Vegetable Losses and Waste Along the Supply Chain and Farmers’ Willingness to Pay for Recycling: Towards to Green Supply Chain

Year 2024, Volume: 21 Issue: 1, 148 - 165, 30.01.2024

Selime Canan Ebru Nur Uluışık

https://doi.org/10.33462/jotaf.1251261

Abstract

The aims of the study were (i) to determine amount of the vegetable losses and waste generated along the supply chain by production system such as under greenhouse and conventional system in open area, (ii) to explore the amount of willingness to pay for recycling vegetable losses and waste by composting and its determinants, (iii) to reveal the economic feasibility of composting vegetable losses and waste at district level and (iv) to calculate the individual and social cost of vegetable losses and waste along the supply chain by production system in Turkey. The farm level research data were collected from 81 conventional farms and 45 greenhouse farms in the Samsun province of Turkey by using questionnaires. In addition, 50 traders and 17 greengrocers, 13 supermarkets and 9 local marketers were interviewed. When quantifying vegetable losses and waste in mass, vegetable supply chain was examined in five different stages such as production, postharvest handling and storage, processing and packaging, distribution and retail. Contingent valuation method was used to asses willingness to pay of farmers, traders/merchants in wholesale market hall, greengrocer and super markets for composting of vegetable losses and waste. The economic feasibility of recycling of waste was revealed by using the net present value, cost-benefit analysis and internal rate of return. According to the research findings, the loss rates of vegetables produced per hectare in the greenhouse at the farm, wholesaler and retailer levels were respectively 2.2%; 1% and 20.3%. The loss rates of vegetables produced per hectare in the conventional farm at the farm, wholesaler and retailer levels were 3%, respectively; 0.9% and 16.8%. The individual loss of producers in the examined area was 0.67 thousand US $/year. The rates of individual loss of farms to annual agricultural income were 1.7% and 2.4% in greenhouse and conventional farms, respectively. Other individual losses in wholesales, retailer and consumers were 0.25, 4.89 and 1.02 thousand US $, respectively. The total social loss in the examined area was 6.83 thousand US $. When an assessment was made at the national level, the social loss was about 4% of the annual agricultural income. According to the research results, it has been concluded that depending on the amount of losses, the compost production facility to be established in the district can economically recycle vegetable losses and wastes.

Keywords

Vegetable losses and waste, Vegetable production system, Vegetable Supply chain, willingness to pay, feasibility of waste recycling

Supporting Institution

TAGEM

Thanks

In line with the goal of transforming biomass obtained from agricultural residues into energy within the framework of combating climate change, the "Sustainable Biomass Use Project to Support the Development of the Turkish Economy on the Path to Green Growth" was carried out in cooperation with the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, General Directorate of Agricultural Research and Policies (TAGEM) and the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) and financed by the Global Environment Facility (GEF). Within the framework of the project, this research was partially supported in order to support the development of biomass in Turkey. Therefore, we would like to extend our best wishes to TAGEM for support.

Tedarik Zinciri Boyunca Sebze Kayıpları ve Atıkları, Geri Dönüşüm İçin Çiftçinin Ödeme İstekliliği: Yeşil Tedarik Zincirine Doğru

