
Post-Harvest Issues: Rethinking Technology
for Value-Addition in Food Security and
Food Sovereignty in Zimbabwe
*Corresponding author: Gladys Mandisvika
Citation
Mandisvika G, Chirisa I, Bandauko E. Post-harvest issues: rethinking technology for value-addition in food security and food sovereignty in Zimbabwe. Adv Food Technol Nutr Sci Open J. 2015; SE(1): S29-S37.
Copyright
© 2015 Mandisvika G. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Research
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to identify a number of critical issues concerning and influencing food security in Zimbabwe. Embedded within this narrative is a critical concern for reducing food losses and enhancing value-addition. Special focus is put on the treatment of fresh produce, especially in rural areas- be it vegetables, fruits or grain. Preservation and safety of the product are important at both the household and market levels. This study used case studies from across rural and urban Zimbabwe to establish the pressing issues surrounding post-harvest management strategies. The study ascertained that Zimbabwe is naturally privileged with fertile soils which are suitable for agriculture, but food security is threatened after harvesting. The study produced an appreciation for the wide range of methods and structures, such as pole-earthed granaries and vegetable drying, that are used in Zimbabwe to gain food sovereignty. Nevertheless, it was established that these methods are not effective in reducing post-harvest losses, hence the need to introduce modern technologies that can supplement the traditional methods of reducing losses to enhance food security.
Keywords
Post-harvest; Food security; Food sovereignty; Value-addition; Food-losses.
Abbreviations
MDGs: Millennium Development Goals; UPA: Urban and Peri-urban Agriculture; FAO: Food and Agriculture Organisation.
Introduction
Approximately 80 percent of Zimbabwe’s total land area is made up of fertile agricultural land, yet it is quite ironic that Zimbabwe is struggling to feed itself despite its rich soils.1 The agricultural sector plays a key role in the overall development of the national economy. It is also the main source of food accessibility at the national level, and a prime source of food and income for most households.2 The Zimbabwean government and the private sector (e.g. Agribank) were in the past instrumental in providing capital and other inputs to farmers. Yet, current economic turmoil has affected the ability of these institutions to finance farmers. Agribank is reported to have received loan applications worth 29 million dollars, yet it could only allocate 15 million for onward lending.3 Hence, many farmers cannot invest in the new, advanced technology that is needed for the post-harvest handling of crops. Achieving food security, however, can be said to be based on the efforts and technology used to transport, store, process and valueadd to harvested crops. Crops can deteriorate and become unfit for sale or human consumption unless preserved, processed and stored under suitable conditions. Poor transport facilities can also result in spoilage and subsequent food-borne illnesses. The intent of this study was to identify critical post-harvest strategies that can enhance food security in Zimbabwe. Attention was given to post-harvest loss reduction strategies through marketing, storage, processing, technology and transportation as well as value-addition to the products. The paper is structured in four major sections. The first sections tackles the theoretical and analytical issues for food security and food sovereignty as well as issues surrounding post-harvest management strategies, such as transportation, storage and processing. The second section gives an analytical description of post-harvest issues that affect food security in Zimbabwe. This section is based on case studies from both rural and urban areas across the country. The third section discusses research results and matches them with theoretical issues to come up with recommended policy options. The final section concludes the paper.
Theoretical and Analytical Issues
This section provides an outline of the key concepts
that underpin this study. Key concepts such as food security,
food sovereignty, marketing, transportation, processing technology
and storage are discussed.
The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the
United Nations4 defines food security as a condition where all
people have physical, social and economic access to sufficient,
safe and nutritious food which meets their dietary needs and food
preferences for an active and healthy life at all times. Food security
is also defined as access by all people at all times to enough
food for an active, healthy life. The opposite of food security is
food insecurity, which is defined by Chirimuuta and Mapolisa1
as an economic and social state of limited and uncertain access
to adequate food at a household level. Food insecurity is broad in
scope and includes hunger, malnutrition and famine. Food security
comprises numerous components, such as food access, food
distribution, a stable food supply, and the use of food. Long-term
food security depends on food sovereignty, which emphasizes
those who produce food and care for the natural environment.5
Food sovereignty is an essential precondition for the existence
of food security.
Edelman6 defines food sovereignty as national food security,
which is derived from the local production of food. La
Via Campesina7 has defined food sovereignty as “the right of
each nation to maintain and develop its own capacity to produce
its basic foods, respecting cultural and productive diversity”.
Advocates for food sovereignty argue that local people
should secure control over natural productive resources, possess
a right to land, utilize and protect their indigenous knowledge
and cultural identity. These aspects of food sovereignty promote
food security by taking advantage of locally tapped riches and
technology in post-harvest management strategies. Food sovereignty
also helps to create local markets while offering income
security.8 It emerged from the Nyeleni Food Sovereignty Forum,
held in 2007, that the aim of food sovereignty is to guarantee
and protect people’s space, ability and right to define their own
models of food production, distribution and consumption, with
the objective being to advance local people’s nutritional status,
incomes, economies, ecologies and culture. Food sovereignty is
also believed to be a foundation for the promotion of democracy
and greater citizen participation. This at a larger scale respects
the voices of the poor and marginalized groups in society, which
are usually women and children.
