Reducing postharvest losses (PHLs) is fundamental to enhancing sustainable utilisation of global food resources (Chadare, 2010). According to the World Bank (2011), managing PHLs is viewed as a viable alternative for increasing world food reserves. The world needs to increase food production by 60% by 2050, but efforts to increase food production are constrained by climate change, soil degradation, reduction of arable land, and dwindling fresh water reserves (Segrè et al., 2014). Management of PHLs is a better response to this need as it involves exerting limited pressure on existing production factors. According to Ayandiji et al. (2011), reducing PHLs by 50% can increase food availability by 20% without increasing the area of cultivated land. As such, reduction of PHLs has a direct impact on household income and nutrition as it increases the amount of food that can be sold or consumed (Sheahan and Barrett, 2017). Despite efforts to reduce PHLs, they remain a major problem in many countries, especially in developing countries, where 15–50% of total food production is lost through PHLs (Affognon et al., 2015).

Research highlights that besides increasing food availability, reducing PHLs has other benefits including stabilising food prices, improving food safety, improving efficiency in resource allocation, and promoting value chain upgrading (Hodges et al., 2011; Shee et al., 2019; World Bank, 2020). Attempts have therefore been made to generate loss estimates of different food products, map hotspots of losses along value chains, standardise methodologies for estimating PHLs, evaluate the impact of innovations implemented to mitigate PHLs, and to suggest cost-effective alternatives to current PHL mitigation measures (Ayandiji et al., 2011; Sheahan and Barrett, 2017). However, there is still no consensus on the proper methodologies to follow when collecting, analysing, and reporting data on PHLs (Affognon et al., 2015; Sheahan and Barrett, 2017). Moreover, existing studies have concentrated on PHLs of staple food crops like maize, cassava, rice, and wheat, although researchers acknowledge that PHLs of other commodity Value chains need to be studied (World Bank, 2011; Affognon et al., 2015; Sheahan and Barrett, 2017). Hence, there is a dearth of knowledge on PHLs in other Value chains, which has resulted in food and economic losses and limited value chain upgrading (Chadare, 2010; Hodges, 2013).

One of the overlooked commodity value chains is the Baobab value chain. Baobab,¹ like other non-timber forest products (NTFPs), are regaining global popularity and acceptance as a super food due to their high nutrient and vitamin content. This global recognition is driven by changes in consumer preferences, whereby a majority of consumers now prefer natural food items. This preference has led to an increase in the volume of Baobab products traded on domestic and international markets (Amosi, 2018; Darr et al., 2020). In Africa, the expansion of domestic trade in Baobab products is also credited to the consumers awareness of its health benefits and the desire to support local products (Kruger and Mohamadi, 2021). Further, an increasing number of urban consumers in Africa appreciate the health and cultural benefits in wild food products like Baobab. Given the significance of Baobab in the food system and livelihoods (Buchmann et al., 2010; Sanchez, 2011), Baobab products lost through PHLs have substantial impact on the income and nutrition of actors throughout the whole baobab value chain. For example, in Southern Africa, a total of 238 t of baobab powder was sold in the local market, and 438 t were exported (Kruger and Mohamadi, 2021). In Malawi, the per capital revenue obtained from baobab enterprises in 2011, ranged between $2.5 to $715 (Munthali, 2012). Other studies such as (Jäckering et al., 2019) and (Welford et al., 2015) have also shown the relationship between baobab collection and improved incomes, in Kenya and Malawi, respectively.

