KWAME NKRUMAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

MSC FOOD QUALITY MANAGEMENT IDL

POST HARVEST MANAGEMENT (FQM 579)

REVIEW STRATEGIES TO MITIGATE POST-

HARVEST CHALLENGES IN GHANA

EDWARD CHRISTIAN BROWN-APPIAH

ID(20823471)
PG9573121
Table of Contents

Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... 2
1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 3
1.1 What is postharvest loss? ................................................................................................ 5
1.2 Causes of postharvest losses............................................................................................ 5
2.0 The Concept of Post-harvest Management ................................................................... 7
2.1 Importance of Good and Efficient Post-harvest Management Practices ................... 7
2.2 Ghana’s policy on postharvest management................................................................. 8
3.0 Review on reports by Ghana Department of Agriculture ........................................ 10
4.0 Approaches To Addresing Losses ................................................................................ 11
5.0 Developing synergies to mitigate PHL ......................................................................... 12
6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations............................................................................. 15
7.0 Reference ........................................................................................................................ 17

1
Abstract
In Sub-Saharan Africa, post-harvest losses (PHL) have been identified as a major obstacle to
achieving food and nutrition security. Due to the considerable growth in post-harvest losses at the
farm, wholesale, and retail sectors, agriculture in Ghana fails to offer the appropriate ratios of food
supply to Ghanaian inhabitants. Despite the fact that the farmer's labor tirelessly to produce a
diverse range of crops, vegetables, and tubers to feed the nation. This jeopardizes the country's
food and nutrition security, depletes the anticipated revenue for agricultural production and the
food processing sector, and exacerbates the impoverishment of Ghana's poor farmers. The goal of
this research is to examine ways for reducing post-harvest losses or problems in Ghana's
agricultural production. This review will define post-harvest loss, its causes, the concept of post-
harvest management, the importance of good and efficient post-harvest management practices that
can minimize and/or eliminate completely, post-harvest losses in agricultural production in Ghana,
Ghana's policy on post-harvest management, reports by the Ghana Department of Agriculture,
approaches to addressing losses, synergies to mitigate PHL, and conclusions and recommendations
that will aid in mitigating PHL as well as conclusions and recommendations that will help
Ghanaian farmers overcome post-harvest problems and increase agricultural production. This
would ultimately boost the economy of the agriculture sector of the country, thereby impacting
positively on the lives of farmers and the Ghanaian economy as a whole.

Keywords: Post-harvest Management Practices, Food Processing Sector, Agriculture Production,

Post-harvest Losses, Food Science, Food security, Loss assessment, Grain storage, Knowledge
gaps, PICS bags, Net benefits

2
1.0 Introduction
The majority of perishable product losses occur at the consumer level in advanced nations, whereas
the majority of perishable products are lost before they reach customers in developing regions such
as Africa south of the Sahara. According to Arah et al., (2016), by simply applying suitable
postharvest handling practices and treatment technologies, the quality of the harvested fruit can be
changed, and shelf life can be extended. Unless simple postharvest precautions are followed,
postharvest losses will continue to be a severe concern for developing nation handlers. One
important source of worry is the extent of postharvest food losses recorded in many developing
countries, especially in Ghana. Consequently, food security remains a problem if food production
and distribution have not been well integrated into effective post-harvest loss management. Up to
37% of food produced in Sub-Saharan Africa is wasted between production and consumption,
according to FAO estimates for 2011. Cereals will account for 20.5 percent of total consumption,
according to projections. The FAO estimates post-harvest handling and storage losses at 8%,
whereas the African Post-harvest Losses Information System (APHLIS) estimates them at 10% to
12%. PHL has attracted international interest as a result of these high estimates. However, most
initiatives for small-scale farmers focus on increasing on-farm grain storage practices.
Extrapolation from purposively sampled (and frequently older) case studies that may focus on
locations with the highest PHL is used to arrive at the estimations. More and better quantification
of (on-farm) grain loss is required (which can then be compared with the costs of improved
postharvest practices). It's also necessary to gain a better understanding of farmers' attitudes about
adopting improved postharvest technologies (World Bank, 2022). Physical damage, rodent assault,
fungal and bacterial infections, and physiological processes such as sprouting, dehydrating, and
respiration, according to Rosegrant et al., (2016), are the key contributors of substantial postharvest
losses in Africa. Pests and disease, too much or too little rainfall, and inadequate harvest and post-
harvest procedures are the main causes of food loss in maize and bean value chains. Improved
extension services to teach farmers about pest management and harvesting practices, as well as
financial services to boost farmers' resilience to rainfall shocks, are two possible solutions,
according to the author IFPRI, (2018). According to Ridolfi and Hoffman , (2017) insufficient
infrastructure and transportation facilities combined with hot and humid weather conditions might
result in 40-50 percent post-harvest spoilage and loss of perishable items. Poor infrastructure and
inefficient market systems that fail to connect potential purchasers to producers are other key