Claeys8 laments that despite the fact that food sovereignty
has the potential to meet current and future human food
needs and ecological protection, two processes endanger it. The
first process is the globalization of world trade, which has created
an opportunity for a few transnational companies to gain a
monopoly over different food chain linkages. This undermines
the capacity of local people to be self-sufficient and achieve
self-determination. The second threat lies in the current modernist
development agenda, which is supported by the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs).8 Food sovereignty is hindered by
the first MDG, which aims at eradicating extreme poverty and
hunger and the third one which aims to promote gender equality
and empowerment of women. These two MDGs advocate for
the reduction of the number of people engaged in food production
by encouraging them to get jobs in the largely urban-based
manufacturing and service sectors. Yet, there is a pressing demand
for agricultural produce to enhance food security. There is
a need to facilitate the marketing of the produce so that it reaches
consumers inadequate quantities and of acceptable quality.
In general, marketing is a human activity that is directed
at satisfying needs and wants through an exchange process.
In agriculture, marketing refers to the process of providing agricultural
produce to consumers.9
Marketing is a broad concept
that includes features such as transportation, storage, packaging
and supply. Marketing ensures that there is efficient processing
and packaging of produce, preparation of marketing facilities
and storage, and the facilitation of transportation to the markets.
Growers can produce large quantities of good-quality harvest,
but if they do not have a reliable, swift, and equitable means of
getting such commodities to the consumer, losses will be extensive
and food insecurity is inevitable.10 The major problem that
affects the marketing of agricultural produce in Zimbabwe is the
lack of improvement in terms of facilities and sanitation in the
market stalls. Market places such as Mbare Musika in Harare
are overcrowded, unsanitary and short of adequate facilities for
loading, unloading and the storing of produce.11 Basically, the
first step after crop harvest in marketing is the processing of the
farm produce.
Crop processing is an essential step in converting harvested
agricultural products into consumable, valuable and saleable
products.12 Processing readies crops for storage, for preservation
for future consumption, and for immediate marketing.
Good crop processing and preservation methods minimize food
losses and keeps food safe for consumption and sale.13 However,
this also depends on good storage technologies. Technology
plays a very critical role in ensuring food security. Post-harvest
activities such as the harvesting itself, processing, packaging,
storage and sales all depend on adequate and advanced technologies.
14
However, the major challenge in developing countries
is that most of the tools are neither manufactured locally
nor imported in sufficient quantity to meet demand. In many
developing countries, some good facilities are out of order or
not functioning properly due to a lack of maintenance and the unavailability of spare parts. Advanced transport networks and
facilities, such as refrigerated vans, are also an essential component
of post-harvest technologies. In developing countries where
there is poor road infrastructure, production should be maintained
as close to the major population centres as possible to
minimize transportation costs.11 Crop storage technologies used
across Africa vary according to the scale of the operation or the
level of production.15 Food producers use both traditional and
modern methods and structures, for drying, temperature control
and atmospheric control. However, traditional methods such as
pole structures and woven baskets are now being refuted as being
inadequate in offering protection from insects.16 Developing
countries such as Nigeria have problems in accessing appropriate
storage technology, and this has resulted in a considerable
waste of agricultural output and, consequently, considerable
losses to its national economy.17 Zimbabwe has only one rainy
season from October to March, and food is grown during this
period. The food is expected to feed people until the next harvest
season. This implies that there is a strong need to have good storage
facilities which do not impinge on food quality and quantity.
1 Grain storage structures help to protect against crop losses
from insects, rodents, moulds, theft and fire.
Study Design and Methods
The following is a case study by design, and it is qualitative in its approach. We engage in both rural and urban cases in order to unravel the post-harvest issues in these circumstances. Qualitative methods of data collection were employed in developing the argument for this paper. Such methods include documentary review. Data were well analyzed using textual analysis, discourse analysis and thematic analysis to determine which issues are common across different areas in rural and urban Zimbabwe. 18
Results
Post Harvest Management Issues in Rural and Urban Areas of
Zimbabwe
This section provides an analytical description of postharvest
issues that affect food security in Zimbabwe. Farmers
in rural areas and in peri-urban areas produce grain, especially
maize, as a means to enhance food security. The grain is preserved
and stored to meet human food needs until the next harvest.
However, the food is lost through the inferior post-harvest
management strategies that are used. Horticulture is another
form of farming that is practiced, especially in urban areas, with
the aim being to eradicate poverty through income generation.
