management so that crops are collected at the appropriate time, produce is not contaminated with soil, crops are dried correctly to reduce moisture for safe storage and measures are taken to reduce susceptibility to pests. In addition, traders must be supported to improve the storability of crops, to reduce contamination, to increase market value and to enhance storage facilities so that the quality of produce can be preserved and grain kept until a good time for market. Equally at the processor level, access to finance is vital in order to invest in improved technology, which will maintain the quality of the produce.In calling for increased investment in infrastructure and the need to shift the incentive for focusing on losses to the farmer, the APPG also recognises that these measures will not deliver the change required over the long term unless there is a focus on facilitating system change. As well as

training, upgrading infrastructure and making new market linkages, policy makers and donors need to invest in the processes of change, for example, understanding linkages, behaviours and relationships with key actors and engaging them in processes that explores solutions to problems. The actors within the systems will need to set the direction themselves and have mechanisms to communicate and tackle problems together.

Case study: Improving grain conditioningAn efficient value chain, optimised to retain quality and value and to maximise quantity, requires holistic change. The APPG heard from the Natural Resources Institute at the University of Greenwich about a successful project in Uganda where a group of farmers were supported to reduce maize losses. Initially the maize cob was being processed late due to other duties, thus leading to quality decline; the cobs were being shelled by beating with sticks, further reducing their quality; grain was then not sorted, which led to a low grade being taken to market; and farmers were paying to have the grain conditioned to qualify for entry into a warehouse receipts system, thereby incurring a financial penalty.This case study highlights the transformative impact of shifting the incentive for focusing on grain quality from the trader to the farmer. By hiring a motorised maize-sheller the produce was shelled quickly after the harvest leading to less quality decline, fewer broken grains and the grain being conditioned before delivery to the warehouse. The absence of costs for conditioning meant a better income for farmers. Furthermore, quick delivery of the grain to warehouse meant rapid credit for the next harvest. Facilitating the adoption of better techniques for processing and storage meant that losses were substantially reduced because quality was achieved from the start of the value chain.

Case study: Access to warehouse servicesHerbert Kyeyamwa managing director for AgroWays (U), a grain warehouse system based in Jinga, Uganda, estimates that the farmers who use his services are able to preserve 40%

more of their crop. The income gains are also significant: farmers earn roughly 20 – 30% more for their grain if it passes through the warehouse system. Much of the success of AgroWays (U) is due to the financial and technical support from the Ugandan Development Trust, a grantee of the African Green Revolution Alliance (AGRA).

The warehouse offers services to small farmers for transport, cleaning, drying, grading and storage at affordable prices. Farmers are organized into village associations with as many as 60 farmers to collectively produce a required minimum of 5 tonnes for pick-up. The grain is retrieved within 2 days of harvest from village aggregation centres located throughout Uganda and taken to the warehouse to be cleaned, dried, graded into class 1 or 2 and stored in a fumigated warehouse. This ensures that the maize is spared from mould and the fungus afla-toxin, which immediately renders the grain unfit for sale.

Farmers gain mainly from reducing post-harvest loss, but also through direct price negotiation with buyers. AgroWays (U) helps to find buyers, such as the World Food Programme, but the

representatives of the farmer associations meet with the prospective buyers and agree on a price directly. Once the deal is agreed, the farmer associations are paid for the amounts of grade 1 or 2 maize they have deposited and wish to sell, less the warehouse charges. The key element of this system is that the farmers retain ownership

of their grain in the equivalent number of bags of the quality they deposited. However, if they find they can get a better deal elsewhere, the farmer associations can take the equivalent number of bags back, pay the warehouse charges and sell them privately.

Key steps to reduce global food wasteThe deployment of existing knowledge and technology, and investment in new technology across the value chain, but particularly in storage and transport infrastructure, is a key priority for reducing postharvest waste.

