5/20/2010

Project Title:
QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE LOSS
ASSESSMENT OF SELECTED HIGH VALUE
FOOD CROPS (Mango, Banana, Calamansi,
Carrots, Cabbage, Onion)

Project Implementers:
Bureau of Postharvest Research and Extension-
Department of Agriculture (BPRE-DA)
Rosendo Rapusas, PhD. ------ Project Leader

Postharvest and Seed Sciences, CSC, College of

Agriculture, U.P. Los Banos
Edralina P. Serrano, PhD. -------Co-Project Leader

Funding Agency: DA-World Bank

Project Duration: Three Years (2006-2008)
Rationale:
– PH losses limits food supply to an increasing
population (UN Assembly, 1970)
– Food losses = less food available to consumers;
less income to growers (Banks and Nichols, 1989)
– Loss estimates are commodity-, location-, and
situation-specific; also technology and practice
dependent
– Difficulty in identifying the actual steps in the
production- marketing-consumption chain where
the loss is incurred + causes of losses
– Generation of loss estimates very expensive

1
 5/20/2010

-Magnitude of PH losses in F&V (Phil):

28-42% (Pantastico, 1979)

- Available PH loss data for F&V limited;

causes of losses not specific, may be
based on perception, not reliable, thus,
if used by:

--policy makers: formulation of policies

on food loss reduction may have limited
impact
--researchers: development of loss
reduction technologies, measures and
interventions may be inappropriate,
inefficient, wasteful, with less impact.

General Objectives: To generate baseline data on

PH losses on selected food crops with the
ultimate objective of providing the basis for
formulating sound and tenable loss reduction
programs.

Specific Objectives:
1. Assess the magnitude and nature of losses at
major steps in the handling chain of selected
high value crops;
2. Identify and analyze the factors causing or
influencing these losses;
3. Identify the constraints and problems that
affect the distribution and marketing of these
crops;

2
 5/20/2010

Specific Objectives:

4. Determine the corresponding monetary values

of the losses;
5. Recommend potential interventions that would
reduce the losses; and,
6. Develop computer-based simulation models for
the prediction of PH losses in selected crops.

Scope of the Project:

Crops: mango, banana, calamansi, onion,

cabbage, carrot
Sites: major production areas; major
handling routes; demand centers

Methodology
Conceptual Framework
• Based on systems approach:

“a system is made up of interrelated and

independent elements, each performing a
function that contributes to the operation of
the whole; it acknowledges that not all parts
of the system contribute to the stability of
the whole system (Sullivan and Thompson,
1991); meanwhile, the system’s boundary
changes with change in focus (FAO, 1990)”.

3
 5/20/2010

Conceptual Framework
INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

Volume of production

Practices of farmers
Effect on supply
•Postharvest
Quantitative
•Marketing
and qualitative
assessment of
Practices of traders/handlers
postharvest
• Postharvest
losses
• Marketing

Others Factors
Effects on income
• Consumer/institutional
requirements farmer
• Technical trader
• Infrastructure
Effects on price
Climatic & other
environmental conditions

Technological intervention and policy recommendations; Development

of computer-based simulation models for loss measurements

Conceptual Framework
• The system: the farming and trading community

- The subsystems: stakeholders who are closely

interlinked and interactive

- Indirect actors: consumers or instution buying

the produce, government who formulates policies
and regulations with which other actors must
comply

- Supporting actors: handlers, laborers, service

providers

• Investigated the change in outputs ( volume of F&V in

the market and the corresponding prices)
• The actual losses as basis for:
- the identification of technological interventions
- policy recommendations

4
 5/20/2010

Loss Assessment Methodologies

• Loss defined (FAO, 1981)
“any change in the availability, edibility,
wholesomeness or quality of the food that
prevent it from being consumed by people”.
• In this project, field assessment of:
-quantitative loss = unmarketable; weight loss
-qualitative loss = downgrading of quality
resulting in lower price
• Assessment done by a multidisciplinary team:
- postharvest physiologist/technologist
- socio-economist
- postharvest engineer
- plant pathologist - simulation specialist

Loss Assessment Methodologies

Project components
I. Overall Assessment of the Commodity Movement
System – use of rapid rural appraisal technique, key informant
interviews and field visits; secondary data; standardized
questionnaires

Mango – Davao del Sur. Iloilo, Pangasinan, Zambales

Banana – Davao del Sur, Agusan del Sur, Oriental Mindoro

Calamansi – Oriental Mindoro, Compostela Valley,

Davao del Sur, Zambuanga Sibugay, Lanao Norte,
Nueva Ecija

Vegetables (carrot, cabbage, onion)- Benguet, Bukidnon, Kapatagan

in Davao del Sur, Dalaguete in Cebu, Nueva Vizcaya,
Nueva Ecija

5
 5/20/2010

II. Actual Loss Measurement – field evaluation of actual

losses under existing commodity handling
system to major markets; and, hand in hand with
identified technological intervention; use of
standardized quality evaluation techniques.

