See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/301770292

Post-harvest Situation and Losses in India

Technical Report · June 2013

DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.3206851.v1

CITATIONS READS
7 20,221

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

NAD-North Africa Development View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Rashad Hegazy on 02 May 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Post-harvest Situation and Losses in India

Summary
India is second largest producer of food next to China with estimated food processing
industry size at US$ 70 billion. In 2012, the production was 257 million tonnes of food
grain (rice, wheat, coarse grains and pulses), 75 million tonnes of fruits and 149 million
tonnes of vegetables. Out of these amounts, only 2.2 % of these are processed. In
contrast, countries like USA (65%) and China (23%) are far ahead of India in reducing the
wastage and enhancing the value addition and shelf life of the farm products. The losses
in postharvest sector are estimated to be from 10 to 25 per cent in durables, semi-
perishables and products like milk, meat, fish and eggs. The estimated losses in fruits
and vegetables are higher and reached from 30 to 40 per cent. These percentages are
not acceptable and adversely affect the Indian economy. To prevent such amount of
losses, different organizations in India have been trying to find solution for serious issue
related to post-harvest. Some efforts came with progress and achievements, other work
didn’t reflect to visible success as expected. So, in this study, our aim is to address and
discuss the important ramified issues in post-harvest in India with focusing on the rules
or constructions of most postharvest contributories. As noticed from the comprehensive
literature review, India has well established postharvest institutions supported by
government, public and private sector. The national-scale surveys and studies have been
carried out mainly by the government and in few cases international organization, while,
case studies and district/level research mostly carried out by local research institutions
and universities. There are many remarkable technologies distributed successfully and
reached the end-users/farmers in some places. However the continuous impact and
follow up stages of them haven’t been covered by literature review. The rules of
national/international non-governmental organizations varied and concentrated on
specific areas. The economic losses reported either in districts or national level and the
figures of losses didn’t match for some cases. The role of women and their suited
technology in post-harvest clearly highlighted, but the procedures of engaging them in
postharvest losses reduction strategies still not clear.
Keywords: Post-harvest, food losses, private sector, policies, gender, post-harvest
technology, non-governmental organization

1. Introduction
Post-harvest food loss is defined as measurable qualitative and quantitative food loss
along the supply chain, starting at the time of harvest till its consumption or other end
uses (Hodges et al., 2011). Every year, an estimated 1.3 billion ton - roughly one-third -
of the food produced for human consumption worldwide is lost or wasted. In
industrialized countries, significant waste occurs at the consumption stage, while in low-
income countries, food losses take place primarily during the early and middle stages of
the supply chain (FAO, 2011). Empirical evidence on the extent of post-harvest food
losses is scarce and estimates vary substantially, between countries and regions as well

1
as between different types of products. Some estimates for average losses in East and
Southern Africa, for instance, put Post-harvest losses for grains at 10-20 per cent (in
term of weight loss), with some regions reaching as high as 25-35 per cent. In South and
Southeast Asia, rice physical losses are 10–25% and quality losses can discount prices by
up to 30 per cent (Gummert, 2013 ; Manners-Bell and Miroux, 2013; FAO, 2011).
Peculiarly, current values related to post-harvest losses have no much difference about
the early cited values, the first world food conference in 1974 identified reduction of
post-harvest losses as part of the solution in addressing world hunger. At this time, an
overall estimate for post-harvest losses of 15 per cent, more previous extensive studies
suggested that about 15 per cent of grain may be lost in the post-harvest system (Liang
et al., 1993; Parfitt et al., 2010). As for individual case, rice in Asia, the estimated
quantitative losses ranged from 10 to 37 per cent in 1994 and was from 13-15 per cent
by 2004 (FAO, 1994; Smil, 2004; Grolleaud, 2002). That does not mean there was no
progress or reduction in post-harvest, but it is shows that current global losses cannot
be quantified whoever post-harvest loss data for developing countries was collected
over many years ago, (Parfitt et al., 2010).
In India, the production is about 450 million tons of raw food materials of plant and
animal origin which are refined, stored and transformed into various usable products
using conventional and modern post-harvest and food processing technology, out of this
amount there is 10 per cent post-harvest losses in durables (Cereals, pulses and
oilseeds), 20 per cent losses in semi-perishables (Potato, onion, sweet potato, tapioca)
and around 25 per cent in products like milk, meat, fish and eggs. Furthermore, In India,
annual storage losses estimated to be 14 million ton of food grains worth $ 16,000
million every year. About from 30 per cent to 40 per cent of the fruits and vegetables
grown in India (40 million tons amounting to US$ 13 billion) get wasted annually due to
gaps in the cold chain such as poor infrastructure, insufficient cold storage capacity,
unavailability of cold storages in close proximity to farms, poor transportation
infrastructure, etc. This results in instability in prices and farmers cannot get
remunerative prices beside rural impoverishment and farmers’ frustrations (Rajasri et
al., 2010; Maheshwar and Chanakwa, 2006; Rolle, 2006; Ali, 2004).
On the basis of production and wholesale market price in India, The Associated
Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India (ASSOCHAM) found that fruits and
vegetables post-harvest losses reached amount of $33,745 million in 2011-12 and may
cross $33,745 million in 2013-14. Among the major producing states, West Bengal
incurred highest loss of $ 2,163 million followed by Gujarat $ 1,805 million, Bihar 1,702
million and Uttar Pradesh $ 1,633 million (ASSOCHAM, 2013). Unavailability of cold
storages in India is just one of major reasons for these losses, since operating costs for
Indian cold storage units are a whopping over $60 per cubic metre per year compared to
less than $30 in the west. Energy expenses make up about 28 per cent of the total
expenses for Indian cold storages compared to 10% in the West. These factors make
setting up of cold storages difficult, unviable and uneconomical (Maheshwar and
Chanakwa, 2006).