Abstract

Çalışmanın amaçları (i) örtü altı ve konvansiyonel sistem gibi açık alanda üretim sistemi ile tedarik zinciri boyunca oluşan bitkisel kayıpların ve atıkların miktarını belirlemek, (ii) bitkisel kayıplar ve atıkların geri dönüşümü için çiftçinin ödeme istekliliği miktarını araştırmak, (iii) sebze kayıplarını ve atıklarını kompostlaştırmanın bölge düzeyinde ekonomik fizibilitesini ortaya koymak ve (iv) Türkiye'de tedarik zinciri boyunca sebze kayıpları ve atıklarının bireysel ve sosyal maliyetini üretim sistemine göre hesaplamaktır. İşletme düzeyindeki araştırma verileri, Samsun ilindeki 81 konvansiyonel işletmeden ve 45 sera işletmesinden anketler kullanılarak toplanmıştır. Ayrıca 50 tüccar ve 17 manav, 13 süpermarket ve 9 yerel pazarlamacı ile görüşme yapılmıştır. Sebze kayıplarını ve atıklarını kütlesel olarak ölçerken sebze tedarik zinciri; üretim, hasat sonrası işleme ve depolama, paketleme, dağıtım ve perakende satış olmak üzere beş farklı aşamada incelenmiştir. Çiftçilerin, tüccarların/tüccarların hallerde, manavlarda ve süper marketlerde sebze kayıpları ve atıklarının kompostlanması için ödeme yapma istekliliğini değerlendirmek için koşullu değerleme yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Atıkların geri dönüştürülmesinin ekonomik fizibilitesi net bugünkü değer, maliyet-fayda analizi ve iç karlılık oranı kullanılarak ortaya koyulmuştur. Araştırma bulgularına göre serada üretilen sebzelerin hektar başına işletme, toptancı ve perakendeci düzeyindeki kayıp oranları sırasıyla %2,2; %1 ve %20,3’dür. Konvansiyonel işletmelerde hektar başına üretilen sebzelerin işletme, toptancı ve perakendeci düzeyindeki kayıp oranları sırasıyla %3; %0,9 ve %16,8’dir. Araştırma alanındaki üreticilerin bireysel kaybı ise 0,67 bin ABD Doları/yıl olarak gerçekleşmiştir. İşletmelerin bireysel kaybının yıllık tarımsal gelire oranı seralarda %1,7, konvansiyonel çiftliklerde ise %2,4’dür. Diğer bireysel kayıplar toptancı, perakendeci ve tüketicide sırasıyla 0,25, 4,89 ve 1,02 bin ABD Dolarıdır. Araştırma alanındaki toplam sosyal kayıp ise 6,83 bin ABD Dolarıdır. Ulusal düzeyde bir değerlendirme yapıldığında sosyal kaybın yıllık tarımsal gelirin yüzde 4'ü civarında olduğu görülmektedir. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre ilçede kurulacak kompost üretim tesisinin kayıp miktarına bağlı olarak bitkisel kayıp ve atıkların ekonomik olarak geri dönüştürülebileceği sonucuna varılmıştır.According to the research findings, the loss rates of vegetables produced per hectare in the greenhouse at the farm, wholesaler and retailer levels were respectively 2.2%; 1% and 20.3%. The loss rates of vegetables produced per hectare in the conventional farm at the farm, wholesaler and retailer levels were 3%, respectively; 0.9% and 16.8%. The individual loss of producers in the examined area was 0.67 thousand US $/year. The rates of individual loss of farms to annual agricultural income were 1.7% and 2.4% in greenhouse and conventional farms, respectively. Other individual losses in wholesales, retailer and consumers were 0.25, 4.89 and 1.02 thousand US $, respectively. The total social loss in the examined area was 6.83 thousand US $. When an assessment was made at the national level, the social loss was about 4% of the annual agricultural income. According to the research results, it has been concluded that depending on the amount of losses, the compost production facility to be established in the district can economically recycle vegetable losses and wastes.

Keywords

Sebze kayıpları ve atıkları, Sebze üretim sistemi, Sebze tedarik zinciri, Ödeme istekliliği, Atık geri dönüşüm fizibilitesi