Post-harvest issues remain critical in this type of farming. There
is a lack of institutional support services, poor road networks, a
lack of storage space and limited access to reliable markets.13
Grain Post-Harvest Management Strategies in Rural Zimbabwe
Maize is the staple food in Zimbabwe, and it is widely
grown across the country. Areas in agro-ecological region five,
such as Masvingo and Chiredzi, receive rainfall of less than 650
mm/year, and it is highly erratic.11 This region is unsuitable for
crop production, but local people still produce maize, millet and
sorghum for their food security. Millet and sorghum are, however,
the best crop alternatives, as they can withstand the low
rainfall and high temperatures that are indigenous to this region.
The maize, sorghum and millet that the country as a whole depends
on are produced by communal and small-scale farmers
who have very limited access to the advanced technologies
needed to enhance value-addition for food security. Large-scale
commercial farmers dominantly produce cash crops such as tobacco
and cotton. They also depend on small-scale farmers for
their own food security. The communal farmers use traditional
post-harvest management systems.
Indigenous knowledge and the use of vernacular materials
is very common in Zimbabwe’s rural post-harvest processes.
This has largely contributed to the low levels of cereals that
are grown and the lack of adequate income to acquire advanced
technologies.1 Crop harvesting is mostly done manually, and it
takes more time than necessary. The harvesting and drying techniques
employed make the farm produce more prone to thieves.
For instance, maize can be stacked in small pyramids and left
to dry in the fields before de-husking can occur, and the corn
ears can be ferried to the homesteads. On the other hand, maize
plants can be left standing to dry completely before they remove
the cobs and leave the maize stalks in the field. This method is
encouraged, as it promotes conservation agriculture. Conservation
agriculture hinges on minimum soil disturbance, mulching
of the soil, and promotion of crop rotation, with the ultimate goal
being to improve soil fertility.11
After harvesting and drying, pesticides are applied to
the grain before it is stored in plastic bags or sacks. The pesticides
applied should be capable of protecting the grain from
insects until they are ready for consumption. In rural areas, generally
the same facility is used to store all grains, but in different
containers or compartments.11 The traditional pole and earth
structures (Plate 1) and woven basket structures (Plate 2) are the
most commonly used granary structures in rural Zimbabwe. The
base of the granary is raised off the ground to prevent animals,
such as rats and mice, from eating the grain. The raised base also
keeps the grain away from wet ground and facilitates ventilation.
Poles alone or poles resting on rocks, as in Plate 1, support the
granary. The granary is built with a removable thatched roof,
which has a large overhang to protect the mud walls from rain.16
The interior of the pole earthed granary is cleaned and plastered
with fresh cow dung before loading fresh grain. Cow dung is the
best local material, as it is believed to have insect repellent properties.
If resources permit, the walls and the floors can be flushed
with an insecticide before loading the granary, as a supplement
to cow dung. However, these granaries are slowly vanishing due
mainly to a shortage of the appropriate construction materials,
which itself is a result of deforestation. Termites also damage
the timber used. Efforts at modernization have led to the rejection of the use of local and traditional methods. Nevertheless,
woven basket structures are still commonly used in some areas
that maintain strong traditional practices, such as in the Zambezi
Valley and in North Eastern Zimbabwe.

Plate 1: Pole and earth walled granary.
Source: Google images.

Plate 2: Woven-basket granary.
Source: Google images.
Due to difficulties faced in accessing hardwood supply
for the construction of traditional granaries, some farmers
are now adopting the use of metal silos. Smallholder farmers
are using these silos, with the added advantage that rodents and
termites do not attack them. FAO in Zimbabwe implemented a
pilot project from June 2010 to July 2011 in the districts of Guruve
and Gokwe South. FAO trained local builders and local tinsmiths
on the construction of improved brick granary and metallic
silos. The aim of the project was to reduce post-harvest crop
losses through improved post-harvest management practices in
order to improve food security at the household level. The project
promoted the construction of brick granaries and metallic
silos (plate 3) which are much more effective for preserving the
grain than more traditional storage structures.
The project empowered local farmers by giving them
technical knowledge and skills on effective post-harvest management
strategies. Farmers in Gokwe learned improved methods
of drying and treating the grain before storing it in either
metallic silos or the brick granary.19 Drying and treating grain
before storage prevents the grain from moulding or caking
while in storage. By October 2011, the quality of grain was still
good, with no signs of pest infestation. The main challenge for
the project was the lack of local construction materials. Gokwe
south has loamy sandy soils which are not effective for making
bricks.20
Horticulture Post-Harvest Management Strategies in rural Zimbabwe
Horticulture is the science and art involved in the cultivation,
processing and marketing of ornamental plants, flowers,
turf, vegetables and fruits.21 In Zimbabwe and other developing
countries, small-scale fruit and vegetable production plays an
important role in income generation, poverty alleviation and in
improving the nutrition and livelihood of the rural population.
Just as it is in the case of grain, the horticultural sector suffers
greatly from post-harvest losses.22 Post-harvest losses in fruits
and vegetables can occur in terms of income, quantity, quality,
nutritional value and aesthetic appeal, which affect market value.