2
In last decades different organizations and institutions in India, including; governmental
organization; National/international research institutes and universities; private sector;
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) etc. have been involved and played different
rules in post-harvest losses and their effect. Compared to other Developing Countries,
Indian Government has different organizations and departments involved in post-
harvest losses issues, i.e. Department of Agriculture and Cooperation (DAC) which
follows Ministry of Agriculture and has the Agricultural Marketing Advisor, DAC active in
cooperative education & training, information technology and agricultural marketing
with providing different post-harvest commodity profiles, DAC supervise the Directorate
of Marketing & Inspection (DMI) which is running national level surveys and statistics
within the country. Also; Department of Agricultural Research and Education (DARE),
which leads Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) the autonomous organisation
with separate thrust area in reduction of post-harvest losses, value addition to
agricultural produce, processing and utilization of by-products. ICAR also has established
the Central Institute of Post-Harvest Engineering and Technology (CIPHET) in 1989 and
now CIPHET is running different projects including assessment of post-harvest losses,
application of modern technologies, low cost cold chain transport and storage and many
other post-harvest related works. In addition, The Department of Food and Public
Distribution in Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution (MCAFPD) has
a primary Policy objective to ensure food security for the country through timely and
efficient procurement and distribution of foodgrains, this involves procurement of
various foodgrains, building up and maintenance of food stocks, their storage,
movement and delivery to the distributing agencies and monitoring of production, stock
and price levels of foodgrains.
2. General post-harvest situation
2.1 Governmental organizations /departments country level studies and surveys
Due to well established governmental institutions in India, many research practices have
been conducted. Governmental national level field surveys with help of State
agricultural marketing boards/government undertakings/ agricultural universities etc.,
was conducted to study marketable surplus and post-harvest losses of foodgrains at the
producer’s level, with methodology and profile of sample villages during continuous
basis for a period of three years, i.e. 1996-97, 1997-98 and 1998-99. It Covered 25
States, 100 districts and 15,000 cultivator households in the country, and covered also
vital information on village population, geographical area, area under cultivation,
sources of irrigation, ratio of area under each crop, distribution of cultivators in different
categories, accessibility of the market, condition of the feeder roads and availability of
storage capacity etc. as pre and post production factors (DMI, 2002a). Although the
huge amount of data collected, there were very few figures about post-harvest losses
and their values i.e. post-harvest losses during different operation for paddy at
producers’ level were as shown in Table 1 (Joshi et al., 2004; DMI, 2002b)
Table 1 Post-harvest losses during different operation for paddy at producers’ level
Item Quantity lost, 1000 ton % to total production

3
 Losses in transport from field to 971.39 0.79
threshing floor
Losses in threshing 1085.76 0.89
Losses in winnowing 584.62 0.48
Losses in transport from threshing 193.40 0.16
floor to storage
Losses in storage at producers level 484.40 0.40
Total losses at producers level 3319.57 2.72
Data related to marketable surplus showed that either primary market or secondary
market served almost 96.74 per cent of the Villages, about 73.9 per cent of the villages
had storage capacity below 200 quintals (20 tonne). It was also observed that storage
capacity was available on varying scales in the class 200 quintals to 5000 quintals (20-
500 tonne) in case of small percentage of villages. Surprisingly storage capacity of more
than 5000 quintals (500 ton) was reported from 4.3 per cent of total sample villages and
only 25.5 per cent villages had institutional storage facility within a radius of 10 kms.
The study highlighted also the marketed and marketable surplus which was stood at
51.97 per cent and 55.46 per cent respectively as general , there was no much
difference between these data and the other recent marketed and marketable surplus
ratio observed by Agro-Economic Research Centre, Visva-Bharati in West Bengal for rice
where average marketed surplus ratio, taking all farms together, was standing at 55.30
per cent of net availability of paddy or 61.19 per cent of current production of paddy,
the marketable surplus ratio was standing at 43.49 per cent of net availability of paddy
36.43 % of current production (Sarkar and Roy, 2013).
With more concentration in assessment of post-harvest losses, a comprehensive nation-
wide quantitative assessment of harvest and post-harvest losses for 46 agricultural
produces was carried out to estimate the extent of harvest and post-harvest losses
(DARE/ICAR, 2011). Data were collected through integrated stratified multistage survey
design from 106 randomly selected districts of the country representing all targeted
agricultural produces. This assessment covered 14 out of 15 agro-climatic zones without
Island region agro-climatic zone. The data were collected through enquiry as well as
actual observations. Estimates obtained through both procedures were combined by
assigning appropriate weighing factors before arriving at final estimate of losses for a
commodity. The operations considered for assessment of losses were harvesting,
collection, threshing, grading/sorting, winnowing/cleaning, drying, packaging,
transportation, and storage depending upon the commodity. As results came from this
study, the post-harvest losses differed as in Fig 1. The post-harvest losses comprise
essentially on-farm losses and those in transportation and storage in different marketing
channels. Where post-harvest losses have been done without systematic study with
only preliminary estimates, this study forms a milestone and can be considered as a
bench-mark survey.

4
Fig. 1 Harvest and post-harvest losses in different commodities from nation scale quantitative
assessment in India 2011.
For some individual cereals like wheat, the post-harvest losses of wheat are estimated
to the tune of 8 per cent of production. There are different estimates on post-harvest
losses in foodgrains. According to one estimate, the harvest and post-harvest losses are
as shown in Table 2 (Sreeramulu et al., 2005)
Table 2 Different reasons may cause post-harvest losses of wheat
Losses reason % of Losses Losses reason % of Losses
Threshing 1.0 Birds 0.5
Transport 0.5 Insect 3.0
Processing - Moisture 0.5
Rodents 2.50 Total : 8.0
Percentages of harvest and post-harvest losses which came in Figure 1 and Table 2
were not far from the percentage of losses cited by CIPHET prospective plane-vision
2025 (CIPHET, 2007), where the losses of foodgrains due to improper handling and
storage was mentioned to be as high as 10 per cent. More than 6 per cent of rice is lost
due to poor storage design and practices, about 66 per cent of rice is milled in hullers,
while the remaining in shellers and modern rice mills. And it is estimated that more than
25-40 per cent of the total production of fruits is lost due to spoilage at various post-
harvest stages, and around 20-25 per cent of the total vegetables is lost due to poor
post-harvest practices. Therefore; development of need based post-harvest
technologies for safe storage; development of agro-processing technologies for
different commodities for adoption at rural level to minimize post-harvest losses and

