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

net/publication/266077198

Promoting climate smart approaches to post- harvest challenges in Rwanda

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Promoting climate smart approaches to
post-harvest challenges in Rwanda

Article  in  International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability · September 2014

DOI: 10.1080/14735903.2014.959329

CITATIONS READS

12 1,658

4 authors, including:

America Bendito Steve Twomlow

University of the Andes (Venezuela) International Fund for Agricultural Development
34 PUBLICATIONS   93 CITATIONS    142 PUBLICATIONS   4,580 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

Simplified model for damage in squat RC shear walls View project

increasing the Impacts of soil fertility research in southern Africa View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Steve Twomlow on 25 September 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)]
On: 24 September 2014, At: 06:17
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office:
Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Agricultural

Sustainability
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription
information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tags20

Promoting climate smart approaches to post-

harvest challenges in Rwanda
a b
A. Bendito & S. Twomlow
a
Emeritus Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Universidad de Los
Andes, Merida 5101-A, Venezuela
b
IFAD Nairobi Office, Regional Office for East and Southern Africa (ESA),
International Fund for Agricultural Development, IFAD C/O UNON, UN
Avenue, Gigiri, PO Box 67578, Nairobi 00200, Kenya
Published online: 24 Sep 2014.

To cite this article: A. Bendito & S. Twomlow (2014): Promoting climate smart approaches to
post-harvest challenges in Rwanda, International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, DOI:
10.1080/14735903.2014.959329

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2014.959329

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”)
contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our
licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or
suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication
are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor &
Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently
verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any
losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities
whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial
or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use
can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 2014
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2014.959329

Promoting climate smart approaches to post-harvest challenges in

Rwanda
∗
A. Benditoa and S. Twomlowb
a
Emeritus Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Universidad de Los Andes, Merida 5101-A,
Venezuela; bIFAD Nairobi Office, Regional Office for East and Southern Africa (ESA), International
Fund for Agricultural Development, IFAD C/O UNON, UN Avenue, Gigiri, PO Box 67578, Nairobi
Downloaded by [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)] at 06:17 24 September 2014

00200, Kenya

Climate change is inevitable and increasingly it appears that the world is not doing enough to
both slow the changes and adapt to them. In Africa, for example, this translates itself into more
erratic rainfall patterns, often associated with increasing wind speeds, and a continued albeit
slow increase in both maximum and minimum temperatures – predicted to reach up to
3.258C by the end of the century. These changes all have direct and indirect impacts on
development investments being made throughout rural Africa, which aim at both crop and
livestock production increases through the promotion of more climate smart approaches.
Unfortunately, at the same time little is being done to ensure that associated infrastructure
for post-harvest storage and processing, and subsequent transport networks are climate
resilient. Modern infrastructure facilities will need to reflect the growing concern over
climate change. This paper draws lessons from a review of the current status of post-harvest
structures in Rwanda and suggests basic design guidelines for greater adaptation to
emerging environmental and climate change challenges. This approach is consistent with the
strategies Rwanda has adopted to achieve its Vision 2020, the Millennium Development
Goals, the emerging Sustainable Development Goals, particularly SDG6, and the
Sustainable Development Solutions Network.
Keywords: climate change; resilience; post-harvest structures; building codes; rural

1. Introduction
Climate change is inevitable and increasingly it appears that the world is not doing enough to both
slow the changes and adapt to them (Lane et al. 2009, ADF 2010, IEG 2012, FAO 2013,
Rockefeller Foundation 2013, Bhorat et al. 2014). In Africa, for example, this translates itself
into more erratic rainfall patterns, often associated with increasing wind speeds, and a continued
albeit slow increase in both maximum and minimum temperatures – predicted to reach up to
3.258C by the end of the century. These changes all have direct and indirect impacts on develop-
ment investments being made throughout rural Africa. Despite major investments in improved
and increasingly climate smart crop and livestock production practices, one of the most significant
and unaddressed sources of food insecurity is post-harvest losses due to ineffective post-harvest
management (e.g. lack of storage facilities and unsanitary and unhygienic practices). Post-harvest
losses are currently estimated at anything from 25% to 35% depending on the sources (APHLIS
2013). To compensate for these losses, extra food has to be produced; often at the cost of further
ecosystem degradation. With Africa’s population projected to double and reach two billion people
by 2050, and with living standards and populations elsewhere also increasing, estimates suggest

∗
Corresponding author. Email: americabendito@gmail.com

# 2014 Taylor & Francis

 2 A. Bendito and S. Twomlow

that global food production will need to increase by more than 70% (UNFCCC 2006, Ngabitsinze
et al. 2011), if crop losses are not addressed. In fact the emerging agenda of the Sustainable Devel-
opment Goals (SDGs), particularly Goal 6, places an emphasis on reducing post-harvest losses
and improving rural infrastructure (UN 2013).
In spite of the significant uncertainty regarding the scale, type and interactions of climate
change impacts, mitigation and adaptation activities are needed if we are to avoid the most
serious consequences of global warming. Africa appears ill prepared to adapt to or mitigate the
powerful effects of climate change. With no adaptation strategies in place, by the year 2020,
75 – 250 million people in Africa will be exposed to high water stress conditions with some
countries experiencing up to a 50% reduction in yields from rain-fed agriculture (IPCC 2007).
Climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies include a broad range of interventions to
increase resilience (e.g. engineering design and construction, building codes and standards, insur-
Downloaded by [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)] at 06:17 24 September 2014

ance, ecosystem management and emergency response), embedded within a holistic suite of
capacity and institutional-strengthening efforts that can protect and strengthen assets and liveli-
hoods (UNDP 2011).
Climate change adaptation interventions, irrespective of sector, should be a country-driven
process and formulated and implemented in response to a country’s specific demands and
needs. See, for example, the National Adaptation Programmes of Action prepared by the least
developed countries (http://unfccc.int/national_reports/napa/items/2719.php, accessed June
2014) which are currently being updated into National Adaptation Plans (http://unfccc.int/
adaptation/workstreams/national_adaptation_plans/items/6057.php, accessed June 2014). Unfor-
tunately, little work has been done on post-harvest structures in recent years; and it is only now
being included in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the emerging SDGs. This
paper draws lessons from a review of the current status of post-harvest structures in Rwanda
and suggests basic design guidelines for greater adaptation to emerging environmental and
climate change challenges that will be experienced by many rural communities throughout
sub-Saharan Africa to help reduce post-harvest losses.