References

• Abass, A., Ndunguru, G., Mamiro, P., Alenkhe, B., Mlingi, N. and Bekunda, M. (2014). Post-harvest food losses in a maize-based farming system of semi-arid savannah area of Tanzania. Journal of Stored Products Research, 57: 49–57.
• Abdullahi, A. N., Abubakar, M. I., Ijaekayi, V. and Nahantsi, S. (2023). Households’ and Farmers’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Municipal Solid Waste Management in Metropolitan Area of Sokoto State, Nigeria.
• Adepoju, A. O. (2014). Post-harvest losses and welfare of tomato farmers in Ogbomosho, Osun state, Nigeria. Journal of Stored Products and Postharvest Research, 5(2): 8-13.
• Akgüngör, S., Miran, B., Abay, C., Olhan, E. anad Nergis, K. N. (1999). Estimation of the potential demand of consumers for environmentally friendly agricultural products in Istanbul, Ankara and Izmir provinces. Agricultural Economics and Policy Development Institute, Project Report 1999-3, Ankara.
• Alabouıd, A. and Bayhan, E. (2022). Determination of the loss ratio on some melon varieties from the melon fly, Myiopardalis pardalina (Bigot, 1891) (Diptera: Tephritidae). Journal of Tekirdag Agricultural Faculty, 19(2): 404-411.
• Anonymus, (2021). https://www.tarimorman.gov.tr/Belgeler/Mevzuat/Talimatlar/ToprakAraziSiniflamasiStandartlariTeknik TalimativeIlgiliMevzuat_yeni.pdf (Accessed Date: 06.09.2021).
• Anonymus (2021a). https://amasyaobm.ogm.gov.tr/SamsunOIM/Lists/varlik/AllItems.aspx (Accessed Date: 07.09.2021).
• Anonymus, (2021b). https://samsun.tarimorman.gov.tr/Belgeler/Yayinlar/Faaliyet_raporlarimiz/2020%20y%C4%B1l%C4%B1%20faaliye t%20 raporu.pdf (Accessed: 07.09.2021).
• Arah, I. K., Amaglo, H., Kumah, E. K. and Ofori, H. (2015b). Preharvest and postharvest factors affecting the quality and shelf life of harvested tomatoes: a mini review. International Journal of Agronomy, 2015: 478041.
• Arah, I. K., Kumah, E. K., Anku, E. K. and Amaglo, H. (2015a). An Overview of post-harvest losses in tomato production in africa: causes and possible prevention strategies. Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare, 5(16): 78-88.
• Bantayehu, M., Alemayehu, M., Abera, M. and Bizuayehu, S. (2018). Determinants and extent of pre- and postharvest losses of fruits in northwestern Ethiopia. International Journal of Sustainable Agricultural Research, 5(4): 68-75.
• Baran, M. F., Ülger, P. and Kayişoğlu, B. (2012). The effect of the table used in canola harvest on harvest losses. Journal of Tekirdag Agricultural Faculty, 9(3): 35-44.
• Basavaraja, H., Mahajanashetti, S. B. and Udagatti, N. C. (2007). Economic analysis of post-harvest losses in food grains in india: a case study of Karnataka. Agricultural Economics Research Review, 20: 117-126.
• Bayramoğlu, Z., Karakayacı, Z., Ağıran, K., Ağızan, S. and Bozdemir, M. (2020). A research on the determination of tomato marketing channels and market margin. T.R. Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Research-Development Support Program Project Final Report.
• Begum, E. A., Hossain, M. I. and Papanagiotou, E. (2012). Economic analysis of post-harvest losses in food grains for strengthening food security in Northern Regions of Bangladesh. International Journal of Applied Research in Business Administration & Economics 1(3): 56– 65.
• Bhattarai, R. M., Rijal, R. K. and Mishra, P. (2013). Postharvest Losses in mandarin orange: a case study of Dhankuta District of Nepal. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 8: 763-767.
• Buzby, J. C., Wells, H. F. and Hyman, J. (2014). The estimated amount, value, and calories of postharvest food losses at the retail and consumer levels in the United States. Economic Information Bulletin Number 121, Washington, D. C.