5
development of technologies for value added products have been made as CIPHET
target in its plan.
Along with the efforts done by the Indian government to address losses in post-harvest,
The Department of Food and Public Distribution keep distributing the uniform
specification of different commodities in order to insure that farmers can get due price
for their products, mostly these specification to be insured by all states/union territories
and food corporations of India (Department of Food and Public Distribution, 2012). As in
in rural areas, Integrated Intensive Farming System (IIFS) including rural based post-
harvest activities has been recommended where the technology for establishing such
agro-processing complex are available and requires to be adopted and should be
demonstrated through pilot plant, that is help in reducing post production losses,
generating employment opportunities in rural sector and provides better quality
products to the consumers at reduced rates. (Ali, 2004)
2.2 Research institutes and universities roles in districts/states level
Research institutes and universities in India undertake a lot of work and studies related
to post-harvest losses assessment, evaluation, new technology etc. and mostly it cover
specific commodities in district/state level or general research for one or more of post-
harvest losses component.
For addressing the seed storage as important reasons for post-harvest losses, study on
viability and quality of wheat grain under storage has been conducted on sample from
Allahabad district. The grain losses found in quantity and quality; can be in the form of
depletion in seed viability, hardness, colour, size and shape, grain weight under post-
harvest storages. Also, it was observed that a holistic ecological view is needed when
considering management approaches to long-term-storage of wheat grains for the
maintenance of quality; other recommendation was that concrete steps should be taken
to improve the storage conditions in granaries (Mathew, 2010).
Post-harvest losses in Karnataka at the farm level have been estimated to be 3.82 per
cent for rice and 3.28 per cent on weight basis, for wheat. The losses have been highest
during storage in both the crops (The storage losses at different stages have added up to
about 35.80 % of the total post-harvest losses in rice and 33.52 per cent in wheat,
during harvesting and threshing operations, there was about 17 per cent of total losses
in both the crops, Transit losses at different levels have been important component of
post-harvest losses, contributing to about 20 per cent of the total losses (Basavaraja et
al., 2007).

6
In northern part of India, Uttarakhand, study has examined the nature and extent of
post-harvest losses in vegetable supply chain, multistage cluster sampling has been used
for selection of 80 vegetable growers, 40 farmers from the hilly region and 40 farmers
from the bhabhar region. The sample has also included 25 market functionaries. The
total post-harvest losses at producer and retail levels ranged from 6 of 23 per cent of
production for all vegetable as shown in Fig 2.

Fig 2 Post-harvest losses of different 12 kind of vegetable at producer and retail levels for 12
major vegetables in Uttarakhand
The study has suggested that one possible solution to tackle these problems could be
the establishment of producer co-operatives to handle various activities relating to
production and marketing of vegetables. This will not only help reduce the post-harvest
losses but will also increase the bargaining power of growers in marketing. It will help
them in adopting consumer-oriented approach to vegetable marketing (Sharma and
Singh, 2011).
2.3 International organizations efforts
The international organizations have been active in studying and reporting the post-
harvest situation and losses in India since long time ago. The International Rice Research
Institute (IRRI) released technical book written for developing countries including India,
It included appropriate equipment and design criteria for different Rice Post-harvest
equipment which contributed in enhancing post-harvest industry (Wimberly, 1983).
The ADM (Archer Daniel Midlands) Institute for the Prevention Post-harvest Loss,
University of Illinois, funded 4 case studies in India (Sonka et al., 2012; Sonka et al.,
2008). The studies included, understanding rice post-harvest losses in Tamil Nadu, study

7
the value chain of maize in Rajasthan, mapping the production system and the supply
chain & study the crop losses of black gram in Maharashtra & Madhya Pradesh and a
study on pigeon pea post-harvest loss in Maharashtra. Also, there is long close
partnership between FAO and India, India-FAO cooperation has covered either direct
topic related to post-harvest such as improvement of post-harvest technology in rural
areas and agribusiness development or in direct issues but related to post-harvest such
as education, training, technology transfer, capacity building, climate change,
etc...(Wall, G. L. 2011). A lot of research organizations that are (separately) mandated to
conduct R&D on packaging, on post-harvest, on food science and on horticultural crops.
One of interesting organizations is the International Development Enterprises (IDE), it
was the first case that connected technology and R&D expertise from the research
organization to those who need it and can operationalize it. The second point is that IDE
fulfilled a role that falls somewhere between the conventional mandate of public and
private sectors, creating the initial conditions needed for the market to take over and
provide services to rural households. The existence of this niche perhaps says something
about the shortcomings of existing R&D organizations and their need to adopt a more
encompassing mandate (Clark et al., 2003), an example of IDE activities in India is the
post-harvest project in Himachal Pradesh.
2.4 Adaptions of new technologies for reducing post-harvest losses
For the ability of adaptions new technology which help in reducing post-harvest losses, a
study based on survey conducted with small rice millers of Orissa in 1996 on modern
trend of rice processing and by product as step to reduce post-harvest losses due to old
traditional milling methods, 33.64 per cent of rice miller owners were interested to
modify their rice millers and 16.16 of them were satisfied with the existing systems and
have no desire to shift towards new technology (Dash et al. 1996). And this percentage
was lower than early percentage of rice huller owner, where 30 per cent of rice huller
owner were satisfied over their own practice and didn’t want to shift to modern rice
milling (Dash et al. 1993).
A project implemented by International Development Enterprises (IDE) in India with
funds received from the Crop Post-Harvest Programme (CPHP) of the Department for
International Development (DFID), it was implemented in partnership with international
non-governmental organization (IntNGO) based in the UK also with different Indian
partners including different research institutes and non-governmental organization
(NGO) based in the region Himachal Pradesh to develop and commercialize of suitable
cardboard carton packaging for tomatoes as the main task (Phansalkar, S.J. 2003). By
the end of the first phase of the project in June 2001 a prototype corrugated cardboard
carton (CCC) had been developed and tested. By early 2002, the producers had an
agreement with a manufacturer to produce 100,000 cartons with credit arrangements
with a local bank. This case study considered new approach that combined both
conventional development and aid projects, the geographic focus of the project and
selection of local NGO partners built on existing activities and relationships of IDE and
Helped the poor and non-poor cope with environmental policy changes (Hall et al.,
2003)
8
Based on the principle of direct evaporative cooling zero energy cool chambers have
been developed. It does not require any electricity or power to operate, materials
required like bricks, sand, bamboo etc. available easily and cheaply, Cool chambers can
reduce temperature by 10- C and maintain high humidity of about 95 per cent that
can increase shelf life and retain quality of horticultural produce. National Horticulture
Board is giving 100 per cent grant in aid for the benefit of the farmer. (Kitinoja et al.,
2011; Roy and Pal, 1991), later Kaushalya Foundation revisited the idea and has
completed the constructed 300 PZECC out of 500 for farmers in Patna, Naland and
Vaishali district in Bihar. Other simple technology was a simple shade structure for field
packing results in 1% weight losses for spinach as compared to 5% weight loss when
packed during the same time period under sun (Kitinoja et al., 2010). With near cooling
concept, a cool storage shed introduced by CTI (Compatible Technology International )
the international non-profit volunteer organization, CTI’s cool storage shed make
farmers can extend the shelf-life of their fruits and vegetables by storing their crops just
1, 2 or 3 additional months, they can sell their harvest in the off season, when market
prices are much higher. Additionally, farmers using the storage shed have more time to
process their crops into value-added products. The cool storage shed is currently used in
India, where it’s enabled farmers to triple their earnings, CTI primarily is focusing on
helping small farmers address their post-harvest challenges (CTI, 2013).
For technology produced and distributed by government, Ayyappan (2012) mentioned
that ICAR Developed and commercialized around 60 processing machineries and
technologies for post-harvest loss reduction and value addition.
Along the lines of technology introduced to India for reducing post-harvest losses, IRRI
showed safe storage in the smaller SuperGrainbags (60 kg) as hermetic storage of rice
and corn seed with good results for long storage periods of 90-280 days with
germination rates at the end of the period from 95 to 98.3 per cent. SuperGrainbags are
now used on a large scale by Bayer CropSciences for rice seed storage in India (Rickman
and Aquino, 2004; Villers and Gummert, 2009).
In some cases not all technology available lead to reduction in post-harvest losses,
farmers from Maharashtra indicated that manual threshing results in fewer losses
compared to machine threshing. This is due to less breakage, splitting and blowing away
of grains. However, farmers prefer machine threshing over manual threshing in spite of
higher losses as it saves time and contains less soil in the final produce, thus ensuring
better rate in the market (MART, 2012).
2.5 Private sector
The Information System e-Chaupal, a project launched by the ITC, which works with
men and women producers and rural organizations. ITC's International Business
Division, one of India's largest exporters of agricultural commodities, has conceived e-
Chaupal (Chaupal means a common sitting place in an Indian village) as a more efficient
supply chain aimed at delivering value to its customers around the world on a
sustainable basis (ITC, 2013). E-Chaupal today reaches out to, and empowers, over 3.5
million farmers and over 31,000 villages by enabling them to access crop-specific,

