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

1. ETHIOPIAN DEVELOPMENT
RESEARCH INSTITUTE
How big are post-harvest losses in
Ethiopia? The case of teff
Bart Minten, Ermias Engida and Seneshaw Tamru
IFPRI ESSP
14th International Conference on the Ethiopian Economy,
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
(July 21 – 23, 2016)
1

2. 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. 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
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
Teff Barley Wheat Maize Sorghum Finger milletOats/'Aja' Rice
USDBillion
Market surplus Other use

4. 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. 5
Data and methodology
- 60 kebeles surveyed; 1,200 farmers interviewed
- Follow teff value chain from there to Addis’ retailers

6. • 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. 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
0
10
20
30
40
50
Direct
FT
RT
UT
FT-RT
FT-UT
RT-UT
RT-RT
UT-UT
FT-RT-RT
FT-RT-UT
FT-UT-UT
RT-RT-UT
RT-UT-UT
FT-RT-UT-UT
FT-RT-RT-UT
FT-RT-RT-UT-UT
RT-RT-UT-UT
0 node1 node 2 nodes 3 nodes > 3 nodes
percent

8. 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

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

11. 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. 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. 13
Post-harvest losses estimates
(d) The whole value chain
% losses in the value chain
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
Low transport
loss farm
High transport
loss farm
Low transport
loss farm
High transport
loss farm
No storage Storage
%
Threshing farmer Storage farmer Storage wholesaler
Storage retailer Transport farmer Transport wholesaler
Transport retailer

14. 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?
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Teff
Barley
Wheat
Maize
Sorghum
Pulses
Fruits
Roots
%

15. 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?
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0
Maize
Sorghum
Teff
Wheat
Banana
Onion
Orange
Potato
Tomato

16. 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.