3
drivers of postharvest losses in Africa, according to Hague, et al., (2016). Despite the fact that
poor infrastructure contributes to high postharvest losses in Africa, research suggests that human
factors also play a role in yam postharvest losses (Ansah et al, 2017): (Ansah and Tetteh, 2016),
in particular, reaffirmed the importance of reducing postharvest losses as a strategy of improving
national food security. Managing postharvest storage losses is expected to allow commercially
minded farmers to keep their food for lengthy periods of time without incurring major losses,
allowing them to release output when market prices are favorable. Reduced postharvest losses are
a means for farmers who want to meet year-round food needs to assure food supply.

In Ghana, attaining the goal of crop storage to anticipate better prices or meet food demands has
been problematic, especially for yam value chain actors, due to weak infrastructure and poorly
built postharvest storage facilities. Farmers in the Zabzugu area of the Northern region, in
particular, confront poor pricing, particularly during abundant harvests, but are unable to
successfully hold their produce for sale during lean seasons when prices are attractive due to
substantial postharvest losses, as described in the research Composite Budgets, (2016). Postharvest
losses, on the other hand, have been observed by yam dealers in the Tamale city, reducing their
revenues. Not only do yam postharvest losses have an impact on actors' well-being, but they also
have an impact on consumers' well-being due to poor quality and high pricing during lean seasons.
Postharvest losses have also had a negative influence on yam production and selling on a
commercial scale. Poor storage structures, excessive heating (which hastens the process of
respiration and decomposition), and insect and rodent assaults are the most common causes of
tuber losses, according to farmer and trader comments. The most concerning of these problems is
the physical damage caused by insect and rodent assaults (about 95 percent of all respondents
stated this). As a result, enhanced storage methods and management procedures are required in
Zabzugu district and Tamale metropolis, as well as maybe other yam-producing areas in Ghana
(Ansah et al., 2018). According to an FAO study from 2015, more than a quarter of Ghana's
population, primarily in the northern area, were still living below the poverty line of US$ 1.25 or
GH 5.63 per day in 2013. The majority of those living below the poverty level are farmers. As a
result, effective postharvest loss control might be a starting point for reducing poverty and hunger
in the northern area, where yam is one of the most extensively grown and consumed crops. In this
regard, the goal of this research is to review Strategies to mitigate post-harvest challenges in
Ghana.

4
1.1 What is postharvest loss?
According to the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI, 2018). Postharvest Loss
(PHL) refers to the quantifiable loss of food quality and quantity in the postharvest system. From
the act of harvesting to agricultural processing, storage, marketing, and transportation, to the stage
of consumption, its system is made up of interconnected steps. PHL can occur anywhere in the
post-harvest process. Crop harvest, live animal sales at farm gate, collected eggs at farm gate, milk
at the post-milking stage, or fish catch are all part of the post-harvest chain, as does the delivery
of food to the customer. Plant products (e.g. Roots and tubers, grains, vegetables and fruit, and
pulses), animal products (egg, meat, hides and skins), and fish all have distinct activities. Product
losses can fall into three categories as they travel through the supply chain: I quantitative or
physical weight losses; (ii) loss of quality, which affects the product's appearance, flavour, texture,
or nutritional content; and (iii) loss of potential for product value. (Affognon et al., 2015)

1.2 Causes of postharvest losses

Post-harvest losses are caused by occurrences that cause grain quality and quantity to deteriorate.
Aflatoxin, for example, causes grain discolouration. Post-harvest losses don't happen by
themselves, or as they say, in a vacuum. Post-harvest losses are caused by a variety of events or
practices. Each link in the value chain suffers from post-harvest losses. That is, throughout the pre-
drying, harvesting, threshing, shipping, storage, and processing stages. There are two types of
events that occur at each stage of the value chain: internal and external factors. Internal factors are
stages over which the farmer has some control. External factors, on the other hand, are things that
are completely out of the farmer's control.

1.2.1 Internal Causes of post-harvest losses

Many phases of the value chain are involved in the internal causes. Let's take a closer look at three
of them.

• Harvesting Practices: Crop maturity and weather conditions are both important factors in the
harvesting process. During the harvesting process, a number of things can go wrong. Things like
poor or rough crop handling during harvest, a lack of appropriate harvesting tools, equipment, and
containers, and late harvesting.

5
•Transportation practices: Include a lack of proper transportation systems and vehicles. This
problem, on the other hand, is more widespread in underdeveloped countries.