9
customized and comprehensive information in their local language. Vernacular Web
sites relating to each agricultural crop that ITC deals in, have been created by the
Company, and provide real-time information to even the smallest marginal farmers
concerning: prevailing Indian and international crop prices and price trends; expert
knowledge on best farming practices, and micro-level weather forecasts. This
significantly improves farmers’ decision-making ability, thereby helping to better align
their agricultural produce to market demand while ensuring better quality, productivity
and improved prices.
For Post-harvest best management, technical aids and practices, many organizations
provide different kind of help, Navdanya, a research organisation based in Dehradun,
Uttaranchal, India has made a difference through its interventions. Navdanya has been
promoting ecological agriculture through farmer friendly methods, this also includes
post-harvest management and sustainable (Bhatt, 2004). Other few local success
stories, including the use of information technology (IT) kiosks in India (Toyama et al.,
2004)
Sir Ratan Tata Trust which funded Improving vegetable production and consumption for
sustainable rural livelihoods project in Jharkhand and Punjab started on 2008 till 2013
and coordinated by AVRDC, The World Vegetable Center, (AVRDC, 2012).
2.6 Gender and post-harvest losses
General female share of the agricultural labour force has increased slightly during the
past three decades. The female share in India has remained steady at just over 30
percent, where, the population of agricultural workers in India is estimated to be about
207 million, of which about 92 million are women. Fifty per cent of women workers are
labourers, 37 percent are cultivators, two percent are engaged in animal husbandry,
fishery and forestry and 11 percent involved in other activities. In time-use surveys that
cover all agricultural activities, in India, estimates of the time contribution of women to
agricultural activities was 32 percent (Kachru, 2005; FAO, 2011). in India, women
normally participation is more in horticultural sector than the food grain production;
however most of the post-harvest activities either related to food grains, horticulture,
livestock and fishery is dealt by women labors, in extension activities the women is now
the centre point and activities are being planned keeping her in view e.g. under the
project standardization of women specific field practices in rice in Orissa revealed
women of family contributed highest hours per season (61.7) in harvesting and post
harvesting operations of rice and participated lowest in land preparation. (Thakur,
2013)
The post-harvest management and loss prevention of food grain is prime responsibility
of farmwomen as operations viz. Winnowing, drying and storage of produce are
predominantly performed by them. Due to illiteracy, ignorance and lack of exposure of
technology million ton of food grains are either damaged or lost. Therefore, it is utmost
needed to assess the existing knowledge and level of adoption of post-harvest
technology by the farmwomen, which provide desired technological empowerment to

10
farmwomen, e.g. in Rajasthan, majority of the farmwomen were illiterate (61.11 per
cent) (Sandhya and Dashora, 2003).
A study conducted on 2999 farm families in rural Punjab to indicate an active
participation of women in most of the selected activities in the area of post harvesting,
the results varied between zones but the women were found to contribute substantially
in drying, storage and cleaning. In other activities majority of the women were working
with male members. However, least participation was reported in processing and
marketing. There was a need to technically arm women in post-harvest know-how so as
to help in reducing losses during storage. This shall not only reduce economic losses but
help in maintaining family food security (Sidhu, 2007).
During a study conducted in Maharashtra in 2011 for a total sample of 30 villages and
150 farmers, Gender roles were relatively clearly defined in terms of pigeon pea
cultivation, ownership of resources, decision‐making with respect to different resources
and utilization of resources. Land preparation, selection of variety of pigeon pea, inter‐
culture operations, harvesting, transport of pigeon pea produce, and seed selection and
storage were the prerogative of men. In‐hand weeding operations, sowing seeds,
threshing and winnowing operations, and labour force hiring were jointly decided.
Women were generally consulted regarding the education and marriage of children, and
these matters were jointly settled (Rani, 2011).
On the other hand, a few numbers of small tools and equipment have been designed by
ICAR institutes, Universities and other agencies/industries. Some of them which can be
easily used by women for instance, pedal operated thresher, hanging type grain cleaner,
tubular maize sheller and groundnut decorticator (Sundaram, 2013), so that, Bhatt
(2013) and Singh (2013) suggested some of the areas that would be focused for
empowerment of Indian farmers women including and not limited to tools and
equipment where evaluate, refine and develop women friendly tools and equipment are
important for drudgery reduction in agricultural operations. Also, more need towards
post-harvest management and value addition to lead in r low cost, eco-friendly storage
practices, packaging and processing etc. Beside, Screening the existing technologies and
developing inventory by documenting women specific technologies which are relatively
simplified, economical in terms of time and resources, efficient and increasing women
employment which will also serve the purpose of setting research priorities suitable for
women in post-harvest sector.
2.7 Economic losses
Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) addressed the absence of storage facilities
which has led to the rotting of thousands of tons of food grains in recent years.
According to the report submitted in May 2013, wheat worth $ 4.7 million had rotten
due to damaged 17,423 tonne of wheat within three years from 2008 to 2011, which
was because of the poor management by government agencies. The report stated that
government agencies failed to maintain food grains stock in proper health in Haryana
and Punjab where grains left in open storage with inadequate storage worries (CAG,
2013). Many similar cases have been cited also in different places e.g. Hindustan Times

