ETHIOPIAN DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE

How big are post-harvest losses in Ethiopia? The case of teff

Bart Minten, Ermias Engida and Seneshaw TamruIFPRI ESSP

14th International Conference on the Ethiopian Economy, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia (July 21 – 23, 2016)

1

2

Introduction- Wastages and post-harvest losses increasingly being

debated. Important because of food security considerations and environmental implications

- However, wide variation in estimates in post-harvest losses and wastages

- Problem with current estimates: 1/ Based on opinions, not surveys 2/ Biased towards perishables (over-state losses)3/ Not focused on products making up bulk of calories- We look with detailed primary surveys at losses at

different levels in the value chain of teff

3

Background - Most important cash crop in the country - Teff grown by 6.6 million farmers (43%)- 22% of all cultivated area by private smallholders

Production value and use of cereals in 2013/14

Teff Barley Wheat Maize Sorghum Finger millet Oats/'Aja' Rice0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

Market surplus Other use

USD

Billi

on

Background

• The most commercialized crop; 30% of the production sold (CSA 2014)

• Estimated to be 750 mill USD in 2013/14, ½ of total commercial surplus of cereal sector.

• Consumed more by urban households (81kg/per capita/year)

• Characterized by high income elasticities.

5

Data and methodology

- 60 kebeles surveyed; 1,200 farmers interviewed- Follow teff value chain from there to Addis’ retailers

• Stratified random samples at each level:1. Upstream: 1,200 farmers in five major teff production zones. These five zones represent 38% of national teff area and 42% of the commercial surplus.

2. Midstream: 200 rural wholesalers and 75 urban wholesalers

3. Downstream: 282 urban retail outlets (83% mills; 10% cereal shops; 7% consumer cooperatives)

Data and methodology

7

Structure of the value chain - Asked all stakeholders where they obtained teff- In 85% of the cases, 2 or less nodes between urban

retailers and farmers Prevalence value chain structures between retailers and farmers

Dire

ct FT RT UTFT

-RT

FT-U

TRT

-UT

RT-R

TU

T-UT

FT-R

T-RT

FT-R

T-U

TFT

-UT-

UT

RT-R

T-UT

RT-U

T-UT

FT-R

T-U

T-U

TFT

-RT-

RT-U

TFT

-RT-

RT-U

T-UT

RT-R

T-UT

-UT

0 node

1 node 2 nodes 3 nodes > 3 nodes

0153045

per

cent

8

Post-harvest losses estimates

(a) Post-harvest losses at the farm level

- The most prevalent structure of the value chain is used- Data collected at each level in the value chain how

much was lost in storage and during transaction - Simply add up the stated PHL at each level

- All farmers use traditional methods for threshing- 97% using threshing floor made from dry cow dung- 2.5% using threshing sticks

- Loss at threshing is estimated to be 3.1% of the total teff harvest for those reported loss and 1.8% for all the teff farmers.

Losses during threshing

10

Post-harvest losses estimates(b) Losses during storage

- On-farm storage is very important in Ethiopia- Share lost : 1/ at farm level: 0.2%; 2/ by

wholesalers/brokers: 0.3%; 3/ by retailers: 0.2% Losses during storage by farmers

Unit Mean MedianShare of farmers reporting losses % 11.6For those reporting losses- quantity lost qtl 0.24 0.15- teff harvest qtl 16.54 12.00- share lost % 2.0 1.4For all farmers- quantity lost qtl 0.03 0.00- teff harvest qtl 11.00 8.00- share lost % 0.2 0.0

Post-harvest losses estimates(b) Losses during storage

- Only 11 % of wholesalers stored

- All retailers are assumed to store teff

- 8 % of wholesalers and 25 % retailers reported loss

- For all reported storage, 0.3 and 0.2 % was lost from wholesalers and retailers respectively

Losses during storage by wholesalers & retailers

12

Post-harvest losses estimates(c) Losses during transportation

- No information at the farm level (assume two scenarios, i.e. 0% and 0.25% of production)

- Share lost : 1/ by wholesalers/brokers: 0.1%; 2/ by retailers: 0.1%

13

Post-harvest losses estimates(d) The whole value chain

% losses in the value chain

Low transport loss farm

High transport loss farm

Low transport loss farm

High transport loss farm

No storage Storage

00.5

11.5

22.5

33.5

Threshing farmer Storage farmer Storage wholesalerStorage retailer Transport farmer Transport wholesalerTransport retailer

%

14

- Teff losses at farm lower than other cereals, but not much lower

Self-reported post-harvest losses for farmers

Is teff different to other crops?

TeffBarleyWheatMaize

SorghumPulsesFruitsRoots

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5%

15

- Losses higher at the retail level (based on survey of 1,200 urban retailers)

Self-reported losses for urban retailers (%)

Is teff different to other crops?

MaizeSorghum

TeffWheat

BananaOnion

OrangePotato

Tomato

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0

16

Conclusions

- Find that (self-reported) post-harvest losses in teff value chain vary between 2.2 and 3.3 percent of quantity produced [caveat: physical losses, not quality losses; no pre-harvest losses]

- Teff exceptional for staple crops but maybe not that much?

- Implications: Reduction of post-harvest losses entail costs; have to weighed against potential benefits; therefore, getting evidence right on extent of PHL is important.