Download - Maize

Strategic Initiative 6. Integrated post‐harvest management to improve
maize food security and safety
Value proposition
Improve the food security and safety, health, and marketing options of some 6 million smallholders in 15
countries of Africa, Asia, and Latin America by reducing post‐harvest losses and mycotoxin
contamination in maize‐derived foods.
Estimated impact 2020 2030
Potential food security impact Approx. 180 million poor people, in countries where maize
contributes on average 30% of total calories and protein.
Smallholder families potentially 2 million 6 million
gaining from this initiative
Other benefits
Reduced losses in storage, increased income generation, and
reduced health risks/burden through foods free of mycotoxins and
insect pest wastes.
Reduction of post‐harvest losses (%) 20 25
Value of saved grain USD 200 million USD 650 million
Justification
General background
Safe storage of maize at the farm level is crucial, as it directly impacts on poverty alleviation, food and
income security, and prosperity for smallholder farmers. Without appropriate grain storage
technologies, farmers are forced to sell maize when prices are low to avoid post‐harvest losses (PHLs)
from storage pests and diseases. They cannot add value to maximize gains from their harvest, nor use
their harvest as collateral to access credit. Ultimately their food security is undermined.
Food security and safe storage at the farmer level go hand‐in‐hand. As well as providing food security for
times of scarcity, effective grain storage is an inflation‐proof savings bank; grain can be cashed as
needed or used directly as a medium of exchange (i.e. in payment for work such as field clearing and
weeding). Stored grain is also needed for farm‐level enterprises such as poultry production, beer
brewing, and cooking foods for sale. Appropriate low‐cost storage technologies and high‐yielding maize
varieties resistant to storage pests and diseases must be made readily available to farmers, so they can
safely store and maintain quality of their produce.
PHLs result from infection by microorganisms and infestation by insects and rodents. They can be
quantitative or physical, resulting in weight loss of the product. They can also be qualitative—that is,
reflecting changes in appearance, taste and texture, or in nutritional and economic value. Most
importantly, post‐harvest damage affects food safety, harming the health, wellbeing, and productivity of
consumers and increasing societal health costs. PHLs also result in lost market opportunities and
resources (waste of land, labour, inputs, and soil fertility). Therefore, reducing losses during and after
harvest can significantly contribute to food security and safety.
Storage insect pests, mainly the maize weevil (Sitophilus zeamais), larger grain borer (LGB—
Prostephanus truncatus), angoumois grain moth (Sitotroga cereallela) and the lesser grain weevil
(Sitophilus oryzae), cause an estimated 20–30% loss of maize, with consequent impact on food security
and income generation. Ear and kernel rots of maize, caused by a variety of fungi, are prevalent in
warm, humid, tropical and subtropical maize growing environments. About 56% of area under maize in
125