11
reported on July 2010 that about (1,068 million tons of food grains were found
damaged in Food Corporation of India (FCI) depots, enough to feed over six hundred
thousand people for over ten years(Hindustan Times, 2010), which indicate that
indigenous storage structures are not suitable in some places for storing grains for very
long periods and more significance of improved storage structures and scientific storage
of grains in form of warehouses are required.
In individual estimation of economic value of the losses in India as of May 2009 price
index, the total post-harvest losses within the country was about $ 6,830 million (table
3) (CIPHET, 2010), and this amount much lower than the economic loss calculated later
by Rajasri et al (2010) and ASSOCHAM (2013) where the economic losses were $16,000
million and $33,745 million for food grains and fruit/vegetable respectively.
Table 3 post-harvest losses for major crop/commodities, 2010
Crop / commodity Estimate of economic value of the losses, $ million dollar
Cereals 1,949
Pulses 268
Oilseeds 790
Fruits 1,151
Vegetables 908
Spices and plantation crops 892
Livestock produce 872
Total 6,830
In same project which conducted by ministry of agriculture and carried on by CIPHET
(CIPHET, 2010), Average losses as reported that time in comparison with post-harvest
losses in 2004 as data released by Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry
of Agriculture (DAC, 2004) presented in table 4.
Table 4 Average post-harvest losses in major food grain from two different sources losses in
two different years.
Major Foodgrains Average post-harvest losses, % Average post-harvest losses, %
(DAC, 2004) (CIPHET, 2010)

Wheat 8 6
Rice 11 5.2
Maize 7.5 4.1
Jowar 10 3.9
Bajra 6 4.8
Gram 9 4.3
12
 Other Pulses 9.50 5.67
In CIPHET, 2010, the concluded resulted came from study which conducted from 2005-
2007 and this not far from the year where DAC conducted it’s study, however there is
differences in post harvesting losses and the great reduction in their amount not logic as
same methodologies have been used in both surveys.
Contrariwise, there are advantages in using better post-harvest management, e.g. Agro-
processing centre in each village generating employment for 2-10 persons costing $ 1 to
1.5 million, modernization of rice mills has led to advantage of about $ 2,296
million/annum by way of higher rice & rice bran oil recovery, better quality (Ayyappan
(2012).
3- Policies
India had already invested heavily in irrigation, electricity, roads, and human capital
prior to the Green Revolution. More efforts are needed towards post-harvest now.
Initial subsidies in credit, fertilizer, and irrigation helped farmers, especially the
smallholders, to adopt the new technologies. The credit policy of the government is to
provide timely and adequate credit to them for increasing agricultural production and
productivity. Agricultural credit is disbursed through a multi-agency network consisting
of Commercial Banks, Regional Rural Banks and Cooperatives. However , Small farms are
often losers in the initial adoption stage of a new technology because the increased
supply of agricultural products from large farms that have benefited from new
technologies pushes prices down (Kachru, 2005; Fan et al., 2007). Other policies related
to post-harvest are; the reduction in import duty on capital goods for agro-processing
industries; cheaper imports of packaging materials; Deregulation of some agro
industries from the small scale sector etc. beside many thrust areas identified for
exports. Free Trade Zones (FTZ) and Export Processing Zones (EPZ) have been set up
with the entire necessary infrastructure.

different recent actions reported by various ministries, department and divisions of

Agricultural & Cooperation included but not limited to; Skill based training for farmers
and youth in areas like post-harvest management, improving quality certification for
better marketing opportunities; Training of farmers for adopting practices which would
result in minimizing post-harvest losses; modernization of cold storage and processing
facilities in the country to minimize post-harvest losses in perishable agricultural
produce (DAC, 2007). more initiatives had been taken by the Government i.e.
establishing the Food Corporation of India (FCI) in 1965 with the purpose of effective
price support operations for safeguarding the interests of the farmers, distribution of
food grains throughout the country via the Public Distribution System (PDS) and
maintaining a satisfactory level of operational and buffer stocks of food grains to ensure
national food security, however, many voices are asking for better and the ideal food
grains policy which ought to support government to maintain a buffer with the aim of
using it to hold down prices during times of food shortage, and to make sure that the
poor and the vulnerable have access to food at all times (Basu, 2011; Chatterjee, 2013).

13
different recent actions reported as well by various ministries, department and divisions
of Agricultural & Cooperation included but not limited to; Skill based training for farmers
and youth in areas like post-harvest management, improving quality certification for
better marketing opportunities; Training of farmers for adopting practices which would
result in minimizing post-harvest losses; modernization of cold storage and processing
facilities in the country to minimize post-harvest losses in perishable agricultural
produce (DAC, 2007). Recently, the most important pronged strategy from government
to reduce losses occur in the entire food supply-chain from production to consumption
are; compression of the supply-chain by linking producers and markets; promoting
processing in production catchments to add value before the produce is marketed; and
developing small-scale processing refrigerated chambers or cold storage using
conventional and non-conventional sources is required to reduce post-harvest losses.
This would require greater attention to post-harvest engineering research and
development (Directorate of Economics and Statistics. 2013).