• Campoy-Muñoz, P., Cardenete, M. A. and Delgado, M, C. (2017). Economic impact assessment of food waste reduction on European countries through social accounting matrices. Resource Conserv. Recycle. 122: 202–9.
• Cappellini, R. A. and Ceponis, M. J. (1984). Postharvest losses in fresh fruits and vegetables. In: H.E. Moline (ed.), Postharvest pathology of fruits and vegetables: postharvest losses in perishable crops. University California Bulletin 1914: 24-30.
• Chegere, M. J. (2018). Post-harvest losses reduction by small-scale maize farmers: The role of handling practices. Food Policy, 77(C): 103-115.
• Çiftçi, R. and Demirbaş, N. (2020). Factors affecting losses in fruit and vegetable production: The case of İzmir province. Mediterranean Agricultural Sciences, 33(1): 85-91.
• Danso, G., Fialor, S. C. and Drechsel, P. (2002). Farmers' perception and willingness to pay for urban waste compost in Ghana. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, 56: 231-241.
• Demirbaş, N. (2018). Evaluation of Food Waste-Prevention Actions in The World and in Turkey. VIII. IBANESS Congress Series – Plovdiv / Bulgaria.
• Demirbaş, N. and Shadow, E. (2018). The Utilization of Food Waste in Feed and Fertilizer Production in Turkey: Needs and Challenges. Proceedings of the IX International Agricultural Symposium. 04 – 07 October, P.1562-1566. Bosnia and Herzegovina.
• Demirbaş, N., Niyaz, Ö. C. and Apaydın, Y. M. (2017). An Evaluation on problems within food supply chain in Turkey in terms of food losses and waste. International Balkan and Near Eastern Social Sciences Conference Series (IBANESS). 5-6 March, P.830-835, Edirne, Turkey.
• Dogan, A. (2014). A New storage technology: palistore (palliflex) storagesystem for horticultural crops. Fruit Science, 1(2): 1-6.
• Elik, A., Yanık, D. K., Istanbullu, Y., Guzelsoy, N. A., Yavuz, A. and Gögüs, F. (2019). Strategies to reduce post-harvest losses for fruits and vegetables. International Journal of Scientific and Technological Research, 5(3): 29-39.
• Erden, F. F., Dellal, I. and Bayramoğlu, Z. (2017). Food losses and waste in fruits and vegetable agri-food chain in Turkey. Viii International Agricultural Symposium. 04 – 08 October, P.2547-2552. Jahorina, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
• FAO (1981). Food Loss Prevention in Perishable Crops. FAO Agricultural Services Bulletin 43, Rome, 72.
• FAO (2011). SAVE FOOD: Global Initiative on Food Loss and Waste Reduction. URL: SAVE FOOD: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction | Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (fao.org) (Accessed Date: 07.09.2021)
• Gajanana, T. M., Murthy, D. S. and Sudha, M. (2011). Post-harvest losses in fruits and vegetables in South India – A review of concepts and quantification of losses. Indian Food Packer, 65(6): 178-187.
• Gangwar, L. S., Singh, D. and Singh, D. B. (2007). Estimation of post-harvest losses in Kinnow Mandarin in Punjab using a modified formula. Agricultural Economics Research Review, 20: 315-331.
• Gunders, D. (2012). Wasted: how America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill. Retrieved April 16, 2019, from NRDC. https://www.nrdc.org/resources/wasted-how-america-losing-40-percent-its-food-farm-fork-landfill (Accessed: 10.01.2022)
• Gustavsson, J., Cedeberg, C., Sonesson, U., Otterdijk, R. V. and Meybeck, A. (2011). Global Food Losses and Food Waste: Extend, Causes and Prevention, FAO, Rome.
• Hanemann, W. M. (1984). Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66: 332-341.
• Harris, K. L. and Lindblad, C. J. (1978). Post-Harvest Grain Loss Assessment Methods. Minnesota, America Association of Cereal Chemist, P 193.