•Storage Practices: Inadequate use of appropriate storage bags and containers for keeping crops,
insufficient warehouse care, inadequate storage facilities, and bad management of pests and insects
such as weevils for grains.

1.2.2 External Causes of post-harvest losses

These events that are beyond the farmer's or commodity trader's control.These include:

• Weather conditions: crop quality is affected by rainfall, whether excessive or not, and sunshine,
whether hot or not. Flooding of farmlands and warehouses, as well as the destruction of farm or
stored crops, may result from excessive rains. It may also cause problems with preharvest and
postharvest drying. Excessive sunlight raises temperature and shortens the storage life of a crop
since most processes that damage crops, such as mold growth, accelerate at higher temperatures.

•Time: the longer produce is stored, the lower the quality of the product becomes, especially for
those with a short storage life. Changes in taste preferences or a lack of quick market for products
might lengthen production storage time, resulting in post-harvest losses owing to bug infestations.

Post-harvest losses don't happen by themselves. Knowing what events and practices encourage
post-harvest losses will help regulate, manage, and reduce the problem. Farmers and commodities
merchants must do all possible to put in place and put into practice the necessary systems and
practices to minimize post-harvest losses (Sesi Technologies, 2021)

According to Alidu et al., (2016) postharvest losses of vegetables are caused by a lack of technical
support, inadequate market structures, poor handling of food by farmers and other actors, terrible
road infrastructure, market intermediaries, and consumers. Access to a road, access to drying
platforms and tarpaulins, use of enhanced storage bags and metal silos, access to shelling
machines, access to warehouse facilities, the cost of post-harvest technologies, and access to credit
were all factors that contributed to PHL. Another study in Nigeria to reduce cassava PHL
advocated gender-sensitive policies aimed at providing affordable and conveniently available
credit to women involved in starch processing. (Adejumo et al., 2020) For the planning and
diffusion of upgraded technologies, Sugri et al., (2021) gave a regional assessment of HPL split
down by commodity. Despite a high impression of post-harvest losses, respondents said that they

6
lacked the technical and resource capacity to reduce PHL. The grain kept in PICS bags for the
same time period, on the other hand, did not lose weight and suffered the same damage as the
original grade. Late harvesting, inadequate drying, and storage in native oxygen-permeable vessels
are the primary causes of PHL in dry grains . (Sugri et al., 2019); (Sawicka B. 2019). Farmers that
store grain maize in PICS bags or plastic drums may face storage losses of 0-5 percent after a year.
If grain maize is stored in PICS bags or plastic drums for the next 12 months, it may not need to
be chemically treated. However, the grain's condition before to storage should be thoroughly
inspected. In any case, prior to storage, the grain should be cleaned and dried to the appropriate
acceptable moisture level. Furthermore, because the infection can quickly accumulate, especially
after 8 months of storage, close monitoring is essential. Despite the fact that enhanced storage
technologies have been linked to higher variable costs, all treatments have shown a positive stream
of discounted net benefits.

2.0 The Concept of Post-harvest Management

Due to the higher loss of productivity during the post-harvest period, management practices are
used to minimize these losses. Post-harvest losses are the term for this. A post-harvest loss is a
broad, phrase that encompasses all resource waste associated with the production and harvesting
of farm products. Land, Labour, energy, water, fertilizer, and so on are examples (Sipho and
Tilahun, 2020). The goal of post-harvest management is to ensure the quality and safety of
agricultural products until they reach the consumer (IFJ, 2020), while improving the fresh
produce's shelf life (Essien et al., 2018)

2.1 Importance of Good and Efficient Post-harvest Management Practices

This increases the availability and distribution of high-quality food in sufficient numbers to nourish
society's members. It reduces the pressure on farmers to increase agricultural production, which
typically falls short of meeting the population's needs due to substantial post-harvest losses. Many
forest lands are being removed nowadays to increase agricultural production in order to feed the
world's ever-growing population. People living in forest edge villages have frequently reduced
and/or encroached on the land mass of Protected Areas and Conservation sites as a result of this
(Osei et al., 2020). As a result, if efforts are made to create post-harvest management systems,
what the author refers to as the "craze for land use for agricultural production" will be reduced. It
would save money on labor, machinery, and other aspects of agricultural production that are
7
typically wasted due to post-harvest losses. Furthermore, many investors are withdrawing their
investments in the agricultural industry due to losses from post-harvest losses of harvested items,
while many youngsters in developing nations such as Ghana are abandoning agriculture. Farmers'
income is increased through an efficient post-harvest management system (IFJ, 2020), makes the
agricultural industry more lucrative and appealing to investors and the youth in society, while also
increasing developing countries' agricultural economies (Sipho and Tilahun, 2020). Unfortunately,
post-harvest losses result in the loss of a larger portion of horticultural goods, lowering their
nutritional value. This has been the case in developing nations such as Ghana, where malnutrition
and other types of nutritional inequity impact a larger percentage of the population, particularly
children under the age of five. The adoption of simple, good, and efficient post-harvest
management systems, according to the author, will improve the quality and quantity of agricultural
produce. He considers the post-harvest management system to be the simplest, least expensive,
and most efficient method of assuring a constant supply of food to communities. The entire cost
of lost agricultural produce far outweighs the expense of putting excellent post-harvest
management techniques in place. Furthermore, when post-harvest procedures are used, the quality
of agricultural produce is improved. This improves the appeal of agricultural products and
enhances client interest (Essien et al.,2018). Good post-harvest management systems are vital in
the growth of the agriculture sector in countries because of their essential responsibilities and
importance.