Mango: Pangasinan to Manila - use of alum to reduce latex

injury
Davao del Sur to Manila- hot water treatment
(HWT) to control PH diseases
Banana: Agusan del Sur to Manila – use of ethylene
adsorbent to minimize premature ripening during
transit
Calamansi: Zamboanga Sibugay to Manila – use of
modified atmosphere (MA) technology using
polyethylene bag

Onion: Nueva Ecija to Manila – use of cold

storage

Carrot and cabbage: Benguet to Manila –

washing of carrots; use of
refrigerated transport, plastic crate for
packaging

III. Total Loss Estimation/Computer Simulation

and Modelling – simulation model (loss
calculator spreadsheets) used to mimic the dynamics of
the PH-marketing system, thus, can predict and
estimate losses by extrapolation of total loss/system
loss from actual loss data gathered; other applications
of the spreadsheets include valuation of losses (value
chain analysis) and partial budget analysis.

6
 5/20/2010

RESULT HIGHLIGHTS: Mango

• From RRA:
- Perceived losses
11-22% (Pangasinan) 5-20% (Iloilo)
1-2% (Zambales) 1-9% (Davao)
- Problems/Causes:
 high rejects (preharvest damage, latex injury)
 shortage of skilled labor in harvesting and sorting
 high cost chemicals used to control pest and
diseases
 High cost of toll fees and kotong
 lack of exporters/market outlets
 Pilferage prior to harvesting and during transport

From Actual Field Loss Assessment

Quantitative Losses (%) from farm to market (Davao del Sur to Manila
by ship) during peak and lean months.

Handling Route/(Player) Without With HWT as

Intervention Intervention
Farm (Farmer) 11/11 11/11
CDO Port (Shipper) 14.72/13.27 10/10
Manila Port (Consignee) 14.72/13.27 10/10
Manila (Wholesaler/Retailer) 3.06/3.83 3.97/3.97
Manial (Retailer) 1.62/2.99 2.11/2.66
Total system 30.40/28.10 24.70/25.13
Percent point losses can not simply be added to represent % total system loss
since the volume decreases as the commodity passes from one step to the next.

7
 5/20/2010

From Actual Field Loss Assessment

Quantitative Losses (%) from farm to market (Pangasinan to Manila by
non-refrigerated truck) during peak months.

Handling Route/(Player) Without With Alum as

Intervention Intervention
Farm (Farmer) 11.71 7.95
Pangasinan 0 0
(Assembler/wholesaler)
Manila (Wholesaler/Retailer) 15.40 5.94
Manila (Retailer) 3.74 2.97

Total system 26.46 14.65

Percent point losses can not simply be added to represent % total systen loss
since the volume decreases as the commodity passes from one step to the next.

• Major causes of unmarketable rejects:

- harvesting-related (latex stains/injury, physical
damage due to dropping fruits onto the ground)
- postharvest diseases (anthracnose, stem-end
rot)
• Cumulative effect of temperature (above
27oC)over time = 821.5 degree-hours highly
correlated with weight loss but the quality of
the mango appeared to be least affected by
this amount of degree-hrs even during
transit.
• Fungal load was highest at the retailers’ end.
• Alum reduced latex burn by 57% at the retailers’
level; quality deterioration and weight loss was
reduced by 11 and 2.45%, respectively.

8
 5/20/2010

• Davao mangoes – high incidence of

anthracnose at the retail level; HWT delayed
(by 8 days) the manifestation of the symptoms
• Value chain analysis:
- with interventions (alum/HWT) mango farmers
of Davao and retailers of mangoes from Davao
and Pangasinan earned more than the other
players, with retailers having more profit.
• Partial budget analysis using alum --- a 48%
decrease in system loss, with additional income
of PhP47,481 per hectare.

RESULT HIGHLIGHTS: Banana

• From RRA:
- Perceived losses
3-30% from Agusan del Sur because of bulk
loading of bananas compared to crated
bananas from Davao del Sur.
- Problems/Causes:
 high rejects (premature ripening, compression
damage, cuts, peeling off, disease, rotting) due to:
- long distance, high temperature transport
conditions
- variability in maturity and harvest dates
- poor handling techniques

9
 5/20/2010

From Actual Field Loss Assessment

Quantitative Losses (%) of banana from farm to market (Agusan del
Sur del Sur to Manila) by sea shipment in bulk / crated in closed container
van and in open truck.