2. Adaptation challenges to address climate change in Rwanda

Rwanda’s Economic Development Strategy is highly vulnerable to climate change as it depends
on rain-fed agriculture for supporting rural livelihoods and exports. This is already manifested
through frequent extreme weather events that cause major socio-economic impacts and reduce
economic growth in different regions (see IFAD 2013 for a complete discussion). The impacts
of floods and droughts associated with El Niño and La Niña events of recent years are thought
to have been exacerbated by climate change and the poor environmental conditions prevailing
in the country (NAPA 2006). There is increasing uncertainty about rainfall events, though
most models predict that rainfall intensity will increase and there may be a change in the
timing of the two cropping seasons that characterized Rwanda’s rain-fed systems (IFAD 2013).
The long-term development goals of the Government of Rwanda (GoR) are embedded in its
Vision 2020, which seeks to transform Rwanda from a low-income agriculture-based economy
into a service-oriented economy by 2020. Rural economic transformation through the moderniz-
ation of the agriculture sector is one of the key priority areas. By 2020, agricultural production
should have tripled, exports increased five times and the population depending on primary agri-
cultural production reduced to 50% (Rockefeller Foundation 2013).
The strategies for achieving Rwanda’s growth objectives are articulated in the 2013 – 2018
Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy II (EDPRS II). The realization of the
Rwanda Vision 2020 (2000) and the EDPRS II will primarily depend on the dynamism of the
agricultural sector and in particular the growth and sustainability of food crops in face of
 International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 3

increasing climatic uncertainties. According to the recent World Bank Rwanda Economic Update
(World Bank 2013), higher agricultural productivity has been the main driver of growth and
poverty reduction in Rwanda (14% points) over the last 10 years.
The achievements made during the period of the first EDPRS (2008 – 2012) have been
remarkable in terms of economic growth and increased incomes, but also in other dimensions
of well-being. The country’s GDP has grown by an average of 8% annually during the past 20
years, and GDP per capita reached USD 644 in 2012 (from USD 479 in 2008). The GoR has
made great progress in deepening reforms, especially those designed to improve the business
environment to support a private sector-led development model (IFAD 2013).
Despite the country’s success in having established a sound investment climate, foreign direct
investments remain at low levels. The major constraints to accelerated growth, investments and
exports are the lack of economic infrastructure, the still limited skills base and an increasing
Downloaded by [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)] at 06:17 24 September 2014

vulnerability to climate risks. The agriculture sector will be the hardest hit by adverse climate con-
ditions because agricultural production, both pre- and post-harvest, is very exposed to climate
change risks through drought, intense and erratic rainfall, an increasing incidence of high
winds and emerging seasonal temperature shifts. If not addressed, existing climate variability
will impose significant economic costs on this growth, an estimated USD 50– 300 million per
year by 2030, given the country’s dependency on rain-fed agriculture for supporting rural liveli-
hoods and exports (IFAD 2013).
The Crop Intensification Programme is a flagship programme implemented by the Ministry of
Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINAGRI) since 2007. The programme has focused on
increasing productivity with limited concern for post-harvest management, so there is urgent
need to improve post-harvest handling and infrastructure (harvesting, cleaning, drying and
storing) as the infrastructure developed for the traditional cropping practices is insufficient for
the current volumes of production.
Post-harvest losses are recognized in Rwanda as one of the greatest sources of inefficiency in
agricultural production in the country; and therefore, one of the best ‘no-regrets’ opportunities for
effectively improving crop productivity and resilience in more uncertain climatic and economic
conditions. Current losses for key commodities amount to about 30% of harvested products, but
these losses are likely to increase given the country’s reliance on rain-fed agriculture and its vul-
nerability to climate change (IFAD 2013).
The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) designed a ‘Post-harvest Agri-
business Support Project’ for Rwanda, linking with the GoR targets reducing post-harvest losses
(IFAD 2013). Part of the project (and focus of this paper) is to review the current status of post-
harvest structures and associated building codes in Rwanda and suggests design guidelines for
greater adaptation to emerging environmental and climate change challenges. These guidelines
are a first approximation to the development of building codes for rural structures in Rwanda,
especially for post-harvest structures. This approach is consistent with MDGs, Sustainable Devel-
opment Solutions Network and Vision 2020 for Rwanda, all strategies adopted to move towards a
Sustainable Development path. Furthermore, it is likely that our findings are not significantly
different to realities faced by governments in much of sub-Saharan Africa and thus will have
broad relevance.