4. Conclusion and recommendations

Conclusion and recommendations based on literature review analysis and or have

suggested by different authors are summarized as follow:

1- It was clear that there is some conflict in data collected and figures related to post-
harvest losses, the current situation of post-harvest losses should be updated with
using better methodologies and assessment tools in future.
2- Reducing food loss and waste requires action by a wide range of researchers,
households, private sector, policymakers, farmers, extension services, and more. It
also requires changes in technology, practices, behavior, and policy. These factors
suggest that no single individual or group can sufficiently tackle this problem alone;
collaboration is needed. They can provide more than solution which cannot be done
by individual efforts. Also, Post-harvest loss interventions should be appropriate to
the socioeconomic, business, and political context of a country as suggested by
Kitinoja et al. (2011).
3- More technology adaptation efforts required to be undertaken by technology-
generating laboratories through a field-level program of adaptive research, this
technology should be in community-based production systems, to make them fully
competitive in local markets. This can happen with better linkages with laboratories,
financial institutions, and governmental bodies as a way of continuously improving of
the competitiveness of the local system. Besides, the developed and promoted
technology should come as low cost devices, practical and effective for use at farmer
level.
4- Searching for innovated ideas and prototypes in and outside India to bring them to
the community for enhancing the post-harvest activities and reducing losses to bring

14
 them to the community, specially, there are evidences that various technologies are
exist but lab to community transfer has not happened yet.
5- The post-harvest system in India is ready for more effective Local knowledge
networks. Remarkable achievements from local grassroots and non-governmental
organization (NGO) were identified and they had already established a relationship
with farmers and self-help groups, more efforts needed to enhance and to widely
distribute their rules.
6- Inspectors and observers to address the defects located in the post-harvest sector
and causes of loss, and to watch the performance of governmental / international
organization activities and their impact, they could be independent local
organization, NGOs etc….
7- The rule of farmwomen, businesswomen, female stalk-holder is clear, however, no
much studies cited their suggested situation in improving post-harvest sector or how
they can share in reduce post-harvest losses in India.
8- Develop and promote package of practice based on area specific needs and identified
challenges, followed by training to Enhance skills and knowledge of farmers in post-
harvest management.

References
Ali, N. 2004. Post-Harvest Technology for Employment Generation in Rural Sector of
India. Central Institute of Agricultural Engineering, Indian Council of Agricultural
Research, India. P: 63-105.
ASSOCHAM (The Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India). 2013. Press
Releases: post-harvest losses. The Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of
India Corporate, Patel Marg, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi – 110021. India. Available at:
http://www.assocham.org/prels/shownews.php?id=4132
AVRDC (The World Vegetable Center). 2012. Annual Report. AVRDC, the World
Vegetable Center, P.O. Box 42 Shanhua, Tainan 74199, Taiwan. ISBN: 92-9058-197-2.
Ayyappan, S. 2012. Feeding over a billion forever: challenges and priorities for ICAR in
the next decade. ACIAR Seminar Series presentation, 18 January 2012, Canberra,
Australia.
Basavaraja, H., Mahajanashetti, S.B. and Naveen, C.U. 2007. Economic Analysis of Post-
harvest Losses in Food Grains in India: A Case Study of Karnataka. Agricultural
Economics Research Review, Vol. 20, p: 117-126.
Basu, A. 20 . India’s Foodgrain Policy: An Economic Theory Perspective. Economic &
Political Weekly (EPW), January 29, vol. xlvi no 5. P: 37:45.
Bhatt, B. P. 2013. Gender Perspective in Agriculture: Strategies for Gender
Mainstreaming. Model Training Course on Gender Perspective in Integrated Farming
System w.e.f 17- 24 at ICAR Research Complex for Eastern Region, Patna, Bihar, India.

15
Bhatt, V.K. 2004. Navdanya Trust, 105 Rajpur Road Dehradun, 248 001, Uttaranchal,
India. Post-harvest management of Rice in Uttaranchal, India: Navdanya’s experience.
LEISA India September 2004.
CAG (The Comptroller and Auditor General). 2013. CAG report, May 2013. Comptroller
and Auditor General of India, New Delhi. India. Available at:
http://publish.illinois.edu/phlinstitute/2013/07/19/cag-slams-punjab-haryana-for-
letting-grains-rot/
Chatterjee, S. 2013. Technical know-how is only one side of the coin. Rural 21. The
International Journal of Rural Development, Vol. 47 No. 3/2013, p: 24-25.
CIPHET (Central Institute of Post-Harvest Engineering and Technology). 2007.
Perspective Plan - Vision 2025. Indian Council of Agricultural Research, Ministry of
Agriculture, India. P: 1-64.
CIPHET (Central Institute of Post-Harvest Engineering and Technology). 2010.
Estimation of Quantitative Harvest and Post-harvest Losses of Major Agricultural
Produce in India All India Coordinated Research Project on Post-harvest Technology,
CIPHET (ICAR), Ludhiana, 2010.
Clark, N., Hall, A., Sulaiman, A., Naik, G. 2003. Research as Capacity Building: The Case of
an NGO Facilitated Post-Harvest Innovation System for the Himalayan Hills. World
Development Vol. 31, No. 11, p. 1845–1863.
CTI (Compatible Technology International). 2012. Cool Storage Shed. Compatible
Technology International. Saint Paul, Minnesota, USA. Accessed on August 2013,
available at: http://www.compatibletechnology.org/our-tools/current-
technologies/storage.html.
DAC (Department of Agriculture and Cooperation). 2004. State of Indian Farmer-Post
harvest Management-A Millennium Study, Vol. 16 ISBN 81-7188-370-2. Department of
Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, Pages: 224.
DAC (Department of Agriculture and Cooperation). 2007. Action reported by Ministries/
Departments/ Divisions of DAC on steps/ points identified in the Plan of Action for
Operationalisation of NPF. Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of
Agriculture, Government of India.
DARE/ICAR (Department of Agricultural Research and Education/ Indian Council of
Agricultural Research). 2011. Post-harvest Management and Value-addition, DARE/ICAR
Annual Report 2010–11, Ministry of Agriculture, India. P: 57-62. Available at:
http://www.icar.org.in/files/reports/icar-dare-annual-reports/2010-11/PHM-Value-
addtion-AR-2010-11.pdf
Dash, S. K., Bakhara, C.K. and Mohanty, S.N. 1993. Status of small rice hullers of Orissa
and response of the millers on modernization of hullers. Agric. Engng. Today. Vol. 17 (3-
4), P: 73-78.