23
After Zimbabwe gained independence, many people
were involved in the call from the government to support and
improve rural livelihoods. Rural capacity building programmes
such as the European Union’s Lome Convention funding programme
were implemented in rural areas to promote small-scale
commercial farming and increase household incomes and food
security. The European Union’s Lome Convention Funding Programme
started supporting Small-scale Coffee and Fruit projects
in Manicaland province from 1982.22 The projects promoted
small-scale commercial production, value-addition and the marketing
of coffee and fruits in Honde and Rusitu Valleys. Despite

Plate 3: Metal silo and bricks granary in Gokwe.
all these efforts, the small-scale farmers are still facing post-harvest
challenges that result in both quality and quantity losses.24
The losses are attributed to poor post-harvest management of the
fruits, especially at peak production, since they mature almost at
the same time, causing seasonal gluts. Oranges are also perishable,
and a lack of adequate storage facilities causes considerable
losses.
In a study conducted by Musasa, et al.,22 it was found
that >40 percent of the mature fruit from the Rusitu citrus farmers
are lost in the orchard and during temporary storage. A lack
of pesticides, poor production practices due to lack of knowledge,
poor storage facilities and poor physical infrastructure,
such as access roads, transportation and communication, are
the major causes of post-harvest losses. The small-scale farmers
store their oranges under tree shades waiting for buyers, mostly
intermediaries known as makoronyera, to purchase and supply
to large-scale fruit juice producers elsewhere. Storage of oranges
under tree shades exposes the fruit to adverse climatic conditions
such as fluctuations in temperature and humidity, leading
to deterioration in quality and consequent low market value.
From this analysis, it is clear that local producers do not have the
capacity to participate fully in the orange value-chain. Farmers
only produce for family consumption and sell to local markets;
hence, they lose considerable potential income.
Rolle13 argues that horticulture post-harvest losses can
be attributed to rough handling, untimely harvesting, a lack of
appropriate harvesting tools, inadequate field sorting, grading
and packing protocols for commodities, poor transportation infrastructure,
a lack of appropriate transport systems, and a lack
of refrigerated transportation vehicles. However, post-harvest
damage to bananas decreased significantly in Chipinge when
a private company, Matanuska, invested in modern production
technologies, such as handling facilities and pack sheds.25
The
farmers were also equipped with a tractor to deliver the product
to pack sheds and specialized trucks that could transport the
product to the market.
Fruit and vegetable processing is largely influenced by
two factors. The first is to promote food security in rural areas.
Since Zimbabwe has only one rainy season, there is a need to
preserve food produced until harvest the next season. For instance,
donors who were engaged in the Musami area of Murehwa
introduced communal drying technology to local people to
enhance food security at the village level. The traditional technique
of sun-drying leafy green vegetables is the most common
in Zimbabwe and has been passed down from generation to
generation from an early time. This technique enables households
to access vegetables throughout the year. Drying of fruit
and vegetable is also a preferred method to preserve foodstuffs
to be used as raw material in other food products. For instance,
both dried vegetables and fruits can be pounded into a powder
and used to make soup, or the powder can be added to flour for
cakes. The second drive in fruit and vegetable processing is to
eradicate poverty through income generation. Processing adds
value to fresh fruits and vegetables, thus permitting producers to
generate income from locally available resources that are highly
perishable. In this sense, processing becomes a market-oriented
activity focused on increasing returns to producers while reducing
losses.
Given the huge losses that fruit producers often encounter
during temporary storage, some farmers have developed
innovative ideas on how to process and add value to low quality
fruits.26
Small-scale commercial farms, such as Golden Harvest
and Froggy Farm, make jam as a way to reduce post-harvest
losses. The marketing of fresh produce generates more sales revenue
when compared to selling processed fruits, hence, processing
is a secondary activity that adds value to second and third
grade fruit, which may be unacceptable to the fresh produce
market. Companies such as Cairns Foods Limited buy second
and third grade fruits but do not give a rewarding price for these
inferior products, so domestic processing increases the farmers’
potential returns to lower grade fruit. Other processors, such as
the Rusitu Valley Jam Canners Co-op, process jam due to the
constraints they face when marketing fresh produce. Poor road
networks, deficiencies in transport and high costs make it difficult
for farmers in Rusitu to access outside markets, resulting
insignificant losses of fresh produce.27
Post-Harvest Management Strategies in Urban Zimbabwe
Urban and Peri-urban Agriculture (UPA) in Zimbabwe
is practiced in two ways, either as onsite or as off-site. On-site
agriculture refers to agricultural activities that take place in a
residential property while off-site agriculture refers to agriculture
that takes place in open spaces as well as in the peri-urban
areas.28 On-site agriculture is usually focused on perishable and
high-value horticultural products, such as green vegetables,
mushrooms, herbs, eggs, poultry and tomatoes that can be grown
in confined spaces. The scale of UPA ranges from purely subsistence-
oriented, small-scale semi-commercial gardeners and
livestock keepers, to medium- and large-scale commercial endeavours.
