This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility: Agriculture in the Global South remains under pressure to produce more food while responding to climate change and resource constraints. Policy responses have focused on increasing production.
But what about postharvest losses? Globally, about one-third of food produced for human consumption is estimated to be lost or wasted. The problem was examined in a recent Advances in Agriculture paper by agriculture, Indigenous knowledge and food security researchers.
Our research was based on examining 324 studies on the scale, causes and drivers of postharvest losses across food commodities and regions of the Global South. We found that the evidence is fragmented and uneven. In addition, estimating the true scale is difficult because studies measure losses differently.
They examine different commodities and stages of the value chain and use different indicators and methods. Research has also concentrated heavily on storage losses in major staples such as maize, rice and pulses. That has left evidence gaps for fruits, vegetables, roots and tubers, animal products and other foods.
But we were able to identify some patterns. First, postharvest losses occur throughout the food supply chain, from harvesting and handling to transportation, storage, processing and marketing. Second, there's substantial variation among food groups.
For example, without interventions, estimated losses were about 27.7% of cereals, 35.1% of vegetables, 25.8% of fruits and 42.9% of roots and tubers. With appropriate mitigation measures, such as improved harvesting and handling practices, hermetic storage technologies, cold-chain infrastructure, better packaging, and enhanced processing and transportation systems, these fell to about 8.2%, 7.3%, 6.2% and 11.5%, respectively. These figures illustrate the scale of variation and the potential for reduction.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