16
Dash, S. K., K Khan, M.D., Bakhara, C.K. and Mohanty, S.N. 1996. Study on the response
of small millers of Orissa to modernization. Curr. Agric. Res. Vol. 9 (1-2). P: 39-41.
Department of Food and Public Distribution. 2012. Uniform Specifications of paddy, rice,
and coarse grains for Kharif Marketing Season 2012-13. Ministry of Consumer Affairs,
Food and Public Distribution, Department of Food and Public Distribution, Krishi
Bhawan, India.
DMIa (Directorate of Marketing and Inspection). 2002. Estimation of Marketable Surplus
and Post-Harvest Losses of Foodgrains in India - Methodology and Profile of Sample
Villages. MRPC-40 Department of Agriculture and Co-Operation, Ministry of Agriculture,
India.
DMIb (Directorate of Marketing and Inspection). 2002. Marketable Surplus and Post-
Harvest Losses of Paddy in India. MRPC-41. Department of Agriculture and Co-
Operation, Ministry of Agriculture, India.
Directorate of Economics and Statistics. 2013. State of Indian Agriculture 2012-13.
Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation,
Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.
Fan, S., Gulati, A. and Thorat, S. 2007. Investment, Subsidies, and Pro-Poor Growth in
Rural India, IFPRI Discussion Paper 007/16, September.
FAO. 2011. Global food losses and food waste: extent, causes and prevention, by J.
Gustavsson, C. Cederberg, U. Sonesson, R. van Otterdijk and A. Meybeck. Rome.
www.fao.org/docrep/014/mb060e/mb060e00.pdf
FAO. 2011. The role of women in agriculture. ESA Working Paper No. 11-02. Agricultural
Development Economics Division. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations. Available on: www.fao.org/economic/esa.
Grolleaud, M. 2002 Post-harvest losses: discovering the full story. Overview of the
phenomenon of losses during the post-harvest system. Rome, Italy: FAO, Agro Industries
and Post-Harvest Management Service.
Gummert, M. 2013. Reducing rice postharvest losses. Developed by M. Gummert with
funding for IRRI’s postharvest projects provided by the Asian Development Bank (ADB),
the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC), and the Deutsche
Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ). Produced by the International
Rice Research Institute (IRRI), Los Baños, Philippines. Available at:
http://irri.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=12489:reducing-rice-
postharvest-losses&lang=en
Hall A. J., Yoganand, B., Sulaiman R. V., and Clark N. G. (eds.). 2003. Post-harvest
innovations in innovation: reflections on partnership and learning. Crop Post-Harvest
Programme (CPHP), South Asia, c/o International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-
Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India: Crop Post Harvest
Programme South Asia. 180 pp.

17
Hindustan Times. 2010. Food grains rot in FCI godowns across India. IANS, New Delhi,
July 27, 2010. Available at: http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-
news/NewDelhi/Food-grains-rot-in-FCI-godowns-across-India/Article1-578444.aspx
Hodges, R.J., Buzby, J.C., and Bennett, B. 2011. Postharvest losses and waste in
developed and less developed countries: opportunities to improve resource use. Journal
of Agricultural Science 149:37-45.
ITC, India's foremost private sector companies. 2013. Accessed on August, 2013.
http://www.itcportal.com , http://www.echoupal.com/
Joshi B.L., Sherkar, B.D., Singh, H.P., Bhatia, G.R. 2004. Post-Harvest Profile of Paddy/
Rice. Directorate of Marketing & Inspection (DMI), Ministry of Agriculture, India. P: 1-75.
Available at: http://agmarknet.nic.in/rice-paddy-profile_copy.pdf
Kachru, R.P. 2005. Status of the post-harvest sector in South Asia. Background
Documents. Region specific documents, Asia and the Pacific, Egfar. Available at:
http://www.egfar.org/egfar/lfm/gphi_documents/02_Region_specific_documents/D_As
ia_and_the_Pacific_Islands_(APAARI)/02_Background_Documents/01_General_issues/
D-1-004-D4_Ph_in_South_Asia.pdf
Kitinoja, L., Al Hassan, H.A., Saran S., and Roy S.K. 2010. Identification of appropriate
postharvest technologies for improving market access and incomes for small
horticultural farmers in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Invited paper in three parts
for the IHC Postharvest Symposium Lisbon, August 23, 2010. Acta Hortic.
Kitinoja, L., S. Saran, S. K. Roy, and A. A. Kader. 20 . “Postharvest Technology for
Developing Countries: Challenges and Opportunities in Research, Outreach and
Advocacy.” J of the Science of Food and Agriculture 9 : 97–603.
Liang, L. et al. 993 China’s post-harvest grain losses and the means of their reduction
and elimination. Jingji dili (Econ. Geogr.) 1, 92–96.
Lipinski, B., Hanson C., Lomax, J., Kitinoja, L., Wait R. And Searchinger, T. 2013. Reducing
Food Loss and Waste.” Working Paper, Installment 2 of Creating a Sustainable Food
Future. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute. Available online at available at:
http://www.worldresourcesreport.org
Lucia M. d and Assennato, D. 1994. Agricultural engineering in development: Post-
harvest operations and management of foodgrains. FAO Agricultural Services Bulletin
No. 93. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. M-17. ISBN 92-5-
103108-8.
Maheshwar, C. and Chanakwa, T.S. 2006. Postharvest Losses Due To Gaps in Cold Chain
in India: A Solution. Acta Hort. (ISHS) 712:777-784. Available at:
http://www.actahort.org/books/712/712_100.htm
Maheshwar, C. and Chanakwa, T.S. 2006. Post-Harvest Losses due to Gaps in Cold Chain
in India – A Solution. Acta Hort. (ISHS). 712:777-784.

