Reducing Postharvest Losses
In the OIC Member Countries
32
General review and interpretation with respect to OIC Member Countries
The estimates of root and tuber crop postharvest losses reported i vary by country and
methodology. The FAO key findings are widely reported and indicated that fruits and
vegetables, plus roots and tubers had the highest wastage rates of any food at 40-50% in terms
of physical losses. No indication, however, is given of the economic losses for root and tuber
crops probably because this is more challenging to estimate
.
For the OIC Member Countries considered in this review and the root and tuber crops
evaluated we find a number of trends.
Potato
Of the OIC Member Countries, the literature survey identified percentages relating to physical
losses from five of the top countries by production of potato. These varied between 5 and 40%
and one study 6 in Kazakhstan gave a breakdown by stage in the value chain and suggested
that the postharvest handling and storage step accounted for the greatest losses being from 10
to 30% and that consumption at the household level was the least at 5 to 15%. In Bangladesh,
the largest OIC Member Country for potato production, a recent study reported the lowest
losses (around 5%) and that this varied by season (Minten et al., 2016). Even lower losses are
reported for India (3.2% and 3.3%, respectively) but may be higher in China, possibly because
of the significantly longer distances that potatoes are shipped (Minten et al., 2016). There was
no reported information related to the estimation of the economic impact.
Considering how to mitigate these losses, it was reported that the use of cold storage facilities
can minimize the level of wastage in the potato distribution chain. Studies of this type of
storage for other countries and commodities can identify opportunities in which adoption of
cold storage can provide the greatest contributions toward the elimination of food wastage
(Minten et al., 2016).
Cassava
Of the OIC Member Countries, the literature survey identified percentages relating to physical
and economic losses from four of the top countries by production of cassava. Considering the
physical losses, these varied from 7% to 50% depending on the country and the product.
Three of the studies did report a breakdown of losses according to the value chain. In South-
West Nigeria, losses were reported to low on the farm at 1% with the bulk as a result of
processing and handling (including gari) resulting in an overall 7% loss (Naziri et al., 2015)
while another study reported higher losses on farm of 8.5% and overall losses of 25% for gari
production (Oguntade 2013). In other countries losses reported were higher for example in
Mozambique (Jones et al., 2016), 43% was lost on farm followed by 14% in postharvest
handling and storage, 18% during processing and packaging, 15% during distribution and 5%
at the household level. In Benin (Mutungi and Affongnon 2013) losses were similar to
Mozambique being 14% during harvesting, 9% during handling, 40-50% during storage of
cassava chips and 23% during processing. The wide variation reported between studies may
be because of the different locations, products and methods of estimated.
The economic losses were only reported in Nigeria being USD20 (South-West Nigeria only)
(Naziri et al., 2015) and Euro686 million (Oguntade 2013). The economic losses are
influenced whether the loss is at the producer or consumer end (Naziri et al., 2015) of the