3. Methods
The fieldwork was carried in May 2013 with the goal of developing a detailed assessment of the
status of post-harvest facilities and a review of the current rural building standards and codes in
Rwanda. Prior to conducting the fieldwork, information from various sources was collected,
reviewed and summarized.
 4 A. Bendito and S. Twomlow

Two assessment forms were designed to facilitate the collection of status information in the
field (summarized in Table 1). Form 1 is used to collect general information, local construction
and design practices, quality and description of typical construction materials, a drawing of the
location of the post-harvest facilities, orientation, soil, slope and access to the facility and
water supply. Photos of the buildings were taken from different sides and angles, of spotted struc-
tural attributes, and of features that illustrate the structural type. Form 2 was used to evaluate the
building configuration (e.g. shape and length – width ratios), identify the structural horizontal-
force resisting system; and identify potential features that can limit the performance of the struc-
ture to natural disasters.
The field programme of visits was developed in consultation with the Rwandan MINAGRI
and facilitated by the IFAD Rwanda Office. While a number of different post-harvest facilities
from private companies and from different projects were visited, our main focus were the
Downloaded by [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)] at 06:17 24 September 2014

post-harvest facilities built during the post-harvest, handling and storage project at the community
level (2011 – 2013) and sub-contracted to the private sector.
The recognition of the value of local expertise and experience in judging the expected behav-
iour and degrees of vulnerability of post-harvest facilities to environmental threats demanded a
systematic knowledge sharing approach. At each village, focus group discussions were under-
taken with representative samples of farmers to identify challenges and opportunities. Key infor-
mants helped to clarify and complement information derived from focus group discussions.
Special efforts were made to ensure adequate representation of women and minority groups
who had a major role in crop post-harvest storage processes at each facility.

Table 1. Recommended guideline (G) and the current status (CS) of post-harvest structures in Rwanda.
Guidelines (G) Current status (CS)
G1 CS1
Building design Generic design and no reference measures
Material quality Not guaranteed
Construction inspection Not followed
G2 CS2
Maintenance Not followed
G3 CS3
Location and settings Partly followed
G4 CS4
Configuration Followed
G5 CS5
Building remains as one unit Not guaranteed
G6 CS6
Structural behaviour Not guaranteed
G7 CS7
Sufficient loading capacity Not guaranteed
G8 CS8
Roof Partly followed
G9 CS9
Drainage Not followed
G10 CS10
Rain water-harvesting Not followed
G11 CS11
Weather proof, well-sealed Not followed
G12 CS12
Eaves Not followed
 International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 5

Interviews with local officials and representatives of the private sector and engineering depart-
ment at local universities were undertaken in Kigali, to gather their respective perceptions on
current building codes and standards used.

4. Results and discussion

4.1. Status and recommended guidelines of post-harvest facilities
Based on the field reconnaissance in Rwanda the authors identified several recurring failure mech-
anisms that are summarized in Table 1.
A first approximation to the development of guidelines for rural structures in Rwanda is sum-
marized in Table 1. This table shows on the left column the recommended Guideline (G) accord-
Downloaded by [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)] at 06:17 24 September 2014

ing to structural engineering principles and experience, and on the right column of the table the
Current Status (CS) highlighting common structural errors of post-harvest structures visited in
Rwanda identified as CS, associated with the specific guideline topic. After the table, each of
the 12 guidelines associated with each current status, is explained in more detail.

4.1.1. (G1) Three-pronged structure regulatory protocol

Three important points must be taken into consideration as minimum requirements to guarantee
the performance of the building: (a) building design, (b) review of material quality control and (c)
construction inspection requirement.
It is therefore essential that the design is appropriate, correctly engineered and embraces
appropriate legislation, guidance and good practice and that the quality of construction does
not compromise the design intent.

4.1.1.1. CS1. All the facilities visited in 2013 followed the same generic design based on a plan
proposed by MINAGRI (Figure 1). This plan does not provide any quantitative building measures
and structural element dimensions, and thus gives contractors the opportunity to use different
measures in each facility (e.g. height, width, slope and pitch of the roof, distance between each
column and roofing truss, width of roof overhang, rain water management systems and thickness
of floor slab). This is an important issue, especially for the main structural elements (e.g. columns
and beams), that needs to follow specifications building regulations to resist natural disasters for
each country’s specific demands.

Figure 1. Plan, section and front and left and right view of the post-harvest facilities in Rwanda.
Source: IFAD (2013).
 6 A. Bendito and S. Twomlow

4.1.2. (G2) Building maintenance

If a building is not maintained its life span will be significantly reduced, as the external parts of a
building will be weathered more quickly when exposed to the natural environment. Regular pre-
ventive maintenance, to address problems while they are still minor, is the most cost-effective
strategy for providing well-functioning buildings and thus reduces operating costs and prolongs
the useful life of a structure. Regular and appropriate treatments are a must if the economic life of
the building is to be extended.
Rural Africa is littered with infrastructure, built with development funds that have fallen into
disuse due to lack of maintenance. It is often the case that since maintenance can be postponed, it
gets deferred – repeatedly – until the asset crumbles. For example, about 30% of infrastructure
assets of a typical African country need rehabilitation, and just $0.6 billion on road maintenance
would yield $2.6 billion in annual benefits (World Bank and United Nations 2010). Unfortunately,
Downloaded by [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)] at 06:17 24 September 2014

we do not have similar statistics for post-harvest infrastructure, but if losses continue at the current
rates agricultural development and adaptation to climate change would become even more diffi-
cult to achieve.

4.1.2.1. CS2. Wood-eating termites can significantly damage the timber frames of a building.
Initial termite activity is usually not evident, and it is only after the first signs of damage
appear that the full extent of structural deterioration is realized. Once a connection fails, the struc-
ture cannot carry any more load and will collapse. Local measures to prevent termite attack to the
post-harvest structure elements highlighted by key informants include the application of used car
oil on construction timbers. Figure 2 shows a column treated with car oil in 2011, when the build-
ing was constructed, that is already being attacked by the termites two years later.
No other signs of regular preventive maintenance to the facilities were reported by focus
group discussions. But interestingly, communities expected that the structures should last a
long time.

4.1.3. (G3) Building considerations

Before a decision about the final site of a building can be made, a number of factors need to be
taken into account:

Figure 2. Column attacked by termites (photo by A. Bendito).