The APPG heard that there is an urgent need to strengthen the evidence base for postharvest losses to ensure that statistics are accurate and

up to date. In recent years there has been a lack of primary data. Developing common approaches for defining and measuring postharvest losses and food waste would be a positive step. Better understanding the impact of food loss and waste on nutrition would further strengthen the evidence base for action on postharvest losses and waste.

Food supply chains are becoming technically more challenging as populations become increasingly urbanised in developing countries and international trade in perishables increases. The biology of produce after harvest must be better understood and new technologies developed and utilised if the shelf life of perishable produce is to be extended.

Retailers play a role too. Some supermarkets are at last beginning to work with suppliers and growers to reduce waste in the agriculture and supply chain and with customers to reduce waste at the consumer level. For instance by using single date coding on meat, fruit and vegetables in the UK, dropping the ‘display until’ on items, has reduced food waste in stores.

The need for global leadershipIt was clear throughout the evidence presented to the APPG that existing efforts must be scaled up. The significant scale of the problem requires more effective global political leadership and commitment. It is therefore encouraging that the United Nations High Level Panel on Post-2015 Development Agenda recommended that a target for reducing postharvest loss and food waste be included in the successor framework to the Millennium Development Goals. The 5th pillar of the UN Secretary General’s Zero Hunger Challenge calls for zero loss or waste of food, further demonstrating political recognition and an appetite for change in this issue – albeit with an unrealistically ambitious target.

Strengthening the data and means of measuring progress will be critical if these goals are to have

a tangible impact. Estimates of postharvest losses are important data for policy makers and practitioners proposing, or managing, interventions to reduce postharvest losses. The African Postharvest Losses Information Service (APHLIS) was established to generate figures for the postharvest losses of cereal crops in a fully transparent manner and in a way that can enable the updating of postharvest losses estimates as new data becomes available.

Global policies must be underpinned by policy dialogue and the scaling up of knowledge sharing, capacity development; innovation and technology transfer at the regional and national levels. Post-harvest and food safety considerations must be built into national policies, planning and investment programmes.

The Department for International Development (DFID) have a number of agricultural research programmes, which have components or sub-projects looking at postharvest losses. However, the scale of problem demands a more substantial and coherent approach from all donors and governments.

RecommendationsConsensus that the amount of postharvest losses and food waste represents a crisis in the global food system was abundantly clear

from all of the APPG’s research, meetings and seminars. Developing efficient systems for ensuring that food produced by smallholder farmers is properly handled, stored, transported and marketed will have a transformational impact both in terms of the rural economy and in terms of poverty, hunger and malnutrition alleviation. Reducing postharvest losses is a resource efficient way to increase food availability and nutrition. Significantly, this means knowledge sharing, capacity building, access to technology and investment in infrastructure across the value chain. This must be matched by awareness raising and behaviour change to reduce waste at the consumer level.

The All-Party Group on Agriculture and Food for Development recommends that national governments, donors, multilateral institutions, the private sector and NGOs:

nSupport research into cost effective means of reducing postharvest losses in ways that benefit smallholder farmers.

nPrioritise investments to reduce postharvest losses and food waste.

nStrengthen the evidence base for postharvest losses to ensure statistics are accurate and up to date.

nPromote the scaling up of knowledge sharing, capacity building, innovation and technology transfer and investment in infrastructure across the value chain.

nEncourage the reduction of postharvest losses and improvements in quality by shifting the incentive to the farmer; investing in farmers’ education and training on the benefits of improving processing and storage. Women smallholder farmers should be given the highest priority within such interventions.

nEnsure that at the national and global levels there is a coherent and coordinated effort to work on postharvest losses and food waste.

The All-Party Parliamentary Group on Agriculture and Food for Development wishes to thank all those who presented to the group

on their ‘Postharvest losses and Global Food Waste’ Seminar Series. A full list of participants can be found on the APPG website.

The All Party Parliamentary Group on Agriculture and Food for Development

Lis Wallace

Room 1-04, 7 Old Palace Yard

Houses of Parliament

Westminster

SW1A 0PW

lis.wallace@parliament.uk

www.appg-agdev.co.uk