• Hazarika, C. (2006). Post-harvest loss and food security — A study on fruits and vegetables in Assam. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 61(3): 418-419.
• Hazarika, C. (2008). Extent of post-harvest losses of ginger in Assam – A micro level analysis. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 63(3): 370-371.
• HLPE (The High-Level Panel of Experts) (2014). Food Losses and Waste in The Context of Sustainable Food Systems; A Report by The High-Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of The Committee on World Food Security, Rome.
• Hodge, R. J., Buzby, J. C. and Bennett, B. (2011). Postharvest losses and waste in developed and less developed countries: opportunities to improve resource use. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 149: 37-45.
• Jeger, M. J. and Plumbley, R. A. (1988). Post-harvest losses caused by anthracnose (colletotrichum gloeosporioides) of tropical fruits and vegetables. Biodeterioration, 7: 642–646.
• Jha, S. N., Vishwakarma, R. K., Ahmad, T., Rai, A. and Dixit, A. K. (2016). Assessment of quantitative harvest and post-harvest losses of major crops/commodities in India. ICAR-All India Coordinated Research Project on Post-Harvest Technology ICAR-CIPHET, PO: PAU, Ludhiana-141004, India.
• Johansson, J. K., Douglas, S. P. and Nonaka, I. (1985). Assessing the impact of country of origin on product evaluations: a new methodological perspective. Journal of Marketing Research, 22: 388-96.
• John, A. (2014). Rodent outbreaks and rice pre-harvest losses in Southeast Asia. Food Security. 6 :249–260. Kalidas, K. and Akila, K. (2014). Micro level investigation of marketing and post-harvest losses of tomato in Coimbartore District of Tamilnadu. Journal of Stored Products and Postharvest Research, 5: 1-7.
• Kannan, E., Kumar, P., Vıshnu, K. and Abraham, H. (2013). Assessment of pre- and post-harvest losses of rice and red gram in Karnataka. Agricultural Development and Rural Transformation Centre Institute for Social and Economic Change Bangalore- 560 072. Research Report: IX/ADRTC/153.
• Khan, M., Rahım, T., Naeem, M., Shah, M. K., Bakhtıar, Y. and Tahır, M. (2008). Post-Harvest economic losses in peach production in District Swat. Sarhad Jorunal of Agriculture, 24(4): 705-712.
• Kiaya, V. (2014). Post-Harvest Losses and Strategies to Reduce Them. Technical Paper on Post-Harvest Losses. Technical paper Scientific & Technical Department, Action Contre la Faim.
• Kirigia, D., Kasili, R. and Mibus, H. (2017). African leafy vegetables pre-harvest and post-harvest constrains and technologies for losses reduction along the field to consumer chain. African Journal of Horticultural Science, 12: 51-60.
• Krijger, I. M., Gerrit, G., Steven, R. B., Peter, W. G., Groot, K., Rokeya, B. S. and Bastiaan, G. M. (2020). Efficacy of management and monitoring methods to prevent post-harvest losses caused by Rodents. Animals, 10(9): 2-19.
• Ku, K. M., Choi, J. H., Kushad, M. M., Jeffery, E. H. and Juvik, J. A. (2013). Pre-harvest methyl jasmonate treatment enhances cauliflower chemoprotective attributes without a loss in postharvest quality. Plant Foods for Human Nutrition, 68(2): 113–117.
• Kumar, D. and Kalita, P. (2017). Reducing postharvest losses during storage of grain crops to strengthen food security in developing countries. Foods, 6: 7.
• Kumari, A. and Pankaj, P. P. (2015). Post-Harvest Losses of Agricultural Products: Management and Future Challenges in India. Recent Trends in Postharvest Technology and Management (pp.141-153). Edition: First. Chapter: Chapter 12. Publisher: Manglam Publishers, New Delhi, India.