 International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 7

(1) Location:

. Away from floodplains, rivers, storm water drains or other large tracts of land prone to
flooding or seepage from contaminants.
. Away from heavy industry or other pollutants, hazardous industries such as explosives fac-
tories or chemical plants.
. Away from industries that attract rodents (e.g. grain-processing factories).
. Away from strategic installations such as ammunitions or fuel depots.
. Away from major airports and not directly under flight paths. Aviation activities pose a risk
of accident and exhaust pollutants.

(2) Orientation:
Downloaded by [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)] at 06:17 24 September 2014

Consideration of prevailing winds is required as it influences cross-ventilation which is crucial,

particularly when humidity is high (FAO 2011). An east – west alignment is also recommended
because it eliminates glaring by confining the sun’s rays to the end walls.

(3) Soil:
The optimum option for laying the foundation is a rocky base on the surface or below. Soft soils
should be avoided. Where soft soils cannot be avoided, special strengthening must be provided.

(4) Slope and access:

The optimum option is to have the facilities on a flat terrain with good access. If sloping terrain
cannot be avoided the slope should not exceed u ¼ 208 (approximately 36%). And the facility at
the top or at the base of the slope should be at a distance ‘D’ bigger than ‘H’ (height of the slope)
(Figure 3) (López et al. 2014).

(5) Water supply:

An essential need of farmers is to have an adequate provision of water, both for drinking purposes
and other domestic uses, as well as for basic crop processing and cleaning of the storage floor.

4.1.3.1. CS3. All post-harvest structures visited were typically found at an adequate location,
on a flat terrain, with good access and good drainage infrastructure (Figure 4). Some trees were
found near the facilities, which when properly aligned could be a useful way of preventing
strong and undesirable winds. Orientation and water supply requirements, however, were not
followed.

Figure 3. Vulnerable zones associated with the topography.

Source: López et al. (2014).
 8 A. Bendito and S. Twomlow
Downloaded by [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)] at 06:17 24 September 2014

Figure 4. Post-harvest facilities in the Republic of Rwanda (photo by A. Bendito).

4.1.4. (G4) Building configuration

An important feature is regularity and symmetry in the overall shape of a building. Buildings with
rectangular plans stand the best chance of performing well during a hazard event. For example, a
rectangular building in plan is inherently stronger than one that is L-shaped. As a norm, the length
of a building should not be larger than three times its width (Bendito 2011).

4.1.4.1. CS4. The post-harvest facilities visited in Rwanda have an adequate rectangular shape
and are one storey high (Figure 4).

4.1.5. (G5) Building design as to ensure that all the building will remain as one unit, even while
subjected to large deformation
All structural elements of a building should be tied together so as to act as an integrated unit trans-
ferring forces across connections and preventing separation and deformation during stress gener-
ated by earthquakes, flooding or high wind flow (IAEE 2001).
Iron roofing sheets should be well tied to both the wall columns and the roof trusses to prevent
them coming loose and not only bringing economic loss but also potential direct harm to people.
The foundations are required to anchor the building frame, so the foundation must be well tied
together, as well tied to the walls.

4.1.5.1. CS5. The commonest lateral load-resisting system for the post-harvest facilities visited
in Rwanda is a timber frame. Timber poles form the inner skeleton of the structure.
Timber poles in excess of 3.5 m long are difficult to obtain. This leads to splicing two poles
together to extend their length using some form of joints and connector or gluing, which is not
recommended (Figure 5). For timber structures, the serviceability and the durability of the struc-
ture depend mainly on the design of the joints. These joints should be firm through the use of
framing, nails, bolts or disc-dowels and kept tight by using steel straps (IAEE 2001).
Unfortunately, many post-harvest facilities visited in Rwanda included timber poles that had
been joined together, but did not conform to engineering standards for the construction of frames
(Figure 6). Whether this is malpractice or an oversight due to lack of knowledge on the part of the
contractors employed is unclear. But what is clear is the need for a minimum set of construction
standards to be agreed upon by all stakeholders in rural development, accompanied by a capacity
building and awareness campaign.
 International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 9
Downloaded by [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)] at 06:17 24 September 2014

Figure 5. Use of connectors not recommended, especially where there might be increased incidence of
earthquakes, floods and strong winds (photo by A. Bendito).

Inadequate connections between structural building elements can lead to failure during a
flood, an earthquake or high-wind event (Figure 6).

4.1.6. (G6) Structural behaviour

Structures should not be brittle or collapse suddenly. Rather, they should be resistant, able to
deflect or deform a considerable amount in response to sudden or accumulated stresses
imposed by high intensity rainfall, winds and earthquakes. This ductile behaviour is desirable
because it means that structures can absorb more damage, and because it permits the deformations
to be observed and repairs or evacuation to proceed, prior to collapse (IAEE 2001).
A good solution to improve the long-term adaptation to climate change in the post-harvest
structures is the use of steel structures. Steel is a candidate material for ductile behaviour; properly

Figure 6. Iron wall and roofing sheets are not well tied/connected to the roof trusses and liable to wind
damage (photo by A. Bendito).
 10 A. Bendito and S. Twomlow

designed steel structures are very ductile and can flex in response to external stresses. This is
because steel has a high strength to weight ratio and the resulting dead weight of a steel structure
is relatively small compared to timber-framed structures. This property makes steel a very attrac-
tive building material for post-harvest storage structures, where heights to the eaves exceed 8 m
and widths exceed 20 m requiring roof trusses of more than 3 m length. As temperatures continue
to rise, the need for taller buildings will increase to improve natural ventilation. Further discussion
on advantages and disadvantages of steel can be found in IAEE 2001.