Handling Route/(Player) Without Intervention W/ Ethylene

scrubber as
Intervention
Farm (Farmer) 0.54/0.00/0.54 0.54
Nasipit Port (Shipper) 0.65/0.00/0.65 0.65
Manila Port (Consignee) 6.52/0.00/3.57 10.77
Manila (Wholesaler/Retailer) 4.47/2.98/9.53 4.13
Manila (Retailer) 5.22/3.75/6.62 1.12
Total system 16.06/6.62/20.09 15.94
Percent point losses can not simply be added to represent % total system loss
since the volume decreases as the commodity passes from one step to the next.

• Major causes of unmarketable rejects:

- premature ripening during transit; postharvest
diseases; compression
• Cumulative effect of temperature (above 27oC) over time
during collection and shipment -highly correlated with
premature ripening.
• Ethylene scrubber: reduced weight loss (2.65 to 0.26%)
and proportion of ripe fruits (70 to 16%) after sea
shipment.
• Ethylene scrubber intervention: reduced losses (5.22%
down to 1.12%) at the retail level; additional income of
P0.53/kg was realized; net benefit = P87,066.
• Value chain analysis : retailers get the highest income @
P7.23/kg without intervention and P7.76/kg with
intervention.
• Among the market players, the consignee gets the
highest per capita income if the volume traded is
considered.

10
 5/20/2010

RESULT HIGHLIGHTS: Calamansi

• From RRA:
- Perceived losses
1-30% from 5 major producing areas
- Problems/Causes:
 Rejects in the form of yellowing, tuklap , and
oleocellosis (skin browning due to rupture of oil
glands) due to:
- long distance, high temperature transport
conditions
- variability in maturity and size
- poor harvesting and handling techniques

From Actual Field Loss Assessment

Quantitative Losses (%) of calamansi from farm to market
(Zamboanga Sibugay to Manila) by sea shipment in crated in closed
container van with ice blocks.
Handling Route/(Player) Without With MAP as
Intervention Intervention
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 1 Trial 2
Farm (Farmer) 0.47 0.26 0.47 5.40
Manila (Wholesaler) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Manila (Retailer) 10.08 32.36 8.05 5.06
Total system* 10.50 32.54 8.48 10.19
*Percent point losses can not simply be added to represent % total system loss
since the volume decreases as the commodity passes from one step to the next.

11
 5/20/2010

• Major kinds and causes of rejects (10-32% using

traditional handling system):
- yellowing due to over maturity at harvest and
high temperature during long distance transit
- tuklap due to inappropriate harvesting method
and tool/device
- oleocellosis due to compression damage and
inappropriate packaging material

• Cumulative effect of temperature of 150 degree-hr:

calamansi most affected among crops tested;
positively correlated with weight loss and
yellowing

• MAP intervention reduced weight loss (from

7.8 to 0.5%) and unmarketable rejects
from an average of 21 to 9 %.

• Value chain analysis:

- without intervention, retailers incurred
the highest losses
- with intervention, these losses reduced
by half, retailers benefited most

12
 5/20/2010

• Sensitivity analysis:
- farm gate price high in March, thus,
farmer will profit more
- wholesaler and retailer never lose at any
prevailing market price
- with MAP, retailer gains more
• Partial budget analysis:
- use of MAP= additional benefit of P8,000 per
5,000 kg shipment or P1.61/kg; should be
used when price is high
• In the long run, farmers will benefit from MAP
as it will assure better price for maintaining
good quality produce.

RECOMMENDATIONS
• Establishment of postharvest facilities: collection
centers, packinghouses, precoolers and low cost
evaporative coolers; hot water tanks, low cost storage
systems, mechanical dryers

• R& D related:

– Development of and optimization of techniques (MAP,

use of ethylene adsorbent) to delay ripening or
yellowing in fruits
– Design and development of appropriate and efficient
containers/packaging containers and transport vans
– Establishment of appropriate temperature management
protocols during inter-island transport and long-term
storage
– Development or optimization of postharvest disease
control measures

13
 5/20/2010

RECOMMENDATIONS
• R & D related (con’t..)
- establishment of quality assurance program from
production to marketing

• Capability building of stakeholders on good

agricultural and handling practices (GAP/GHP),
technology application, marketing strategies,
accessing information

• Policy-related
- implementation and enforcement of grades and standards
even at the local level of marketing
- upgrading market information programs and timely
dissemination of market information

RECOMMENDATIONS
• Policy-related (con’t…)
- provide support in disseminating postharvest
technologies and their utilization in terms of
assistance, e.g, in acquiring/establishing the
facility or equipment
- adopt measures and policies to make efficient
the transport and marketing systems (increase
space allotment and landing priority for high
value crop[ produce, high value crop pass to
prevent road taxes or kutong

14
 5/20/2010

THANK YOU
Team Members from PSSD
Physiologists/ Postharvest Technologists
EB Esguerra
PA Nuevo
JU Agravante Postharvest Engineers
LA Artes KF Yaptenco
Socio-Economists EQ Amatorio
MV Maunahan
D Del Carmen
GD Masilungan

15