Reducing PHLs has received policy prioritisation in Malawi. However, dealing with the PHLs of NTFPs like Baobab has been overlooked in these policies (Amosi, 2018). Policies such as the Malawi National Food Security Policy of 2006, the National Agricultural Policy of 2011, the National Forest Policy of 2016, and the Malawi Nation Export Strategy II (NES II) of 2022, which specifically affect PHLs management in Malawi, have rarely focused on NTFPs. The lack of visibility of PHLs of NTFPs in the national policies has been credited to the unavailability of clear and empirical information on the value, distribution, and determinants of the losses (North et al., 2014; Amosi, 2018). This information is crucial in order to identify solutions and guide priorities of action (Kikulwe et al., 2018). Unlike other fruits, Baobab has unique product attributes, handling methodologies, and climatic conditions under which crops grow (Kitinoja and Kader, 2015), hence the methodologies used to estimate PHLs in other fruit Value chains cannot work in the baobab value chain (Amosi, 2018). In addition, some interventions for mitigating PHLs implemented in other value chains, like the use of warehouse receipt systems, pesticides, and hermetic storage bags are not applicable in the Baobab value chain (Affognon et al., 2015; Sheahan and Barrett, 2017; Amosi, 2018).

Previous studies on PHLs have majorly focused on major crops such as pineapples (Tröger et al., 2020), tomatoes (Abera et al., 2020), maize (Abass et al., 2014), sweet potatoes (Shee et al., 2019), and fruits and vegetables (Porat et al., 2018). Further, recent reviews and metanalysis that study PHLs mainly consider studies on food grains, root crops, and vegetables and fruits (Affognon et al., 2015; Stathers et al., 2020; Debebe, 2022). To the best of our knowledge we only found one study Sanon et al. (2018) that has focused on descriptively analysing PHLs in NTFPs. Other studies (e.g., Adepoju and Salau, 2007; Meinhold and Darr, 2019), mention PHLs in NTFPs, but do not undertake any detailed analysis. In this paper, we seek to contribute to this gap in the literature by analysing the value of PHLs at various stages of the Baobab value chain and to assess the extent to which socioeconomic factors influence PHLs along the Baobab value chain in Malawi studies on socioeconomic factors influencing PHLs (Shee et al., 2019; Abera et al., 2020; Bendinelli et al., 2020; Debebe, 2022) do not look into losses in NTFPs, but rather focus on staples and cash crops. However, we also expect heterogenous patterns on the effect of socioeconomic factors relative to specific value chains. Even within the same value chain, PHLs may vary based on the geographical regions (FAO, 2011). Baobab is a unique case because it is a priority NTFP that is commercialized domestically and internationally.

The subsequent sections of this paper are structured as follows; section two provides the context of the baobab value chain; section three presents an overview of data and methods, describing the study area, data sources, sampling procedure, and data analysis. Section four presents and discusses the results and the last section concludes.

In Malawi, most baobab trees grow naturally and are communally owned. However, individuals may claim ownership of baobab trees if they naturally grow on their private land. The communal ownership and non-uniform distribution of baobab trees pose challenges for the collectors to effectively manage baobab trees. Crucial pre-harvest practises that are common in other value chain like protecting trees from diseases, preventing animal foraging, and ensuring harvesting of mature fruit are not followed in the baobab value chain (Amosi, 2018). Baobab fruits are mainly harvested between April and June, however some collectors would start in February and extend to October (Meinhold and Darr, 2022). The main actors in the baobab value chain include collectors, traders, processors, retailers, and consumers (Amosi, 2018; Jäckering et al., 2019). Collectors are responsible for harvesting and pre-processing of the baobab fruit. Fruits are mainly harvested by picking them from the ground or using long sticks with hooks to pluck them from the trees (Olumeh and Mithöfer, 2023). The main products that are sold by collectors are baobab fruit and pulp. Pulp is a cream-coloured powder that is embedded on the baobab seed, and it is extracted by opening the shell of the fruit using a machete or a hard object (Kaimba et al., 2020). Collectors either work individually or they are found in clubs. Collectors who are the members of baobab clubs or cooperatives may only collect fruits from designated forest and they follow strict guidelines to ensure that products are of high quality (Meinhold and Darr, 2022). The other category of the collectors does not belong to any grouping and they indiscriminately collect fruits. Actors at all baobab value chain levels store baobab products. However, there is no agreed proper storage material for baobab products especially for fruits and pulp. Some collectors store fruits in granaries and pulp in grain sacks that are coated with plastic, whilst others put the fruits in the yard, and part of livestock sheds. Collectors who store pulp in sacks with plastic lining argue that the plastic help to maintain the cream colour on pulp favoured by processing companies. Baobab traders mostly procure baobab from collectors. They market both whole fruit and pulp on seed. However, these traders are not specialised in baobab only, but baobab and its related products form part of the trader’s portfolio (Meinhold and Darr, 2022). Majority of baobab purchases by traders were made between the month of April and June.

