1) The document discusses food loss and waste (FLW) hotspots and interventions to reduce FLW. It analyzes FLW and associated greenhouse gas emissions globally and in Africa. 2) Direct measurements of FLW are important for understanding root causes and assessing intervention impacts, as self-reported estimates can differ substantially from measured losses. 3) Major conclusions are that FLW accounts for 25% of food production and 20-25% of food-related greenhouse gas emissions; reducing FLW could significantly lower emissions, though interventions may induce additional emissions. More measurement data is needed to accurately identify hotspots and customize interventions.

1. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
Post-harvest food loss reduction interventions
- Effectiveness & trade-offs on GHG emissions
2nd AAPHCE, 19 September 2019
Jan Broeze, Heike Axmann, Xuezhen Guo

2. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
Key questions
● What are FLW hotspots?
● Which interventions can effectively solve FLW
problems?
● What effects may we expect?
● What are next steps?
-> Objective data are key

3. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
Adequate monitoring protocols are essential
Self-reported interviews vs. Direct Measurements
Choice of data collection
method may largely affect
the outcomes
37%
39%
25%
34%
8% 8%
9%
9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Benue Plateau Taraba average all
regions
Loss(in%)
Measured (% based on total paddy in field)
self-reported (% based on expected yield)

4. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
Background & ongoing research
● EU-FUSIONS – FLW definitions & monitoring harmonization
● EU-REFRESH – Interventions
● Yieldwise – measuring & protocols for measuring in Africa
● Consortium for Innovation in post-harvest loss
● And food waste reduction
● Part of CCAFS project
Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security

5. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
Presentation structure
1. Hotspots based on secondary data:
Basis for prioritizing product categories
2. Improving understanding of a FLW hotspot +
interventions
3.Major conclusions

6. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
Hotspots based on secondary data:
Basis for prioritizing product categories

7. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
Global FLW hotspots + associated GHG-e
Estimates based on secondary data
Data sources:
• Porter et al. (2016): FLW %, GHG emission factors
• FOASTAT (production volumes, trade)

8. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
(2013)

9. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
Data for Sub-Saharan Africa

10. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
Europe

11. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
Presentation structure
1. Hotspots based on secondary data:
Basis for prioritizing product categories
2. Improving understanding of a FLW hotspot +
interventions
3.Major conclusions

12. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
Improving understanding of a FLW hotspot
+ interventions
Collecting primary data:
- understanding of specific situation
- basis for understanding root causes
- assessing potential interventions’ impact
Work in progress
Impact analysis: Trade-offs
Food Loss & Waste – Greenhouse Gas Emissions

13. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
Example: Baskets vs. Crates (Tomato)
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
Baskets Crates
CO2impact(kgCO2perkgintactptoductatmarket)
Comparison GHG impact for tomato supplied in crates
vs. baskets
Agricultural production Transport fuels
Impact of losses in transport
emissions due to crates
Agro-Chain Greenhouse
gas Emissions (ACGE)
calculator will be made
available on
https://ccafs.cgiar.org/

14. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Bovine meat, 7C Bovine meat, 4C Cut lettuce, 7C Cut lettuce, 4C
GHGemissions(kgCO2-eq/kgproduct)
primary production PH activities and collection transp.
primary processing and packaging transport
DC storage and transport to retail outlet retail
Loss and Waste
Examples: lowering storage temperature
22
22.5
23
23.5
24
24.5
25
25.5
Bovine meat, 7C Bovine meat, 4C
GHGemissions(kgCO2-eq/kgproduct)
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.55
Cut lettuce, 7C Cut lettuce, 4C
GHGemissions(kgCO2-eq/kgproduct)

15. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
1. Hotspot modelling: food loss and waste in different stages of the food chain, per food product aggregated
per country and global region
2. Quantifying GHG emissions: direct and indirect effects of FLW are measured and impacts of crop and
postharvest operations are calculated
3. Best intervention: a loss-reducing measure will be identified and customized
1-3. Tunnels opportunities to enable quick scoping of opportunities and customization of interventions
Collaboration to reduce your FLW & GHGE

16. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
Presentation structure
1. Hotspots based on secondary data:
Basis for prioritizing product categories
2. Improving understanding of a FLW hotspot +
interventions
3.Major conclusions

17. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
Major conclusions from hotspot analysis
• Food Loss and Waste induce significant Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
• Hotspots for FLW and FLW-allocated GHG emissions are not always
equal.
• Hotspot analysis highlights hotspot product categories and hotspot
activities along the chain
• FLW account for 25% of total food production and 20-25% of the
total GHG emissions related to food production and international
food transport.
• Since most FLW reducing interventions induce additional GHG
emissions, the GHG reduction potential is smaller than 20-25%.
• We do have high-level data, but these are averages; we need more
data based on adequate measurements!!

18. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
Major conclusions from this studies (2)
Africa:
● high loss volumes of staple food crops like roots and
tubers which are crucial for Africans food security,
● migration: middle class moving to the cities
+ change of diets: milk and bovine meat
● This may lead to increase of African’s GHGE
● Current systems my lead to high FLW-induced GHG
emissions – interventions are essential

19. Wageningen
Food & Biobased
Research
Thank you!
jan.broeze@wur.nl
heike.axmann@wur.nl