• Lipinski, B., Hanson, C., Lomax, J., Kitinoja, L., Waite, R. and Searchinger, T. (2013). Reducing Food Loss and Waste. Working Paper, Installment 2 of Creating a Sustainable Food Future. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.
• Mitchell, R. C. and Carson, R. T. (1989). Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Resources for The Future, Washington D. C.
• Murthy, D., Gajanana, T. M., Sudha, M. and Dakshinamoorthy, V. (2009). Marketing and post-harvest losses in fruits: its implications on availability and economy. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 64(2): 34-43.
• Parfitt, J., Mark, B. and Sarah, M. (2010). Food waste within food supply chains: quantification and potential for change to 2050. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 365(1554): 3065-3081.
• PHP (2019). Economic Analysis Report of Post-Harvest Losses for Some Fruits. Innovative Approaches to Reduce Post-Harvest Losses in The Food Chain. http://postharvestproject.com/uploads/outputs/d3270dfd-9d15-4b65-a2b9-9d13567be7e9.PDF (Accessed Date: 21.09.2021)
• Prusky, D. (2011). Reduction of the incidence of postharvest quality losses, and future prospects. Food Security, 3: 463-474.
• Rahiel, H. A., Zenebe, A. K., Leake, G. and Gebremedhin, B. W. (2018). Assessment of production potential and post-harvest losses of fruits and vegetables in northern region of Ethiopia. Agriculture & Food Security, 7: 1-13.
• Rehman, A., Malik, A. U., Ali, H., Alam M. W. and Sarfraz, B. (2015). Preharvest factors influencing the postharvest disease development and mango fruit quality. Journal of Environmental & Agricultural Sciences, 3: 42-47.
• ReFED (2016). A Roadmap to Reduce U.S. Food Waste by 20 Percent. Rep. 1-96, Berkeley, C. A. Salihoğlu, G., Salihoğlu, N. K., Uçaroğlu, S. and Banar, M. (2018). Food loss and waste management in Turkey. Bioresource Technology, 248: 88-99.
• Sessi, A. and Özdemir, G. (2007). Post-harvest product losses in horticultural products and their causes, Agricultural Mechanization 24th National Congress,5-6 September, P. 205-211. Kahramanmaraş, Turkey.
• Sharmaa, G. and Singh, S. P. (2011). Economic analysis of post-harvest losses in marketing of vegetables in Uttarakhand. Agricultural Economics Research Review, 24: 309-315.
• Stenmark, Å., Jensen, C., Quested, T. and Moates, G. (2016). Estimates of European Food Waste Levels. EU FUSIONS, IVL-Rep. C 186, 80, Stockholm, Sweden.
• Stuart, T. (2009). Waste – Uncovering the Global Food Scandal. Penguin Books, London.
• Tadesse, B., Bakala, F. and Mariam, L. W. (2018). Assessment of postharvest loss along potato value chain: the case of Sheka Zone, Southwest Ethiopia. Agriculture and Food Security, 7: 2-14.
• Tatlıdil, F. F., Dellal, İ. and Bayramoğlu, Z. (2013). Food Losses and Waste in Turkey, FAO.
• TUIK (2020). Vegetable Production Statistics. https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/medas/?kn=92&locale=tr (Accessed Date: 20.03.2021).
• Verma, M., Plaisier, C., van Wagenberg, C. P. A. and Achterbosch, T. A. (2019). Systems approach to food loss and solutions: understanding practices, causes, and indicators. Sustainability, 11(3): 579.
• Winpenny, J. (1991). Values for the Environment: A Guide to Economic Appraisal. London: HMSO for the Overseas Development Institute.
• World Resources (1998). Environmental Change and Human Health. URL: World Resources 1998-99 | World Resources Institute (wri.org) (Accessed Date: 30.01.2022).
• Yamane, T. (1967). Statistics: an introductory analysis, 2nd edition, New York: Harper and Row.
• Yelboğa, M. N. M., Sayın, C. and Metin, F. D. (2023). The current issues about waste prevention and willingness to pay: A case study of greenhouse production in Turkey. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 32(1):.419-426.