Baobab processing is mostly done informally, where processing is done in a microenterprise managed by an individual. Ice lollies were the most commonly processed baobab product. Other processed products include; juice, jam, baobab powder, coffee, and cosmetic products (Darr et al., 2020). More recently, formalised baobab processing has also emerged in Malawi (Meinhold and Darr, 2022). A baobab collector association is involved in manufacturing of baobab juice which is sold domestically. On average, 60 t of baobab pulp is processed annually into powder and then stored to be used as the main raw material for juice processing. Unlike other value chains in Malawi, trade in baobab products is only regulated for formal processors (Meinhold and Darr, 2022). The Malawi Bureau of Standards (MBS) are responsible for checking the processing facilities and the manufactured products, to ensure food safety and hygiene. Also, majority of the products processed by the formal enterprises are sold in supermarkets, hence, the MBS certification is a requirement.

Wild fruits are gaining status as a valuable food resource worldwide. As with other crops, the reduction of postharvest losses is critical to enhancing sustainable utilisation of wild food resource and strengthening value chains for local development. Baobab, like other wild fruits are regaining global popularity and acceptance as a super food due to their high nutrient and vitamin content. However, little information is documented on the magnitude and correlates of postharvest losses (PHLs) along the Baobab value chain in Malawi. Using a cross sectional data set from baobab collectors, traders, and processors in Malawi we employ the loss estimation procedure outlined by Egyir et al. (2008) and tobit models to assess the magnitude of PHLs and the effect of socioeconomic characteristics on PHLs, respectively.

The results show that 7.78% of the total value of Baobab products held by actors along the Baobab value chain in Malawi is lost through different forms of PHLs. A large proportion of the losses are incurred at storage and marketing stages. The results also indicate that PHLs at different value chain levels are influenced by different sets of socioeconomic factors. Collectors who are male, more educated, and more experienced are less likely to incur PHLs. The likelihood of incurring PHLs at the traders’ level increases with a greater COVID-related sales reduction, if customers specify product attributes, and if more labourers are recruited. Processors are less likely to incur PHLs if the processor is female, married, and has received training in PHL reduction.

Our findings have key policy implications, for instance we recommend that development practitioners and relevant government institutions should provide training in the proper handling of Baobab products to all actors along the Baobab value chain to reduce PHLs. The training content should emphasise the better management of Baobab products at storage and marketing stages. In addition, the government, through the Malawi Bureau of Standards (MBS), should implement and enforce product-handling standards to ensure the production of quality products that are capable of withstanding PHLs. National policy strategies need to guarantee inclusion of sustainable NTFPs storage infrastructure. This will have a positive effect on reducing losses during storage of baobab products.

Because of complexity in estimating value lost due to quality deterioration, we could not include it in our assessment of PHLs. Failure to include PHLs attributable to quality loss means that our estimate for PHLs is only composed on the losses that are quantifiable. Also, data on quantity lost is based on self-recall data and could be affected by strategic bias of the respondent. Rather than using actors’ self-reported estimates, future research should use direct measurement methods and include qualitative PHLs.

The datasets presented in this article are not readily available because the data used for this manuscript is still being used in development of other research articles. Requests to access the datasets should be directed to FC; cossamfoster98@gmail.com.

FC, JD, BK, and DM contributed to the conception and design of the study. FC and DO organised for data collection and performed statistical analyses. FC wrote the first draft of the manuscript. DO and DM wrote sections of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

This work was supported by the German Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL) based on the decision of the Parliament of the Federal Republic of Germany through the Federal Office for Agriculture and Food (BLE) (grant number 2816PROC20).

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.