Prioritizing Development A Cost Benefit Analysis of the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals
Book contents
- Prioritizing Development
- Prioritizing Development
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Boxes
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Introduction
- Chapter 1 Benefits and Costs of Air Pollution Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 2 Targets for Biodiversity and Deforestation
- Chapter 3 Benefits and Costs of the Climate Change Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 4 Beyond Civil War
- Chapter 5 Data Revolution
- Chapter 6 Benefits and Costs of the Education Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 7 Benefits and Costs of the Energy Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 8 Benefits and Costs of the IFF Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 9 Benefits and Costs of the Trade Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 10 Benefits and Costs of the Health Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 11 Benefits and Costs of the Noncommunicable Disease Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 12 Benefits and Costs of the Women’s Health Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 13 Benefits and Costs of TB Control for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 14 Benefits and Costs of the Infant Mortality Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 15 Benefits and Costs of the HIV/AIDS Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 16 Benefits and Costs of the Malaria Targets for the Post-2015 Consensus Project
- Chapter 17 Benefits and Costs of Digital Technology
- Chapter 18 Returns to Investment in Reducing Postharvest Food Losses and Increasing Agricultural Productivity Growth
- Chapter 19 Benefits and Costs of the Gender Equality Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 20 Benefits and Costs of the Food and Nutrition Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 21 Benefits and Costs of the Population and Demography Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 22 Benefits and Costs of Two Science and Technology Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 23 Global Benefits and Costs of Achieving Universal Coverage of Basic Water and Sanitation Services as part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
- Chapter 24 Benefits and Costs of the Poverty Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 25 Good Governance and the Sustainable Development Goals
- Conclusion
- Index
- References
Chapter 18 - Returns to Investment in Reducing Postharvest Food Losses and Increasing Agricultural Productivity Growth
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 30 May 2018
Book contents
- Prioritizing Development
- Prioritizing Development
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Boxes
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Introduction
- Chapter 1 Benefits and Costs of Air Pollution Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 2 Targets for Biodiversity and Deforestation
- Chapter 3 Benefits and Costs of the Climate Change Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 4 Beyond Civil War
- Chapter 5 Data Revolution
- Chapter 6 Benefits and Costs of the Education Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 7 Benefits and Costs of the Energy Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 8 Benefits and Costs of the IFF Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 9 Benefits and Costs of the Trade Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 10 Benefits and Costs of the Health Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 11 Benefits and Costs of the Noncommunicable Disease Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 12 Benefits and Costs of the Women’s Health Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 13 Benefits and Costs of TB Control for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 14 Benefits and Costs of the Infant Mortality Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 15 Benefits and Costs of the HIV/AIDS Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 16 Benefits and Costs of the Malaria Targets for the Post-2015 Consensus Project
- Chapter 17 Benefits and Costs of Digital Technology
- Chapter 18 Returns to Investment in Reducing Postharvest Food Losses and Increasing Agricultural Productivity Growth
- Chapter 19 Benefits and Costs of the Gender Equality Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 20 Benefits and Costs of the Food and Nutrition Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 21 Benefits and Costs of the Population and Demography Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 22 Benefits and Costs of Two Science and Technology Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 23 Global Benefits and Costs of Achieving Universal Coverage of Basic Water and Sanitation Services as part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
- Chapter 24 Benefits and Costs of the Poverty Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda
- Chapter 25 Good Governance and the Sustainable Development Goals
- Conclusion
- Index
- References
Summary
The 2008-2011 food price spikes brought the issue of postharvest losses (PHL) back to the forefront of policy debate, and observers are again calling for a reduction in PHL as a tool to feed the expanding global population. Food losses due to improper postharvest handling, lack of appropriate infrastructure, and poor management techniques, have once again become a matter of serious concern. Food losses, defined as “any decrease in food mass throughout the edible food supply chain,” can occur in any point of the marketing stages–from production (e.g., crop damage, spillage), postharvest and processing stages (e.g., attacks from insect or microorganisms during storage), distribution, and retail sale until home consumption (e.g., spoilage, table waste) (Rosegrant et al. 2013). Kummu et al. (2012) suggest an additional 1 billion people could be fed if food crop losses were halved, which could potentially relieve some of the pressure on the significant increase in production that would be required. Achieving lower levels of food losses, however requires both investments in technologies that help prevent losses as well as in overall infrastructure. Understanding the magnitude of these investments and their impact is key to establish that a reduction in PHL has in fact an impact on food security.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Prioritizing DevelopmentA Cost Benefit Analysis of the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals, pp. 322 - 338Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2018