On the other hand, offsite agriculture usually consists
of maize production for family consumption while others also
sell surplus grain in the market to increase their income.29
Urban areas do not rely totally on the rainy season, except
for off-site agriculture. In this regard, there is little processing
of vegetables produced at home, since there is no need to
preserve for the next season. Mature crops are consumed soon
after harvest, and some are sold immediately. Urban vegetable
growers do not need storage space, since they harvest and sell
them immediately. This gives urban production a niche against
their fellow vegetable producers, who are based in rural areas.
The drying methods used to preserve food by urban producers
are identical to those used in rural areas, but the reasons for this
differ. In rural areas, farmers store to preserve the vegetables
until the next harvest, while in urban areas, vegetable producers
dry the vegetables by choice for consumption.25 On the other
hand, maize production is seasonal, and the produce must be stored and treated to meet the requisite quantity and quality until
the next season. The post-harvest management strategies used in
urban areas are basically the same as the strategies used in rural
areas. The major difference is in storage structures. There are no
household granaries in urban areas, rather, they use ordinary living
rooms for this purpose.
There are also large-scale horticultural farmers in urban
areas, and especially in Harare, Bulawayo and Mutare. The
farmers mainly produce mushrooms, flowers and herbs.30
The
produce is sold locally by the smaller farmers, while large-scale
commercial farmers export their produce worldwide. The problem
with local markets is that local supermarkets and retailers
prefer importing horticultural products from South Africa regardless
of the fact that the products will be readily available
from local farmers. Retailers import farm products that include
beetroot, grapes, peaches, frozen vegetables, carrots, bananas,
cucumbers, peaches, plums, and even fruit juices. Local horticulture
farmers and traders are failing to find markets for their produce,
since local retailers import the same products elsewhere.31
This leads to post-harvest losses as farmers end up throwing their
vegetables away after failing to secure markets, hence, threatening
food security and income generation. Chiutsi30
reiterates that
the problem lies with the policy makers who allow imports into
the country. This policy is an abject failure, and it has opened the
country to the importation of foreign goods.
Poultry production has gained popularity in recent
years as a type of urban agriculture. Poultry gained recognition
because of escalating prices for beef and pork, with more consumers
resorting to poultry and poultry products due to its relatively
low pricing.32 Urban residents have ventured into poultry
production, and they sell their chickens to fellow residents.
Some have the privilege to supply large supermarkets and fast
food outlets, such as Chicken Inn. However, poultry farmers
face numerous challenges once the birds are ready to sell. The
major challenge is a lack of access to reliable markets as well as
electrical failures. These failures cause severe losses, as it affects
refrigeration storage facilities.
Discussion and Options
This study revealed that many loopholes are affecting the attainment of food security in Zimbabwe. The current level of post-harvest management that is being practiced in the country both in urban and in rural areas is not adequate to secure the country’s food needs. The use of traditional storage technology has many problems, including mould development and the failure to regulate temperature and moisture. In this regard, there is a need for advanced storage facilities, such as metal silos, which efficiently reduce pathogen losses in grain. Since this technology is expensive and beyond the reach of many communal farmers in Zimbabwe, who encompass the bulk of the national food provid

Table 1: A summary of emerging post-harvest issues in Zimbabwe.
Source: (Rolle, 2006)
ers, there is a need for the government and private sector institutions
to assist these farmers financially in constructing metal
silos. Projects such as that conducted in Gokwe and Guruve are
sustainable, as they give relevant technical skills to local builders
and tinsmiths on how to construct these silos even when the
project executors have terminated the projects. The experience
gained in Rusitu Valley indicated that there is a lack of access to
markets for fresh produce, and it showed that there is a general
lack of communication between producers and receivers as well
as a lack of market information. Farmers should be well advised
on market needs before they produce their crops so that they
can minimize their post-harvest losses. Construction of good
physical structures, such as road networks and communication
channels facilitate marketing from producers to all participants
in the value-chain, up to the consumer (Figure 1). In value-chain
system development, farmers need to be linked to the needs of
the consumers. This can be achieved if they work closely with
traders and processors to produce the specific goods in specific
quantities and quality as required by the end consumers.
Food security can be accomplished if there is continuous
innovation, research and communication among the various
participants in the value-chain. This will also increase the farmers’
market influence and profitability and consequently improve
their livelihood.33
Marketing cooperatives can be useful among
producers of major commodities in specific production areas.
This facilitates the flow of market information, improved market
access, and increased access to higher-value markets. Cooperatives
also help small-scale and communal farmers to share advanced
materials used for post-harvest crop management. The
government and respective organizations should advocate for a
deliberate policy that regulates the importation of products that
can be produced locally. This will help to protect the rights of
local producers to access retail markets and thus minimize the
losses that occur when their produce is not sold.