2.2 Ghana’s policy on postharvest management

Most policy documents, including the Ghana Poverty Reduction Strategy (GPRS I) of 2003–2005,
GPRS II of 2006–2009, Food and Agriculture Sector Development Policy (FASDEP) of 2002–
2009, FASDEP II of 2009–2015, and METASSIP have extensively explored the appropriate
technologies to manage harvest surpluses and maintain quality ( IFJ, 2020) . These strategic
policies include the development and deployment of improved post-harvest interventions to
improve food security. The lack of proper process technologies for transporting, managing, and
storing agricultural, seafood, and livestock products was identified as a major impediment to
achieving sustainable food security in Ghana in these documents. Due to this lack of knowledge,
post-harvest losses are high across all commodity groupings. Other issues included the use of
traditional treatment technology, a lack of gender-responsive technologies and labor markets, and

8
inequities in the provision of agricultural extension services to women. (IFJ, 2020). Strengthening
producers' capacity for better harvesting, transportation, and storage methods, as well as the
introduction of new processing methods, different storage systems, and the creation of
relationships between producers and markets are some of the interventions that have been put in
place to address these constraints. "Investing for Food and Jobs (IFJ): An Agenda for Transforming
Ghana's Agriculture (2018–2021)" is the current policy direction of Ghana's Ministry of Food and
Agriculture (MoFA) (Essien et al.,2018) This policy aims to modernize agriculture, resulting in a
structurally transformed economy with improved food security, job opportunities, and poverty
reduction. Postharvest interventions by the IFJ include:

1. To minimize postharvest losses, provide storage, transportation, processing, packaging,

and distribution for certain food products, notably staples.
2. Under the government's one-district-one-factory agenda, provide incentives to the private
sector and district assemblies to invest in post-harvest activities, thereby ensuring a steady
supply of raw materials to markets and small and medium-scale agro-enterprises.
3. Reorganize the National Food Buffer Stock Agency to make it more efficient and market-
oriented so that private sector participation is encouraged.
4. Under the government's "one-district-one-warehouse" goal, provide storage infrastructure,
including a drying system and a warehouse receipt system.
5. To establish a reservoir of specialist extension agents in each region for training of
producers and other players along the value chain, develop a core team of extension
professionals in post-harvest technology.
6. Implement the Gender and Agricultural Development Strategy (GADS) to facilitate more
gender-responsive program planning and implementation; use affirmative action in
extension service delivery; target and support less privileged women, youth, and physically
challenged farmers; and assist women in processing, value addition, and utilization.

This policy complies with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) , Global, continental
(CAADP-Malabo Declaration), and regional (ECOWAP) levels, as well as the continental
(CAADP-Malabo Declaration) and regional (ECOWAP) development frameworks. In general,
Ghana's obligation stems from continental and global commitments to reduce PHL in the medium
and long term, through the African Union's Malabo Declaration of 2014, which aims to eliminate

9
PHL by 2025, and the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals 2&12.3, which aim to
eliminate hunger and malnutrition and global food loss and waste by 2030. Access to reliable PHL
information and the implementation of efficient technologies to reduce losses remain a difficulty.
Only 19 countries out of 54 reported on post-harvest losses (AUC et al, ,2019) according to the
latest African Union 2020 Biennial Review Report on the implementation of the 2014 Malabo
Declaration. Only 10 of the 19 countries have achieved the requisite 15% reduction from 2015
levels to be considered on track. Only 5 of the 17 CILSS-ECOWAS countries were able to provide
complete reference data and track their PHL reduction targets by 2025. Amongst them are Benin
(27.5%), Côte d'Ivoire (31.9%), Nigeria (26.4%), Togo (21.4%), and Sierra Leone (46.1%) are
among them . The fact that less than 10% of African countries have successfully reported on
PHL, implies a liability burden in terms of PHL quantification and monitoring in African Union
Member States.