18
Manners-Bell, J. and Miroux A. 2013. Logistics as Solutions and New Opportunities: The
Role of Logistics in Reducing Post-Harvest Losses. Global Agenda Council on Logistics &
Supply Chain Systems, 2012-2014. Published by World Economic Forum, Geneva,
Switzerland, 2013. Available at:
http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GAC_LogisticsSupplyChainSystems_Outlook_201
3.pdf.
MART. 2012. Mapping the production system and the supply chain and study the crop
losses of Black Gram: Final Report. A Joint Initiative by University of Illinois and MART.
MART Knowledge Centre. Noida, India. P 1:51. Available at:
http://postharvestinstitute.illinois.edu/pdfs/Black%20Gram%20Report_Full.pdf
Mathew, S. 2010. An Evaluation on the Viability on the Post-Harvested Stored Wheat
Grains. International Journal of Pharma and Bio Sciences. Vol. 1, (4). P: 192-198.
Parfitt, J., Barthel, M. and Macnaughton, S. 2010. Food waste within food supply chains:
quantification and potential for change to 2050, Phil. Trans. R. Soc., vol. 365, pp. 3065-
3081
Parfitt, J., Barthel, M., and Macnaughton, S. 2010. Food waste within food supply
chains: quantification and potential for change to 2050. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B (2010) 365.
Phansalkar, S.J. 2003. Evolving technology through collaboration and partnership: the
case of IDE(I)’s work with tomato packaging in Himachal Pradesh, India. Pages 32–44 in
Post-harvest innovations in innovation: reflections on partnership and learning (Hall A J,
Yoganand B, Sulaiman R V, and Clark N G, eds.). DFID Crop Post-Harvest Programme,
South Asia, Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India and Natural Resources
International Limited, Aylesford, UK.
Rajasri, M., Sambasiva Rao P. and Meena Kumari, K.V.S. 2010. Inert dusts better
alternatives to manage Angoumois grain moth Sitotroga cerealella in stored rice29th
Congress of the International Seed Testing Association (ISTA), Cologne, Germany, 16-22
June 2010. Available at: https://www.seedtest.org/upload/cms/user/ISTA-June16-1400-
SympSession1-P5-Rajasri.pdf
Rani, A. 2011. Farmer Surveys on Postharvest Loss in India: study Conducted for
Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Company. Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Company Limited,
Dawalwadi, Jalna, Indi. P: 1-9. Available at:
http://postharvestinstitute.illinois.edu/pdfs/Farmer_Surveys_on_Postharvest_Loss-
Final.pdf
Rickman, J.F. and Aquino, E. 2004. Appropriate Technology for Maintaining Grain Quality
in Small-scale Storage. Donahaye, E.J., Navarro, S., Bell, C., Jayas, D., Noyes, R., Phillips,
T.W. [Eds.] (2007), pp. 149-157. Proceedings of the International Conference on
Controlled Atmosphere and Fumigation in Stored Products, Gold-Coast Australia 8-13th
August 2004. FTIC Ltd. Publishing, Israel. Available at:
http://www.ftic.info/CAFsite/CAF.html

19
Rolle, R. S. (ed.) 2006 Improving postharvest management and marketing in the Asia-
Pacific region: issues and challenges trends in the fruit and vegetable sector. Tokyo,
Japan: FAO, Asian Productivity Organisation (APO).
Roy, S.K. and Pal, R.K. 1991. A low cost zero energy cool chamber for short-term storage
of mango. Acta Hort 291:519-524.
Sandhya, M. and Dashora P.K. 2003. Communication Strategies for Technological
Empowerment of Farm Women in Post-Harvest Management. International Conference
on Communication for Development in the Information Age: Extending the Benefits of
Technology for All. 07-09 January 2003 Eds., Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, (India).
Sarkar, D. and Roy, D. (2013). Factors Affecting Marketed & Marketable Surplus of
Paddy: A Case Study in Some Districts of West Bengal. International Journal of Social
Science: 2(1) 19-28.
Sharma, G. and Singh S.P. 2011. Economic Analysis of Post-harvest Losses in Marketing
of Vegetables in Uttarakhand. Agricultural Economics Research Review, Vol. 24 July-
December 2011. P: 309-315.
Sidhu, k. 2007. Participation Pattern of Farm Women in Post Harvesting. Stud. Home
Comm. Sci., 1(1), p: 45-49.
Singh, K.M. 2013. Gender Issues in Agriculture. Strategies for Gender Mainstreaming.
Model Training Course on Gender Perspective in Integrated Farming System w.e.f 17- 24
at ICAR Research Complex for Eastern Region, Patna, Bihar, India.
Smil, V. 2004 Feeding the world: how much more rice do we need? In Rice is life,
scientific perspectives for the 21st century. Proc. of the World Rice Research Conf. held
in Tokyo and Tsukuba, November 2004, Japan, pp. 21–23.
Sonka, S., Russell, B.J., Kenney, G., Cheng, C. and Wozniak, K.A. 2012. Progress Report
2012. ADM (Archer Daniel Midlands) Institute for the Prevention Postharvest Loss,
University of Illinois, Champaign, IL 61820, USA, Available on:
http://postharvestinstitute.illinois.edu/pdfs/2012%20Progress%20Report_Final_Web.p
df
Sonka, S., Ting, K.C., and Kenney, G. 2008. Keynote Address: Funded Case Studies in
India. ADM (Archer Daniel Midlands) Institute for the Prevention Postharvest Loss,
University of Illinois, USA. Available at:
http://postharvestinstitute.illinois.edu/pdfs/Sonka,Ting,Kenney-022712.ppt
Sreeramulu, N., Chimalwar, P.J., Verma, V.K. Singh H.P. and Bhatia G.R. 2005. Post-
Harvest Profile of Wheat. Directorate of Marketing & Inspection (DMI), Ministry of
Agriculture, India. P: 1-73. Available at: http://agmarknet.nic.in/profile_wheat.pdf
Sundaram, P.K. 2013. Women Friendly Agricultural Engineering Technologies for
Reducing Drudgery. Model Training Course on Gender Perspective in Integrated Farming
System w.e.f 17- 24 at ICAR Research Complex for Eastern Region, Patna, Bihar, India.

20
 Thakur, A.K. 2013. Post-Harvest Technology & Value addition: Profitable venture for
Women. Model Training Course on Gender Perspective in Integrated Farming System
w.e.f 17- 24 at ICAR Research Complex for Eastern Region, Patna, Bihar, India.
Toyama, K., a Kiri, K., Lakshmi M.R., Nileshwar, A. Vedashree, R. and MacGregor, F.R.
2004. Rural Kiosks in India. Technical Report NO: MSR-TR-2004-146, Microsoft
Research, pages 9. Available at: http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/70150/tr-2004-
146.doc
Villers, P. and Gummert, M. 2009. Seal of Approval. Rice Today, January - March 2009.
pp. 36-37.
Wall, G. L. 2011. India and FAO Achievements and success stories. FAO Representation
in India, (ex) Lodi Road Tel: (+91-11) 465 3220, New Delhi 110003. India. Available at:
http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/rap/files/epublications/IndiaedocFINAL.pdf
Wimberly, J. E. 1983. Technical Handbook for the Paddy Rice Postharvest industry in
Developing Countries. International Rice Research Institute, Los Baños, Laguna,
Philippines. ISBN:971-104-075-1.

21

View publication stats