Conclusion
This study has demonstrated that the traditional methods of post-harvest crop management that are used in Zimbabwe cause major losses in vegetable, fruit and grain production. Grain, which is normally the major source of food, goes through five post-harvest stages. These are: harvesting, drying, shelling, storage and marketing. Horticultural products are usually perishable, and they are consumed soon after harvest. A lack of advanced technology in terms of transportation systems, storage facilities and marketing services is the major cause of postharvest food losses in Zimbabwe. This affects food security for the entire country. Food sovereignty is also a critical issue that needs to be incorporated into the concept of food security. Local knowledge and traditional practices, such as vegetable drying, have proven to be relatively efficient in enhancing food security. Nevertheless, there is a need to combine traditional post-harvest management strategies with new emerging technology in order to minimize overall food losses.4, 34

Figure 1: A synthesis of issues that can enhance food security.
Source: Authors’ creation
Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
References
1. Chirimuuta T, Mapolisa C. Centring the peripherised systems:
Zimbabwean indigenous knowledge systems for food security.
Zimbabwe International Journal of Open & Distance Learning.
2011; 1(2): 52-56.
2. MacNairn I. Zimbabwe Food Security Brief. Harare: FEWSNET.
2014.
3. Flory C. Lautt’s Builds Additional Building For Equipment.
The Herald, 2012. Available at: https://www.heraldpressnd.com/
?id=1116&offset=308&limit=11 2012; Accessed 2015.
4. FAO. The state of food insecurity in the world. Rome: FAO.
2013.
5. Guest RP. Food sovereignty. The Journal of Peasant Studies.
2009; 36(3): 663-706.
6. Edelmann W, Cohen PE, Kneitz B, et al. Mammalian MutS
homologue 5 is required for chromosome pairing in meiosis. Nat
Genet. 1999; 21(1): 123-127. doi: 10.1038/5075
7. La Via Campesina. Food is first and foremost a source of nutrition
and only secondarily an item of trade; 1996: 3.
8. Claeys P. From food sovereignty to peasants rights: an overview
of la via campesina’s rights-based claims over the last 20
years. The Journal of Peasant Studies. 2013; 1: 11.
9. Tangermann S. Policy solutions to agricultural market volatility.
Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable
Development (ICTSD). 2011; 33.
10. Kindness and Gordon, 2001 Gordon HK. Agricultural marketing
in developing countries: the role of NGOs and CBOs.
Policy Series 13. Chatham: Natural Resources Institute; 2001.
11. Munyanyi W. Agricultural infrastructure development imperative
for sustainable food production: a Zimbabwean perspective.
Russian Journal of Agricultural and Socio-Economic
Sciences. 2014; 12(24): 13-21.
12. FAO. Rural structures in the tropics: design and development.
Rome: FAO. 2011.
13. Rolle RS. Postharvest management of fruit and vegetables
in the Asia-Pacific region. Tokyo: Asian Productivity Organization.
2006.
14. Kitinoja L. Innovative small-scale postharvest technologies
for reducing losses in horticultural crops. Ethiopian Journal for
Applied Science Technology. 2013; 1: 9-15.
15. Costa S. Reducing food losses in Sub-Saharan Africa: improving
post-harvest management and storage technologies of
smallholder farmers. Kampala: UN World Food Programme.
2014.
16. Sharland RW. Fusing tradition and science to design a better
granary. Nairobi: ILEIA Newsletter. 1993; 9: 3.
17. Okoruwa OO. Post harvest grain management storage techniques
and pesticides use by farmers in South-West Nigeria.
Journal of Economics and Rural Development. 2009; 18(1): 53-
72.
18. Phillips LJ. Discourse analysis as theory and method. London:
Sage Publications; 2002.
19. Tefera FK. 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. The official Journal of the International
Association for the Plant Protection Sciences. 2011; 240-245.
doi: 10.1016/j.cropro.2010.11.015
20. Chikowo R. Farm typologies, soil fertility variability and
nutrient management in smallholder farming in Sub-Saharan
Africa. Nutrient Cycling in Agro ecosystems. 2014; 1(73): 1-18.
doi: 10.1007/s10705-014-9632-y
21. ISHS. International Society for Horticultural Science. Website:
http://www.ishs.org/defining-horticulture 2015; Accessed
June 3, 2015.
22. Musasa ST, Mvumi BM, Manditsera FA, Chinhanga J, Musiyandaka
S, Chigwedere C. Postharvest orange losses and smallscale
farmers perceptions on the loss causes in the fruit value
chain: a case study of Rusitu Valley, Zimbabwe. Food Science
and Quality Management. 2013; 18: 1-8.
23. Indira KS. Post harvest technology of horticultural crops.
New Delhi: New Publishing Agency; 2007.