3.0 Review on reports by Ghana Department of Agriculture

The Ghana Department of Agriculture (DoA) has reviewed certain reports and
recommends progress in implementing interventions to minimize HPL through the commodity
groups (IFJ ,2020). Dissemination of scientific results and innovative technologies connected to
the harvesting, processing, and storage of plant goods, livestock meat and egg products, and fish
are among them. The second strategy includes a large training program for DoA staff (both short-
and long-term academic training) as well as a participatory training module for farmers,
processors, and other value chain players. Nonetheless, the use of upgraded technologies on a large
scale in farming communities is limited. The Department of Agriculture(DoA) has a post-harvest
unit that reports to the Directorate of Agricultural Engineering Services (AESD). The post-harvest
unit, which was previously managed by crop services, was responsible for identifying and
formulating projects in post-harvest technologies as well as activities connected to food
preservation, processing, and use. However, in recent years, the Post-Harvest Unit appears to have
lost some of its capability and concentration. Regional representation of post-harvest specialists
within DoA, for example, no longer exists or is dispersed across various directorates, as it was a
few years ago.

10
4.0 Approaches To Addresing Losses
Many empirical studies have been conducted in order to provide a long-term solution to the
problem of postharvest losses. Existing empirical research, for example, have assessed postharvest
losses (Ansah and Tetteh, 2016), however successful control of food losses is a human factor.
While these studies have contributed to our understanding of the postharvest loss problem, little
emphasis has been paid to the mechanisms through which postharvest storage losses might be
decreased, particularly in terms of management practices and how these practices affect welfare
outcomes. Ansah et al., ( 2017) eloquently express this knowledge gap, he pushed for more
research into key management practices and how they affect wellbeing in the future. Investments
in improved post-harvest technologies can increase small-holders' output, income, and food
availability across actors in Ghana's crop value chains, according to a study by Sugri et al.,(2021).
PHL is best addressed with a multipronged strategy that detects and tackles barriers at each level
of the value chain, as well as individual limits and institutional context. Individual farmers can
take use of a variety of low-cost and cost-effective technology initiatives. However, there are a
number of material and behavioral barriers to adoption, including a lack of expertise and
information about such technology, credit limits, and farmers choosing current spending above
future revenue. According to Daminger et al., (2017) Interventions should be created with both
material and behavioral limits in mind. Furthermore, some technologies and interventions may be
more cost-effective at scale or when employed collectively rather than individually by individual
farmers; reaching such scale or coordination requires deliberate collaboration and investment by
public and/or private entities. The private sector has a lot of room to invest in making value chains
more efficient, especially when manufacturing is heavily concentrated, so that businesses can
profit from their investments. Policymakers should support such initiatives by the private sector.
However, for crops cultivated by a large number of geographically scattered farmers, where the
incentives for private sector investment in value chains are lower, the public sector will need to
take active leadership. In addition, investments outside of the agri-food industry, such as
transportation infrastructure, rural electrification, and the development of rural financial markets,
are critical for lowering PHL and bringing broader socio-economic benefits. According to Sugri
et al., (2021), in order to reduce existing food waste, both government and private sector
partnerships are required to speed the development of postharvest technology centers. He went on
to say that the current IFJ policy and government subsidy on agricultural inputs could be expanded

11
to cover large-scale production of postharvest infrastructure like PICS bags, implements, and low-
cost hermitic metal silos to accommodate harvest surpluses of both small and large-scale
producers.

5.0 Developing synergies to mitigate PHL

Many studies warn against focusing too much on a single or few policies in order to attain long-
term food security. Developing crop production innovations, according to Nkegbe et al., (2017),
may not be sufficiently profitable in food security efforts if other aspects of productivity
development are disregarded. Access to mechanization, finance, extension service, markets and
fair pricing, private sector engagement, proper postharvest technology, and functional policies are
just a few of the productivity improvement add-ons. For example, a lack of storage capacity for
extra farm products may increase post-harvest losses and diminish profitability, making
agricultural investment less profitable (Nkegbe et al., 2017). A comparable research in Ghana that
looked at the size, relative rewards, and economic feasibility of five different agricultural
interventions is worth sharing (Osei et al., 2020) . The measures will play a significant role in
boosting Ghana's agricultural growth as well as providing a springboard for the country's
industrialisation goals. Fertilizer subsidies (4.4), enhanced seed subsidies (3.6), hybrid maize (2.3),
increased mechanization (2.8), establishing grain warehouses (1.8), and renovating irrigation
schemes(1.5) all had good benefit cost ratios, according to the study. The study also stated that
despite the fact that individual interventions yielded favorable results, the nature of agriculture
indicates that complementarities might yield returns that are much higher than the returns of
individual policies.

