A large share of food produced for human consumption is lost before it ever reaches the market. Yet in many countries, the scale and location of these losses remain poorly understood. Without clear measurement, efforts to reduce them risk falling short.
Every year, at least 1.3 billion tonnes of food is lost or wasted – close to one-third of what is produced for human consumption. The true figure is even higher, particularly if farm-level losses are fully taken into account. The economic and environmental consequences are far-reaching: around 4.5 billion people in the world earn a living from agri-food production and trade. Losses diminish smallholder farmers’ incomes and can reduce national export earnings. Food loss and waste also affect the environment, wasting natural resources such as water, energy and land, while also producing an estimated 8 to 10 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs). This underscores the scale of the opportunity: OECD analysis shows that halving food loss and waste by 2030 could reduce agricultural GHG emissions by 4% and lift 137 million people out of hunger by 2030.
Where losses occur – and why they matter
Food loss and waste is understood as the decrease in quantity or quality of food along the food supply chain. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), food loss occurs from harvest, slaughter, or catch through to the stage just before retail, whereas food waste occurs at retail and consumption stages.
Food waste has generally attracted greater policy attention; however, in developing countries food loss remains a pressing issue, diminishing the supply of edible products in contexts where many already face food and nutritional insecurity.
As pressures on agrifood systems intensify, driven by climate change, population growth, geopolitical tensions, and market volatility, cutting food loss and waste along the supply chain is increasingly recognised as critical to strengthening food security. Reducing food loss and waste can boost overall availability, enhance supply stability in the face of shocks, improve the livelihoods of smallholder farmers, and support environmental sustainability. Together, these benefits contribute to more resilient and equitable food systems.
Unlike in high-income countries, where food waste is more commonly concentrated at the consumption level, low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) experience high food loss during harvesting, post-harvest handling, storage, and transportation. Africa and Central and Southern Asia are most affected, particularly for perishable products such as fruits, vegetables, roots, and tubers: in these regions, losses can reach up to 50% at various stages of the value chain.
The primary drivers are inadequate infrastructure, absent or underdeveloped food loss and waste policy and regulatory frameworks, limited access to technology, and weak market linkages (i.e. structural issues). Climate-related factors further exacerbate these losses, with high temperatures, humidity, and increased frequency of extreme weather events (from droughts to floods) accelerating contamination, spoilage and damage during storage and transport. Compounding these challenges, weak institutional bases often limit investments in value chain development and infrastructure.
Addressing these systemic constraints is essential not only to reduce food loss but also to improve the overall efficiency, inclusiveness, and resilience of food systems in developing countries.
The measurement gap
But before any action can be taken, countries need to be able to measure the amount of food losses accurately in order to understand the true scale of the problem and identify which specific areas require priority interventions.
In developing countries, this challenge is compounded by limited data systems, fragmented supply chains and other resource constraints. Much of the food system operates informally, which makes it harder to monitor where and how losses occur. Applying existing international frameworks requires funding, technical expertise, and consistent data collection tools. In addition, seasonal variability and low policy prioritization further complicate accurate reporting. Together, these factors make measuring food loss a broad, systemic challenge. For instance, an OECD survey of 42 national ministries found that food loss and waste strategies relied on soft measures, with most countries having national food loss and waste reduction targets, but not necessarily quantifiable targets, with defined baselines and delivery target dates.
Reducing food loss requires combining measurement, policy action and evaluation, infrastructure investment, and capacity building. Measurement is the essential starting point, because countries cannot effectively manage what they do not quantify. Priority areas include harvest and post-harvest losses across value chains, particularly for staples, depending on the country context, where losses are often significant yet largely remain unmeasured. For example, Thailand stands out among Southeast Asian countries for its strategy to measure food loss more systematically. According to national reporting, the Action Plan for Food Loss Reduction in the Production Chain 2023–2027 sets a baseline of 3.79 % food loss in 2023 and a target of up to 3.3 % in 2027. To meet this ambitious target, key constraints must be addressed, including inadequate technology in the production chain and inappropriate packaging methods and storage techniques.
Having a food loss strategy is especially important in LMICs, where early action prevention can generate important gains for food security, livelihoods, and income. However, the scale and nature of the challenge can only be understood when reliable data are available.
Among the new approaches aimed at making measurement more accessible, the Global Farm Loss Tool (from the World Wildlife Fund and its partners) offers a standardised methodology to assess losses directly in the field. In simple terms, unharvested crops are collected and classified into three categories: edible and marketable, edible but non-marketable, and non-edible and non-marketable. Once weighed, these categories reveal how much of the output could have been used. For farmers and agribusinesses, the process makes losses visible, and therefore actionable. What was previously overlooked becomes measurable, highlighting not only the scale of the issue but also its economic implications.
For example, if a rice farmer annually harvests 1,500 tonnes and 10 % of this – crop that would normally be left behind in the fields – is instead recovered and marketed, that represents 150 tonnes of edible rice. At 400 dollars per tonne, this would equal 60,000 dollars in potential value, showing how even modest loss rates can translate into significant economic and food security impacts. This is not only a matter of increasing farmers’ income, but of strengthening food security and making better use of agri-cultural products already produced.
Integrating food loss reduction into broader systems
To accelerate measurement, policymakers should strengthen data collection, establish clear targets, and create incentives for loss reduction at each stage of the value chain. Governments can support this through appropriate regulations, national strategies and practical incentives for farmers, traders and processors.
In LMICs, these measures are most effective when they respond to local realities, since no country, region, or production system is the same. Food loss and waste strategies are thus strongest when they are integrated into broader national food security, climate, and rural development frameworks.
In addition, farmers and other actors along the value chain need training on planting, harvesting, handling, storage, and transport practices, as well as simple tools and guidance to monitor losses and identify areas for improvement. Training should be practical, locally adapted, and linked to extension services so that knowledge can be applied consistently. In this context, the OECD supports measurement and capacity building efforts in advanced and emerging economies through initiatives like the State of the Environment, the OECD Food Chain Analysis Network and food system resilience reviews.
Together, these efforts can deliver multiple benefits: more stable and accessible supplies, higher incomes for producers, and reduced pressure on land, water and energy resources. Amid increasing climate stress, population growth, geopolitical instability and market volatility, reducing food loss is not a secondary concern. It is a practical and often underused pathway to more resilient and inclusive agri-food systems.
And it begins with making the problem visible.