24. Watson JM, Lambert AE, Cooper JM, Boyle IV, Strayer DL.
On attentional control and the aging driver. In: Zheng R, Hill R,
Gardner M, eds. Engaging older adults with modern technology:
Internet use and information access needs. ISI Global Publishing,
Hershey, PA; 2013: 20-32.
25. Zim-AIED. High value horticulture: irrigation schemes and
contract farming lucrative for Zimbabwean smallholders. Harare: Fintrac Inc. 2014.
26. Mlambo BM. Facilitating the effective production and marketing
of processed food products by small-scale producers in
Zimbabwe (Project R7485); 2002. Not published.
27. Smith J. Transport and marketing of horticultural crops by
communal farmers into harare. Geographical Journal of Zimbabwe.
1989; 20: 1-14.
28. Zeeuw RV. The role of urban agriculture in building resilient
cities. Journal of Agricultural Science. 2011; 1-11.
29. Moustier P, Danso G. Local economic development and marketing
of urban produced food. In: van Veenhuizen R, ed. Cities
farming for the future: urban agriculture for green and productive
cities. Leusden, RUAF /IDRC/IIRR, 2006.
30. Chiutsi N. Retailers, supermarkets blasted over horticultural
products import. Harare: The Sunday Mail. 2015.
31. Heri ST. The growth and development of the horticultural
sector in Zimbabwe. Harare. 2000. Not published.
32. Musukumidzwa S. Chicken House Suppliers. Zim Investors:
http://www.ziminvestors.com/how-to-run-a-successful-poultrybusiness-
in-zimbabwe/ 2013; Accessed June 3, 2015.
33. Mashapa C, Mudyazvivi E, Mhuriro-Mashapa P, et al. Assessment
of market potential for horticultural produce for
smallholder farmers around Mutare City, Eastern Zimbabwe.
Greener Journal of Social Sciences. 2014; 4(3): 85-93. Available
at: http://www.gjournals.org/GJSC/GJSC%20PDF/2014/
March/012414062%20Mashapa%20et%20al.pdf
34. Mapolisa CC. Centring the peripherised systems: Zimbabwean
indigenous knowledge systems for food security. Zimbabwe
International Journal of Open & Distance Learning. 2011;
1(2): 52-56.
Top
FIGURES, TABLES and PLATES
Figures

Figure 1: A synthesis of issues that can enhance food security.
Source: Authors’ creation
Tables

Table 1: A summary of emerging post-harvest issues in Zimbabwe.
Source: (Rolle, 2006)
Plates

Plate 1: Pole and earth walled granary.
Source: Google images.

Plate 2: Woven-basket granary.
Source: Google images.

Plate 3: Metal silo and bricks granary in Gokwe.
Top
References
1. Chirimuuta T, Mapolisa C. Centring the peripherised systems:
Zimbabwean indigenous knowledge systems for food security.
Zimbabwe International Journal of Open & Distance Learning.
2011; 1(2): 52-56.
2. MacNairn I. Zimbabwe Food Security Brief. Harare: FEWSNET.
2014.
3. Flory C. Lautt’s Builds Additional Building For Equipment.
The Herald, 2012. Available at: https://www.heraldpressnd.com/
?id=1116&offset=308&limit=11 2012; Accessed 2015.
4. FAO. The state of food insecurity in the world. Rome: FAO.
2013.
5. Guest RP. Food sovereignty. The Journal of Peasant Studies.
2009; 36(3): 663-706.
6. Edelmann W, Cohen PE, Kneitz B, et al. Mammalian MutS
homologue 5 is required for chromosome pairing in meiosis. Nat
Genet. 1999; 21(1): 123-127. doi: 10.1038/5075
7. La Via Campesina. Food is first and foremost a source of nutrition
and only secondarily an item of trade; 1996: 3.
8. Claeys P. From food sovereignty to peasants rights: an overview
of la via campesina’s rights-based claims over the last 20
years. The Journal of Peasant Studies. 2013; 1: 11.
9. Tangermann S. Policy solutions to agricultural market volatility.
Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable
Development (ICTSD). 2011; 33.
10. Kindness and Gordon, 2001 Gordon HK. Agricultural marketing
in developing countries: the role of NGOs and CBOs.
Policy Series 13. Chatham: Natural Resources Institute; 2001.
11. Munyanyi W. Agricultural infrastructure development imperative
for sustainable food production: a Zimbabwean perspective.
Russian Journal of Agricultural and Socio-Economic
Sciences. 2014; 12(24): 13-21.
12. FAO. Rural structures in the tropics: design and development.
Rome: FAO. 2011.
13. Rolle RS. Postharvest management of fruit and vegetables
in the Asia-Pacific region. Tokyo: Asian Productivity Organization.
2006.
14. Kitinoja L. Innovative small-scale postharvest technologies
for reducing losses in horticultural crops. Ethiopian Journal for
Applied Science Technology. 2013; 1: 9-15.