Another study by (Sugri et al., 2021) offered a comprehensive overview of Ghana's postharvest
losses, knowledge gaps, and some strategies for reducing PHL. Declining agricultural yields,
significant postharvest losses, climate change, population growth, and now the Covid-19
challenges could worsen the study area's vulnerable food insecurity. As a result, deploying
sustainable interventions to reduce PHL will be crucial to attaining the United Nations Sustainable
Development Goals (UN-SDG 2), which aim to eliminate hunger, increase food security and
nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture. High PHL, without a doubt, pose a serious risk to

12
producers, governments, and the environment, since economic resources would have been used in
the production process. However, developments in postharvest technology have made loss
reduction considerably simpler in recent decades if stakeholders take the appropriate steps. Sugri
et al., (2021) further stated that the loss pattern matched most of the available data on PHL in
Ghana. In addition, striking parallels exist regarding extent, causes, and resource constraints
involved in eliminating PHL accross SSA. Such stark parallels, he said, give a crucial signal as to
what policy and technological innovations are needed to address the socioeconomic situations in
these countries. Investment in cold chain pack houses remains the long-term option for perishable
fruits, vegetables, root and tuber crops, particularly in urban markets where retail prices are
substantially higher to compensate for investment. Although the development and maintenance of
community, zonal, and district grain storage warehouses has been encouraged in several
interventions across Ghana, many prior projects have failed. Currently, the overarching
postharvest intervention in grain storage appears to be a component of the Investing for Food and
Jobs (IFJ) policy tagline ("one district, one warehouse"). Many warehouses, such as those built
and/or operated by the Warehouse Receipt System (WRS), Agricultural Development and Value
Chain Enhancement, and Millennium Development Authority Agribusiness Centres, have not been
well patronized by farmers due to a lack of trust and complex socio-cultural factors. The practice
is changing, with the creation of big warehouses owned by enterprising farmers and publicprivate
partnerships that function as profit-driven Postharvest Service Centers. To minimize existing food
waste, both government and private sector collaborations are necessary to speed the development
of postharvest technology centers. The existing IFJ policy and government subsidy on agricultural
inputs might be expanded to include large-scale production of postharvest infrastructure such as
PICS bags, implements, and low-cost hermitic metal silos to accommodate harvest surpluses from
both small and large-scale producers.

Vertical coordination across the value chain is also crucial, as targeting a single node may merely
shift losses from one node to the next, erasing any incentives for new technologies and practices
to be adopted. The simultaneous activation of the essential actors is thus required to reduce PHL.
Reduced perishable product loss at harvest, for example, is of little use to farmers if they can't
bring their harvests to market swiftly. Smallholders must also be able to achieve specified quality
and safety criteria in order to reach high-value downstream markets that place a premium on crop
quality preservation. This requires awareness of the quality standards in question and how to meet

13
them, as well as access to the technologies needed to do so. (Sibomana et al., 2016); (Affognon et
al., 2015) stated that linkages with buyers can help farmers become more aware of and access
technologies, while group coordination can help farmers become more aware of and access
technologies. Redirecting losses to lower-end food markets or non-food industries like feed or bio-
energy can also help to reduce the overall economic value and amount of natural resources wasted.
For more effective PHL management, it is critical to identify and create such alternatives
(Affognon et al., 2015)

Reduced post-harvest loss requires coordination within and across stages of the value chain. Many
post-harvest technologies are only cost-effective at scales larger than the average smallholder
farmer's. Farmer organizations and other institutions that collect product from smallholders can
thus play a vital role in improving postharvest management by allowing farmers access to
technologies (such as storage, packing, and transportation) that would otherwise be unavailable.

Contract farming in SSA enhances farmers' income and minimizes post-harvest losses, according
to a report by Deloitte and the Rockefeller Foundation, especially when applied to the value chains
of high-value, high-margin products like fruits and vegetables (Deloitte, 2015). These value chains
provide attractive incentives for off-takers to make the considerable capital investment required.
Because they must adhere to strict process and product quality requirements imposed by their
buyers, large agricultural businesses engaged in contract farming typically operate collection
centers for the organized aggregation of produce and ensure appropriate handling, storage, and
transportation practices. The majority of the time, these types of agreements are made for crops
that will be exported. Replicating this concept for domestic markets could reduce PHL while also
raising farmer income and increasing the availability of nutritious food for domestic
consumers (Deloitte, 2015)