4.1.6.1. CS6. The commonest material used for the post-harvest structures visited in Rwanda
was timber. In areas where timber and wood are easily accessible, wood construction is often con-
sidered to be the cheapest and best approach. The situation in many countries of the world has in
fact become rather alarming on account of timber demand encouraging deforestation. The use of
Downloaded by [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)] at 06:17 24 September 2014

timber, however, is acceptable in those areas where it is still abundantly available as a renewable
resource.
The strength of timber is a function of several parameters including the species type, wood
density, size and form of members, moisture content, duration of the applied load and presence
of various strength reducing characteristics such as slope of grain, knots, fissures and wane (Euro-
pean Committee for Standardization 2004). Therefore, in order to provide an appropriate building
design according to Rwanda’s climate change risks, it is necessary to develop a minimum set of
construction standards, which should also include available timber parameters for the country.
The use of wood also needs to take account of potential weathering; that is, the disintegration
of wood caused by alternate shrinkage and swelling as a result of rain, rapid changes in tempera-
ture, humidity and the action of sunlight. Painting, when properly carried out, does much to
prevent weathering. The paint must be of exterior quality, however, and applied according to
the manufacturer’s instructions (FAO 2011).

4.1.7. (G7) Storage areas should have sufficient floor loading capacity and height
Foundations are required to anchor the building frame, to ensure effective transmission of stresses
to the ground and overall stability. Even if the building is structurally strong to withstand a hazar-
dous event, it can fail if the foundation is not adequate and the floor loading capacity is exceeded.
Floor loading requirements should be based on the density and quantity of the produce stored.
The foundation should be designed to avoid flooding by elevating the building above the
anticipated flood level. The selection of appropriate elevation of the foundation must consider
locally adapted requirements, as well as the importance of the building to the community
during and after a hazardous event.

4.1.7.1. CS7. Across all facilities visited during this study, it was not possible to estimate the
depth of each structure’s foundation. However, it is suspected that generally these foundations
are shallow. In Figure 7, we can see the timber poles anchored to the concrete foundation. It is
not possible to know if the timber poles are properly anchored and guaranteeing the appropriate
transferring forces to the foundation and to the ground.
The current elevation of the foundation from the ground has to be adapted to the increase in
rainfall intensity predicted for Rwanda and specific risk assessment is required during the
execution of the facilities. No major rainfall event has taken place since the construction of the
facilities (between 2011 and 2013). However, while the total mean July rainfall for the period
of 1961 – 1990 was 8.4 mm, the month of July in 2001 recorded a total rainfall of 120.8 mm.
Moreover, most of the rain fell in one day, 22 July 2001, leading to an exceptional flood in a
 International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 11
Downloaded by [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)] at 06:17 24 September 2014

Figure 7. Concrete foundation of the post-harvest facilities (photo by A. Bendito).

supposedly dry month. This indicates that there is considerable potential for another disaster event
(IFAD 2013).

4.1.8. (G8) Roof

Roofs are composed of two main parts, the cover and the roof structure:
Cover can be of different materials, they need to be impervious to water, and resistant to rain
and wind. Roof waterproofing is required, as otherwise steel roof sheets will corrode.
A good solution for the cover is the use of iron sheets that reflect sunlight and have limited
heat absorption. They have the advantage that they can be recycled but they need to be
checked to ensure that they do not have previous fixing holes in the wrong places. In many
instances, it may be more appropriate to return damaged sheets for proper recycling, if recycling
facilities exist, so that new steel products can be forged.
The roof structure corresponds to the set of structural elements intended to support the cover.
The roof structure must support the weight of its components and the weight of the cover (Bendito
2011).
A good solution for the roof structure is the use of trusses that are able to cover large spans
without requiring intermediate supports. The truss height, the span and the maximum external
member depth should follow a relation between them. More information on diversity of
designs of trusses can be found on Bendito (2011).
Fully triangulated trusses ensure rigidity of the structure and the deformations formed by this
are produced by small increases in length on each of the bars subjected to axial force. It is rec-
ommended that when projecting a truss, the angles are maintained between 458 and 608 and
that the dimensions of the parts are similar. Otherwise, the forces on the bars can reach high
values, or the deformations, proportional to the length of the members, being unequal can
cause asymmetric displacements in structure (Bendito 2011).
Roof shape plays a significant role in roof performance. In order to reduce the uplift forces,
build roofs pitches should be between 308 and 408. When it is possible, use hipped ends, rather
than gable ends (Figure 8). Hip roofs generally perform better in extreme winds because they have
fewer sharp corners and their construction makes them inherently more structurally stable (FEMA
2008). The roof shape that best interacts with wind loads is the four waters (the one from a rec-
tangular plane drift slope in four directions), particularly with slope angles between 208 and 308,
 12 A. Bendito and S. Twomlow

Figure 8. Hipped ends (left) and gable ends (right).

Source: Bendito (2011).

followed by the roof gable end as long as the above mentioned slope range is kept between 208
Downloaded by [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)] at 06:17 24 September 2014

and 308.

4.1.8.1. CS8. For all the post-harvest structures visited in Rwanda, the roof was made of corru-
gate iron sheets and directly supported by the wooden structure.
Some of the post-harvest facilities visited included trusses with squares instead of triangles
and without longitudinal bracing to prevent the truss from tipping which will drag the other
trusses. Fully triangulated trusses ensure rigidity of the structure (Figure 9). A well-constructed
roof will prevent problems related to drainage and rainwater harvesting.

4.1.9. (G9) Drainage systems

Drainage system should remove rainwater quickly from both the building and surroundings. An
example of a drainage system is shown in Figure 10. Rain gutters are critical components of a
building’s roofing system and a long-term investment in the infrastructure of the facility. The rain-
water drainage from the roof protects the walls, the floor and the crops that are being dried and
stored.
Any drains installed in storage areas and/or floors should be slightly angled to prevent water
pockets. The building’s roof should be pitched sufficiently to ensure rapid rainwater run-off and
its guttering and down pipes should be of appropriate diameter and well maintained to prevent
water overflow or blockages.
Any large trees near the building should be adequately pruned to minimize accumulation of
leaf litter and other debris. Debris may cause blockages in gutters.