15. Costa S. Reducing food losses in Sub-Saharan Africa: improving
post-harvest management and storage technologies of
smallholder farmers. Kampala: UN World Food Programme.
2014.
16. Sharland RW. Fusing tradition and science to design a better
granary. Nairobi: ILEIA Newsletter. 1993; 9: 3.
17. Okoruwa OO. Post harvest grain management storage techniques
and pesticides use by farmers in South-West Nigeria.
Journal of Economics and Rural Development. 2009; 18(1): 53-
72.
18. Phillips LJ. Discourse analysis as theory and method. London:
Sage Publications; 2002.
19. Tefera FK. 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. The official Journal of the International
Association for the Plant Protection Sciences. 2011; 240-245.
doi: 10.1016/j.cropro.2010.11.015
20. Chikowo R. Farm typologies, soil fertility variability and
nutrient management in smallholder farming in Sub-Saharan
Africa. Nutrient Cycling in Agro ecosystems. 2014; 1(73): 1-18.
doi: 10.1007/s10705-014-9632-y
21. ISHS. International Society for Horticultural Science. Website:
http://www.ishs.org/defining-horticulture 2015; Accessed
June 3, 2015.
22. Musasa ST, Mvumi BM, Manditsera FA, Chinhanga J, Musiyandaka
S, Chigwedere C. Postharvest orange losses and smallscale
farmers perceptions on the loss causes in the fruit value
chain: a case study of Rusitu Valley, Zimbabwe. Food Science
and Quality Management. 2013; 18: 1-8.
23. Indira KS. Post harvest technology of horticultural crops.
New Delhi: New Publishing Agency; 2007.
24. Watson JM, Lambert AE, Cooper JM, Boyle IV, Strayer DL.
On attentional control and the aging driver. In: Zheng R, Hill R,
Gardner M, eds. Engaging older adults with modern technology:
Internet use and information access needs. ISI Global Publishing,
Hershey, PA; 2013: 20-32.
25. Zim-AIED. High value horticulture: irrigation schemes and
contract farming lucrative for Zimbabwean smallholders. Harare: Fintrac Inc. 2014.
26. Mlambo BM. Facilitating the effective production and marketing
of processed food products by small-scale producers in
Zimbabwe (Project R7485); 2002. Not published.
27. Smith J. Transport and marketing of horticultural crops by
communal farmers into harare. Geographical Journal of Zimbabwe.
1989; 20: 1-14.
28. Zeeuw RV. The role of urban agriculture in building resilient
cities. Journal of Agricultural Science. 2011; 1-11.
29. Moustier P, Danso G. Local economic development and marketing
of urban produced food. In: van Veenhuizen R, ed. Cities
farming for the future: urban agriculture for green and productive
cities. Leusden, RUAF /IDRC/IIRR, 2006.
30. Chiutsi N. Retailers, supermarkets blasted over horticultural
products import. Harare: The Sunday Mail. 2015.
31. Heri ST. The growth and development of the horticultural
sector in Zimbabwe. Harare. 2000. Not published.
32. Musukumidzwa S. Chicken House Suppliers. Zim Investors:
http://www.ziminvestors.com/how-to-run-a-successful-poultrybusiness-
in-zimbabwe/ 2013; Accessed June 3, 2015.
33. Mashapa C, Mudyazvivi E, Mhuriro-Mashapa P, et al. Assessment
of market potential for horticultural produce for
smallholder farmers around Mutare City, Eastern Zimbabwe.
Greener Journal of Social Sciences. 2014; 4(3): 85-93. Available
at: http://www.gjournals.org/GJSC/GJSC%20PDF/2014/
March/012414062%20Mashapa%20et%20al.pdf
34. Mapolisa CC. Centring the peripherised systems: Zimbabwean
indigenous knowledge systems for food security. Zimbabwe
International Journal of Open & Distance Learning. 2011;
1(2): 52-56.
Top
» Introduction Free
» Figures and Tables Free
» References Free
» Full Text Free
» PDF Free
Article History
Received: August 27th, 2015
Accepted: September 16th, 2015
Published: September 21st, 2015

Editor-in-Chief
Michael J. Gonzalez, PhD, CNS, FACN
Professor of Nutrition Program
School of Public Health Medical Sciences Campus
University of Puerto Rico
Gobernador Pinero, San Juan, 00921, Puerto Rico

Associate Editor
Yaning Sun, PhD
Translational Gerontology Branch
NIH Biomedical Research Center
251 Bayview Blvd., Suite 100
Baltimore, MD, 21224, USA

Associate Editor
Zheng Li, PhD
Food Science and Human Nutrition
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA

Associate Editor
Cheryl Reifer, PhD, RD, LD
Interim VP, Scientific Affairs Consultant at Sprim Advanced Life Science
President at Cheryl J. Reifer, LLC
4601 Cape Charles Dr. Plano, TX 75024, USA