Where the private sector lacks the capacity or incentives to invest in PHL reduction, public sector
and non-profit actors can help coordinate value chain participants and capitalize on existing private
incentives. Coca-Cola and the Gates Foundation's investment in Kenya's mango value chain is an
example of a private-non-profit partnership to reduce PHL. Coca-Cola wanted to expand its
acquisition of Kenyan mangoes to achieve local sourcing requirements as part of its corporate
social responsibility aims. The company achieved this by investing in various levels of the mango
value chain, with partial finance provided by the Gates Foundation. Recipes and marketing training

14
were provided to a local processor, as well as technical assistance to meet Coca Cola's strict quality
and food safety standards. Farmers were 13trained by an NGO on how to improve yields and
reduce losses during and shortly after harvest, while ties to traders were made easier by forming
farmer cooperatives to aggregate production. According to the Rockefeller Foundation, the
intervention cut post-harvest losses by nearly half while increasing production by a factor of two.
However, losses continue to be a problem, with post-intervention losses reaching 30% of
production (Foundation, 2015). The development of high-quality transportation infrastructure and
electricity is a vital role for the public sector in reducing post-harvest losses. Good roads reduce
post-harvest loss directly by reducing the time it takes to get to markets and reducing damage while
in transit. Access to energy lowers the cost of cold storage, allowing farmers to take advantage of
this important technology. Furthermore, high-quality infrastructure may boost private investment
in additional technologies for reducing post-harvest losses.

Finally, in PHL research, gender is frequently disregarded. Women, who play significant roles in
post-harvest management, often lack the capacity, knowledge, and means to access and employ
technology and services, causing post-harvest systems to underperform. This is mostly due to long-
standing gender inequities that are both costly and inefficient. (Rosegrant et al, 2015). Efforts to
minimize disparities should be institutionalized by both public and private actors.

6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

1. Transportation infrastructure, rural electricity, and the development of rural financial
markets are examples of investments outside of the agri-food industry that can lower PHL
while also offering broader socio-economic benefits. When contemplating such
investments, all of these advantages should be considered.
2. Ghana should learn from regional accomplishments and establish conducive conditions for
collaboration across the corporate, nonprofit, and state sectors. such as the partnership
between Coca-Cola and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in Kenya's mango value
chain.
3. Reduced PHL will need public sector leadership for crops cultivated by many,
geographically scattered farmers.

15
4. Rather of focusing on losses at a single step, efforts to solve PHL must cover the full value
chain.
5. Some technologies and interventions are only cost-effective at scale or when employed
collectively rather than by individual farmers; obtaining such scale or coordination
necessitates active collaboration and investment by public and/or private entities.
6. The private sector should be encouraged to invest in improving value chains, especially
where production is heavily concentrated, so that enterprises may profit from their
investments.
7. There are a variety of low-cost and cost-effective postharvest solutions available to avoid
PHL. However, there are a number of material and behavioral barriers to adoption,
including a lack of expertise and information about such technology, credit limits, and
farmers choosing current spending above future revenue. Interventions should be created
with both material and behavioral limits in mind.
8. In developing countries, food losses are consistently higher at the producer level; this is a
critical node where interventions are required.
9. To obtain credible information on food loss, specific and precise data gathering procedures
are necessary; standard survey methodologies tend to underestimate the level of loss.
10. Improved extension services to teach farmers about pest control and harvesting practices,
as well as financial services to boost farmers' resilience to rainfall shocks, are two
approaches to resolving these concerns.
11. Horticulture is a key sub-sector of Ghana's agricultural economy, with significant
development potential due to a strong export market and rising local demand. Given the
severity of PHL in horticultural crops, horticulture is predicted to reap significant benefits
from PHL prevention.

16
7.0 Reference

Adejumo, O., Victor Okoruwa, Abass, V. A., Salman, K. (2020) Post-harvest technology change
in cassava processing: a choice paradigm, Scientific African 7 e00276,
doi:10.1016/j.sciaf.2020.e00276.

Affognon H., Mutungi C., P. Sanginga and C. Borgme, (2015). "Unpacking postharvest losses in
Sub-Saharan Africa: a meta-analysis," World Development, vol. 66, pp. 44-68,.

Alidu, A. F., Ali, E. B., and Aminu H., (2016). Determinants of Post-Harvest Losses among
Tomato Farmers in TheNavrongo Municipality in The Upper East Region. Journal of
Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare, 6(12), 14-20.