Figure 9. Timber roof truss forming squares instead of triangles (photo by A. Bendito).
 International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 13
Downloaded by [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)] at 06:17 24 September 2014

Figure 10. Drainage system.

Source: Bendito (2011).

4.1.9.1. CS9. None of the post-harvest facilities visited in Rwanda had adequate rainwater drai-
nage systems (guttering) on the roof.
None of the storage facilities visited had floor drainage. So after cleaning the storage facility,
water pocket problems were frequent thus potentially causing floor damage with time. Adequate
drainage will also help lower the humidity of the site.

4.1.10. (G10) Rainwater-harvesting systems

All the storage facilities should include rainwater-harvesting options and this water could be used
for basic crop processing such as cleaning and cooling, for household potable use rather than
transfer water from distant, and also for irrigation of vegetables and high-value crops.

4.1.10.1. CS10. None of the post-harvest facilities visited included rainwater-harvesting options.
This water could be used for cleaning the storage facilities. Cleaning the storage is an activity that
should be done quite often to avoid rats and insects that are the main cause of post-harvest losses.

4.1.11. (G11) Storage facilities should be entirely weatherproofed and sealed against dust and
moisture
The roof should be well sealed. Door frames should be properly sealed and have metal sheet for
added protection. Storage areas should not have windows. Storage should have natural ventilation
with metal mesh protection.

4.1.11.1. CS11. Requirements were not followed by the post-harvest structures visited in Rwanda.
Focus group discussions highlighted the conspicuous lack of wooden pallets to enhance
produce drying and storage by ensuring no direct contact with the floor and increasing airflow
and thus reducing humidity.

4.1.12. (G12) Eaves

For the eaves, it is necessary to build a side panel called ‘panel overhang’. Restrict unsupported
eaves overhangs to not more than 80 cm from the wall.
 14 A. Bendito and S. Twomlow

It is recommended to keep eaves as short as possible to prevent structural failure due to wind
pressures. Experience with strong winds in the past has shown that local pressures generated
during strong winds are greater in the corners and ridges of the roofs (FEMA 2002).

4.1.12.1. CS12. All of the post-harvest facilities visited had small roof overhangs.
The roof overhang can give adequate protection from sun and heavy rain to the elements of the
facility and the crops that are being dried after harvest.

4.2. Review of current rural building standards and codes in Rwanda

Building standards and codes specific for Rwanda, as for many other African countries, do not
exist. Currently, in urban areas British Standards and the European Committee for Standardization
Downloaded by [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)] at 06:17 24 September 2014

are followed with no modifications to reflect the local environments or hazards. No guidelines
specific to rural infrastructural are available for Rwanda.
In recent years, building collapses have become frequent in East and Central African countries
as some property developers bypass the few regulations and building codes that exist to cut costs.
For example, in March 2013, a building collapsed in the Tanzanian city of Dar es Salaam, and
shortly after, in May 2013 a four-storey building under construction collapsed in the eastern
Rwanda district of Nyagatare (http://www.sabc.co.za/).
Modern infrastructure facilities will need to reflect the growing concern over climate change.
Countries and cities will only have safer infrastructure when standards are in place through build-
ing codes and regulations (UNISDR 2012).

5. Recommendations
5.1. Partial structural solutions for the current post-harvest facilities
. Treat the wood attacked by termites and progressively replace wood with steel profiles.
. Incorporate diagonal wooden struts in trusses with square instead of triangular design.
. Strengthen existing connectors by incorporating steel plates to prevent possible displacements.
. Provide the roof with a ring beams. This option will provide additional structural stability
by helping keep the building together during natural hazards (Figure 11).
. There are insufficient storage and drying facilities for the current volumes of production
throughout the regions visited (highlighted by key informants and by focus group discus-
sions). It is essential that a survey of available drying and storage facilities is made during
the inception phase of a project and an assessment of additional facilities required based on
predicted future volumes of production.

5.2. Establishment of wind barriers

Air movement is essential for cross-ventilation, but excessive wind can damage buildings. Estab-
lishment of wind barriers surrounding facilities with selected trees species as wind barriers could
be a useful way of preventing undesirable wind intensities and simultaneously generate additional
income to local communities.

5.3. Provide similar guidelines to all the structures in Rwanda

Being aware that building standards and codes specific for Rwanda do not exist, similar guidelines
should be provided to all the structures in Rwanda, especially in the rural areas.
 International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 15
Downloaded by [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)] at 06:17 24 September 2014

Figure 11. Ring beams providing additional structural stability (http://earthbagbuilding.com/projects/

nepalschool.htm).

5.4. Changes in building materials

Understanding the implications of long-term climate change and determining an optimal combi-
nation of no-regrets, low-cost/co-benefit, high-cost priority actions remains a challenge.
Probably the option of using steel rather than timber has higher cost implications in the short
term but is the best option in long term. The immediate challenge is to support, educate and com-
municate the understanding of the trade-offs between short-term costs and long-term benefits.
We need to build communities with the confidence that climate change and resulting natural
disaster risk are fully considered. It is safer, as well as cost-effective, to construct climate change
resistant buildings at the initial state following relevant building code.
Using resilient design standards and land use planning is cost-effective when compared to
relocation and/or retrofitting unsafe buildings. UNISDR (2012) estimate that the cost/benefit
ratio following the adoption and promotion of resilient design standards is of 4 to 1. Benefits
observed to offset these upfront costs include avoided future disaster damages, as well as
overall improved building performance and value.