References
Aker, J. C. and Mbiti, I. M. 2010. Mobile Phones and Economic Development in Africa. Journal of Economic Perspectives 24: 207–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buzby, J. C. and Hyman, J.. 2012. Total and Per Capita Value of Food Loss in the United States. Food Policy 37: 561–70.Google Scholar
DAMF, Joseph Schulman Consulting and CANARAIL Consultants Inc. 2007. Estimation of Unit Costs of Rail Transportation in Canada. Final Report www.bv.transports.gouv.qc.ca/mono/0965332.pdf.Google Scholar
de Gorter, H. 2014. Evaluating the Zero Loss or Waste of Food Challenge and Its Practical Implications. Background draft paper prepared for the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.Google Scholar
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) 2011. Global Food Losses and Food Waste: Extent, Causes, and Prevention. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
Gitonga, Z. M., De Groote, H., Kassie, M., and Tefera, T.. 2013. Impact of Metal Silos on Households’ Maize Storage, Storage Losses and Food Security: An Application of a Propensity Score Matching. Food Policy 43: 44–55.Google Scholar
Gómez, M. I., Barrett, C. B., Buck, L. E., et al. 2011. Research Principles for Developing Country Food Value Chains. Science 332: 1154–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoddinott, J. F., Rosegrant, M. W., and Torero, M.. 2013. Hunger and Malnutrition. In Global Problems, Smart Solutions: Costs and Benefits, Chapter 6, edited by Lomborg, B.. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hodges, R. J., Buzby, J. C., and Bennett, B.. 2011. Postharvest Losses and Waste in Developed and Less Developed Countries: Opportunities to Improve Resource Use. Journal of Agricultural Science 149: 37–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Institution of Mechanical Engineers. 2013. Global Food: Waste Not, Want Not. Retrieved from www.imeche.org/knowledge/themes/environment/global-food.Google Scholar
Kader, A. A. 2005. Increasing Food Availability by Reducing Postharvest Losses of Fresh Produce. Proceedings of the 5th International Postharvest Symposium, edited by Mencarelli, F. and Tonutti, P.. Leuven, Belgium: International Society for Horticultural Science.Google Scholar
Kaminski, J. and Christiaensen, L.. 2014. Post-Harvest Loss in Sub-Saharan Africa – What Do Farmers Say? Policy Research Working Paper 6831. The World Bank, http://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/pdf/10.1596/1813–9450-6831.Google Scholar
Kitinoja, L. and AlHassan, H., 2012. Identification of Appropriate Postharvest Technologies for Improving Market Access and Incomes for Small Horticultural Farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Acta Horticulturae 934: 31–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kummu, M., de Moel, H., Porkka, M., Siebert, S., Varis, O., and Ward, P. J.. 2012. Lost Food, Wasted Resources: Global Food Supply Chain Losses and Their Impacts on Freshwater, Cropland, and Fertiliser Use. Science of the Total Environment 438: 477–89.Google Scholar
Lundqvist, J., de Fraiture, C. and Molden, D.. 2008. Saving Water: From Field to Fork – Curbing Losses and Wastage in the Food Chain. SIWI Policy Brief. SIWI.Google Scholar
Minten, B., Reardon, T., Singh, K. M., and Sutradhar, R.. 2014. The New and Changing Roles of Cold Storages in the Potato Supply Chain in Bihar. Economic and Political Weekly 49 (52): 98–108.Google Scholar
Papke, L. E., and Wooldridge, J. M.. 1996. Econometric Methods for Fractional Response Variables with an Application to 401(K) Plan Participation Rates. Journal of Applied Econometrics 11: 619–32. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.473.1598&rep=rep1&type=pdf.Google Scholar
Parfitt, J., Barthel, M., and Macnaughton, S.. 2010. Food Waste within Food Supply Chains: Quantification and Potential for Change to 2050. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Biological Sciences, 365.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, S, Mason d’Croz, D., Islam, S., et al. 2015. The International Model for Policy Analysis of Agricultural Commodities and Trade (IMPACT): Model description for version 3. IFPRI Discussion Paper 1483. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll2/id/129825.Google Scholar
Rosegrant, M. W., Tokgoz, S., Bhandary, P., and Msangi, S.. 2013. Looking ahead: Scenarios for the future of food. In 2012 Global Food Policy Report, Chapter 8, pp. 88–101. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.Google Scholar
Rosegrant, M. W. and the IMPACT Development Team. 2012. International Model for Policy Analysis of Agricultural Commodities and Trade (IMPACT): Model Description. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), www.ifpri.org/book-751/ourwork/program/impact-model.Google Scholar
Swaminathan, M. S. 2006. 2006–07: Year of agricultural renewal. 93 Indian Science Congress in Hyderabad, Public Lecture, January 4.Google Scholar
Tefera, T., Kanampiu, F., De Groote, H., et al. 2011. The Metal Silo: An Effective Grain Storage Technology for Reducing Post-Harvest Insect and Pathogen Losses in Maize While Improving Smallholder Farmers’ Food Security in Developing Countries. Crop Protection 30: 240–5.Google Scholar
World Bank 2011. Missing Food: The Case of Postharvest Grain Losses in Sub-Saharan Africa. Report 60371-AFR, 2011 http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTARD/Resources/MissingFoods10_web.pdf.Google Scholar
- 5
- Cited by