Ansah, I. G. K., & Tetteh, B. K. D. (2016). Determinants of Yam postharvest management in the
Zabzugu district of Northern Ghana. Advances in Agriculture, 2016, 1–9.
doi:10.1155/2016/9274017

Ansah, I. G. K., Tetteh, B. K. D., & Donkoh, S. A. (2017).Determinants and income effect of
yam postharvest loss management: Evidence from the Zabzugu district of Northern
Ghana. Food Security,9, 611–620. doi:10.1007/s12571-017-0675-1
changein cassava processing: a choice paradigm, Scientific African 7
e00276,doi:10.1016/j.sciaf.2020.e00276.

Arah, I. K., Ahorbo, G. K., Anku, E. K., Kumah, E. K. & Amaglo, H. (2016). Postharvest
Handling Practices and Treatment Methods for Tomato Handlers in Developing
Countries:A Mini Review. Advances in Agriculture, vol. 2016, pp. 1-8, Hindawi
Publishing Corporation

Composite Budget. (2016). Composite budget for the Zabzugu district assembly for the 2016
fiscal year.Zabzugu: Author

Daminger, A., Datta, S. and Guichon, D., (2016). Reducing post-harvest loss–A behavioral
approach. Ideas42. org.

Deloitte, (2015) "Reducing Food Loss Along African Agricultural Value Chains,"

Essien, E., Addo, A, Dzisi, KA. (2018) Determining the efficiency of the government of Ghana’s
network of grain storage facilities, West African J. Appl. Ecol. 26 (SI) 234–241.

FAO. (2015). Country fact sheet on food and agriculture policy trends. Ghana: Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome.
17
Foundation T. R., (2015) "Reducing Post‐ Harvest Loss through a Market‐ led Approach,"

Hoffman V. and Ridolfi, C. (2017) “Post-harvest Losses in Kenya: Focus on Fruits and
Vegetables.” Draft.

IFPRI : International Food Policy Research Institute (2018) Returns to investment in reducing
postharvest food losses and increasing agricultural productivity growth |. Available at:
https://www.ifpri.org/publication/returns-investment-reducing-postharvest-food-losses-
and-increasing-agricultural (Accessed: 17 February 2022).

MoFA. (2020) Investing for Food and Jobs (IFJ): An Agenda for Transforming Ghana’s
Agriculture (2018-2021). P.30,

Nkegbe, P.K., Abu, B.M. and Issahaku, H., (2017). Food security in the Savannah Accelerated
Development Authority Zone of Ghana: an ordered probit with household hunger scale
approach. Agriculture & Food Security, 6(1), pp.1-11.

Osei, RD., Asem, F., Yaw Okyere, CY. Appiah-Kubi, JW. Onumah, J., Yaw Ofori-Appiah, Y.,
Wong, B. (2020) in: Cost-Benefit Analysis of Prioritising Agriculture Growth in
Ghana,Copenhagen Consensus Center, Ghana Priorities, p. 66.

Post-Harvest Loss: The African Union Commission’s Post-Harvest Management Strategy

African Union Commission - Department for Rural Economy and Agriculture (AUC-
DREA) and African Union Development Agency – NEPAD.
https://au.int/en/pressreleases/20190917/2nd-post-harvest-congress-opens-emphasis-
increased funding-and-stakeholder

Rosegrant, M. W. Magalhaes, E. Valmonte-Santos R. A. and Mason-D'Croz, D. (2015) "Returns

to investment in reducing postharvest food losses and increasing agricultural productivity
growth," Food security and Nutrition Assessment Paper, Copenhagen,.

Ridolfi, C. and Hoffman V., 2017. “Post-harvest Losses in Kenya: Focus on Fruits and
Vegetables.” Draft.

Sawicka B. (2019). Postharvest losses of agricultural produce. Sustainable development.

Available at: https://.doi:10.1007/978-3-319-69626-3_40-1

18
Sibanda S, Workneh, TS (2020). Performance of Indirect Air Cooling Combined with Direct
Evaporative Cooling for Fresh Produce. Heliyon Journal. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03286

Sugri I, Abubakari M, Bidzakin JK, Yeboah OA. (2019) Integrated Postharvest Practices to
Reduce Losses in Maize Storage for Smallholders. In: Advances and Trends in
Agricultural Sciences Vol. 2 Chapter 4, pp.54-62. Editor: Rad M.R.N. ISBN: 978-93-
89562-14-9, doi:10.9734/bpi/atias/v2.

Sesi Technologies (2018-2021) Causes of Post-harvest Losses in Grains - Available at:

https://sesitechnologies.com/causes-of-post-harvest-losses-in-grains/ (Accessed: 17
February 2022).

World Bank, (2022) Is Post-Harvest Loss Significant in Sub-Saharan Africa? Available at:
https://www.worldbank.org/en/programs/africa-myths-and-facts/publication/is-post-
harvest-loss-significant-in-sub-saharan-africa (Accessed: 10.35am Thursday).

19