5.5. Adoption of building codes

The development and widespread adoption of building codes has been beneficial to society
because it has created a uniform regulatory environment in which design professionals and con-
tractors are held accountable to a set of standards adopted by and applicable to the jurisdiction in
which they work (FEMA 2013). More importantly, building codes would provide protection to
families, communities and society at large in the event of a natural disaster.
Building codes can include both technical and functional standards. They should incorporate
the lessons of international experience and should be tailored to national and local circumstances.
A systematic regime of enforcement is a critical supporting requirement for effective implemen-
tation of building codes. This information is useful for vulnerability and capacity assessments
(UNDP 2011).
The development of building codes for rural infrastructures is critical for post-harvest structures
that are resilient to natural disasters and adapted to climate change. In order to develop building codes
for rural infrastructures in Rwanda, and many other sub-Saharan African countries for that matter, it
would be necessary to have greater investments in structural engineering expertize (Juma 2006).
 16 A. Bendito and S. Twomlow

5.6. Building local capacity on climate science

Technical engineering education for local engineers, contractors and construction workers should
be a crucial part of this work. The idea is not just to make one building safe, but also to develop
capacities and skills to design and construct safe structures, and to spread this knowledge broadly.
Rural development projects have a specific role in knowledge transfer and advisory services
as they can identify knowledge gaps and link partners and institutions to reduce these gaps. While
local knowledge and technical knowledge share a number of common fundamental concepts, the
potential for complementarity is high. Therefore, new agricultural development should foster inte-
grative efforts that blend local and technical knowledge, thus increasing the reach and relevance
of recommended best practices (Barrios et al. 2012). The idea is to avoid overly prescriptive
approaches by fostering participatory processes from the initial stages of the project that
ensure effective harnessing of local and experiential knowledge that would ensure the relevance,
Downloaded by [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)] at 06:17 24 September 2014

credibility and legitimacy required for wide adoption of new building recommendations.

5.7. Identify and rank buildings that are potentially at risk from natural hazard
Develop a participatory assessment methodology that integrates local and technical knowledge
and experience, to identify and rank buildings that are potentially at risk from a natural hazard.
Once the methodology is available, the next step is the training of local engineers and construction
workers, and careful overall management of the process. This methodology could help to design
natural hazard mitigation programmes for rural communities.

5.8. Developing risk maps

The development of risk maps can have a number of beneficial impacts, such as increasing
general public awareness of natural hazard, urban planning, selecting sites for important facilities
(e.g. hospitals and schools), providing a basis for whether site-specific hazard evaluations should
be performed, aiding emergency preparedness and response, and loss estimation.

5.9. Building linkages between institutions in facilitating climate change adaptation

Government, the private sector, universities and research institutions are important parts of a larger
system of knowledge and interactions which allow diverse actors with varied strengths to come
together to pursue broad common goals in agricultural innovation. In many African countries,
the state still plays a key role in directing production activities. But the private sector is an increas-
ingly important player in adapting existing knowledge and applying it to new areas.
Universities also should ensure that students appreciate the relationships between science and
development, encouraging them to be sensitive to societal needs. The success of this approach is
based on the strong interdependence of academia, industry, government and civil society (Juma
2006).

5.10. Increase the knowledge base on monitoring and evaluation of adaptation

interventions
In the climate change context, generating and sharing knowledge, building networks of collabor-
ation and supporting practical learning are key strategies to enhancing adaptive capacity. Adap-
tation is sometimes presented as a question of making the right decision with a view to reducing
future vulnerability. However, adaptation should rather be seen as iterative learning cycles, where
 International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 17

a series of risks and options are evaluated, decisions made and then outcomes monitored and
reviewed again (Coe et al. 2014). This is both because climate risks change over time as
climate and socio-economic activities exposed to risk change, and also because the effectiveness
of adaptation actions needs to be reviewed and assessed, and the results of assessment acted upon.
This process is a process of learning through action (GIZ 2013)

6. Conclusions
All the post-harvest facilities visited are still standing and evidence of structural damage is limited.
However, no major event has happened (http://www.emdat.be/country-profile) since the construc-
tion of the facilities (between 2011 and 2013). It is noted that almost all of the basic engineering
guidelines proposed in Table 1 have not been followed, so there is a high probability that the struc-
Downloaded by [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)] at 06:17 24 September 2014

tures will be weak in face of any natural disaster as is expected in years to come in Rwanda.
The tragedy is that most new buildings in rural areas of developing countries are still being
constructed with no guidelines in response to a country’s specific demands and needs. The adop-
tion of building codes and guidelines should be mandatory in all government departments.
We expect that our study may serve as a reference to be repeated in other countries, especially in
Africa, where the economic growth is increasing and where there is a growing need for improved
rural structures. In urban areas, there are town/municipal engineers responsible for enforcing the
building code, while in rural areas, rural development officers are normally called upon to
provide technical advice on improving rural infrastructures, but they generally have limited knowl-
edge of basic structural engineering principles and few if any guidelines are available (IFAD 2011).
In order to save the existing and future post-harvest facilities from impacts related to floods,
droughts, high temperatures and other weather-related disasters due to climate change and from
earthquakes, a holistic approach is called for consisting of creation of public awareness, education
and training, research and development about safety from natural hazards.

Acknowledgements
We want to express our gratitude to the IFAD Rwanda Office, and the MINAGRI’s Single Project Imple-
menting Unit (SPIU) for their help with the coordination of fieldwork and their contribution to informative
and constructive discussions. The authors also greatly appreciate the information shared by the Department
of Civil Engineering and Environmental Technology, University of Rwanda Kigali Campus, key informants
and farmer groups of each region visited, and representatives of the private sector. Two anonymous reviewers
and the editor made useful comments that helped to improve the paper and are highly appreciated.

References
ADF, 2010. Climate change and infrastructure development. Addis Ababa: United Nations Conference
Centre, Issues Paper #8. ADF VII † 10 – 15.
APHLIS, 2013. African Post-Harvest Losses Information Systems. USAID, MINAGRI and CARANA,
Post-harvest baseline survey of Rwandan maize and rice farming households; Smallholder Post-
harvest Innovations Project (SPIP) – mid term project report, IFAD Policy and Technical Advisory
Division.
Barrios, E., Coutinho, H.L., and Medeiros, C.A., 2012. InPaC-S: participatory knowledge integration on
indicators of soil quality – methodological guide. Nairobi: ICRAF, Embrapa, CIAT, 178.
Bendito, A., 2011. Introducción al Comportamiento y al Diseño de Estructuras de Acero. Método de los
Estados Lı́mites (LRFD) [Introduction to the behavior and design of steel structures with Load and
Resistance Factor Design (LRFD)]. Mérida: Universidad de Los Andes, 629. ISBN:978-980-11-
1345-4.
Bhorat, H., et al., 2014. Top priorities for the continent in 2014. Foresight Africa. Washington, DC: Africa
Growth Imitative, Brookings Institute.
 18 A. Bendito and S. Twomlow

Coe, R., Sinclair, F.L., and Barrios, E., 2014. Scaling up agroforestry requires a research ‘in’ rather than ‘for’
development paradigm. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability [online], 6, 73 –77. Available
from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2013.10.013 [Accessed 26 March 2014].
European Committee for Standardization, 2004. Eurocode 5: Design of timber structures: Part 1. EC-5
ENV-1992-1-1.
FAO, 2011. Rural structures in the tropics. Design and development. Rome: Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations.
FAO, 2013. Facing the challenges of climate change and food security. Occasional papers on innovation in
family farming. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
FEMA, 2002. Construction techniques to protect against future wind damage in Ladysmith. FEMA-DR-
1432-WI September 2002 Tornadoes.
FEMA, 2008. Design and construction guidance for community safe rooms FEMA P-361. 2nd ed.
FEMA, 2013. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Building Science Branch [online]. Available from:
http://www.fema.gov/building-science [Accessed 26 March 2014].
GIZ, 2013. Rural development and adaptation to climate change: what do we know? GIZ sector programs
Downloaded by [INASP - Pakistan (PERI)] at 06:17 24 September 2014

‘Sustainable Resource Use in Agriculture’ (PN 09.2280.7) and ‘Development of Rural Areas’ (PN
11.2222.6), Freiburg.
IAEE, 2001. Guidelines for earthquake resistant non-engineered construction. Tokyo: The International
Association for Earthquake Engineering.
IEG, 2012. Adapting to climate change: assessing World Bank Group experience phase III of the World Bank
Group and climate change. Washington, DC: Independent Evaluation Group, World Bank and IFC.
IFAD, 2011. Report. Enabling poor rural people to overcome poverty in Rwanda. Kigali: UN International
Fund for Agricultural Development.
IFAD, 2013. Climate resilient Post-harvest and Agribusiness Support Project (PASP) including blended
Adaptation for Smallholder Agriculture Programme Grant (ASAP). Kigali: UN International Fund for
Agricultural Development (operations.ifad.org/web/ifad/operations/country/project/tags/rwanda/1497/
documents).
IPCC, 2007. Climate change 2007: mitigation. In: B. Metz, O. Davidson, P. Bosch, R. Dave, and L. Meyer,
eds. Contribution of working group III to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 499–532.
Juma, C., 2006. Reinventing African economies. Technological innovation and the sustainability transition.
London: The Royal Academy of Engineering.
Lane, L., et al., 2009. Copenhagen consensus on climate: Advice for policy makers. Denmark: Copenhagen
Consensus Center Copenhagen.
López, O.A., et al., (2014). Índices de Priorización de Edificios para la Gestión del Riesgo Sı́smico. Informe
Técnico FUNVISIS, FUN-002, Caracas, Venezuela.
NAPA, 2006. National Adaptation Plan of Action [online]. Kigali: Ministry of Lands, Environment,
Forestry, Water and Mines. Available from: http://www.worldagroforestry.org/downloads/publicatio
ns/PDFs/B17459.PDF [Accessed 26 March 2014].
Ngabitsinze, J., et al., 2011. Planning and costing adaptation of perennial crop systems to climate change:
coffee and banana in Rwanda [online]. Available from: www.nurr.ac.rw
Rockefeller Foundation, 2013. Rebound: building a more resilient world. Innovation for the next 100 years.
New York: Rockefeller Foundation.
Rwanda Vision 2020, 2000. Republic of Rwanda, Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, Kigali, July.
Available from: http://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/bitstream/handle/2152/5071/4164.pdf?sequence=1
[Accessed 7 February 2014].
UN, 2013. An action agenda for sustainable development. Report for the United Nations Secretary-General,
New York.
UNDP, 2011. Paving the way for climate-resilient infrastructure. International Conference: Strategies for
Adapting Public and Private Infrastructure to Climate Change, 30 June 2010, San Salvador.
UNFCCC, 2006. Technologies for adaptation to climate change. In: United Nations framework convention
on climate change. Born. Rural 21, 2013. Post-harvest agriculture in a changing climate.
UNISDR, 2012. How to make cities more resilient. A handbook for local government leaders. Geneva:
United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction.
World Bank Rwanda Economic, 2013. Available from: http://worldbank.org/country/rwanda [Accessed 27
May 2014].
World Bank and United Nations, 2010. Natural hazards, unnatural disasters the economics of effective pre-
vention. Washington, DC: World Bank.

View publication stats