Namibia Report Millet

POSTHARVEST ASSESSMENT OF FOOD
LOSSES IN THE PEARL MILLET

(MAHANGU) SUB-SECTOR IN NAMIBIA
FINAL REPORT
Field work and report writing by:
Adedayo A. Ogunmokun (University of Namibia)
Benisiu Thomas (University of Namibia)
Cecil Togarepi (University of Namibia)
Contribution to field work:
Ms. Martha Shigwedha (Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry)
Mr. Martin Tyapa (Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry)

Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................... II
ACRONYMS................................................................................................................................. III
LIST OF FIGURES.......................................................................................................................... IV
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................... IV
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ VI
1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ..................................................................................... 1
A) GOVERNMENT AND PRIVATE SECTOR INVOLVEMENT IN THE PEARL MILLET SUBSECTOR: DEVELOPMENTS OVER
THE LAST 15 YEARS .................................................................................................................................. 1
B) INVENTORY OF ACTIVITIES AND LESSONS LEARNT FROM PAST AND ON-GOING INTERVENTIONS ...................... 6
C) NATIONAL POLICY FRAMEWORK OR STRATEGY RELATED TO PEARL MILLET FOOD LOSS .................................. 9
D) RELEVANT INSTITUTIONS AND THEIR ROLES IN TERMS OF POLICY AND MANAGEMENT IN SMALL AND MEDIUM
PEARL MILLET SUBSECTOR ....................................................................................................................... 12
2 SITUATION ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................... 15

A) THE PEARL MILLET SUPPLY CHAIN..................................................................................................... 15
B) THE SELECTED PEARL MILLET SUPPLY CHAIN: OSHIKOTO REGION ............................................................ 17
C) MARKETING SYSTEMS ..................................................................................................................... 29
D) THE SUPPLY CHAIN ACTORS.............................................................................................................. 30
3 THE FOOD LOSSES STUDY FINDINGS AND RESULTS............................................................ 37
A) FOOD LOSS RISK VARIABLES ALONG THE PEARL MILLET SUPPLY CHAIN .................................................... 37
B) DESCRIPTION OF THE LOSSES ALONG THE MAIZE SUPPLY CHAIN .............................................................. 37
C) CRITICAL LOSS POINTS IN THE PEARL MILLET FOOD SUPPLY CHAIN: OSHIKOTO........................................... 38
D) 2.7 LOW LOSS POINTS .................................................................................................................... 39
E) FOOD LOSS REDUCTION PLAN AND STRATEGY ...................................................................................... 45
F) CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................... 54
ANNEX 1: REFERENCES: .............................................................................................................. 55
ANNEX 2: LIST OF EXPERTS CONSULTED AND OF VILLAGES VISITED ............................................. 57
ANNEX 3: QUALITY SCORING OF PEARL MILLET GRAINS .............................................................. 59
ANNEX 4: QUALITY ANALYSES OF PEARL MILLET GRAINS COLLECTED FROM FARMERS GRANARIES
.................................................................................................................................................. 60
ii
Acronyms
ADC Agricultural Development Centre
AGRIBUSDEV Agricultural Business Development Agency
AMTA Agro-Marketing and Trade Agency
APA Agronomic Producers Association
CAC Cardno Agrisystems Consortium
CLP Critical loss point
CRISP Caprivi Region Integrated Storage Project
DAPEES Directorate Agricultural Production, Extension and Engineering Services
DRD Directorate Research and Development
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
FIVISMS Food Insecurity and Vulnerability Information and Mapping Systems
FSC Food supply chain
FSNDP Food Security and nutrition development Programme
GAP Good Agricultural Practices
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GMO genetically modified organisms
GRN Government of Republic of Namibia
HACCP Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point
HH household
ISO International Organization for Standardization
LLP Low loss Point
MAWF Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry
MAWRD Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Rural Development
MGECW Ministry of Gender Equality and Child Welfare
MHSS Ministry of Health and Social Services
MISMED Ministry of Industrialisation, and SME Development
MURD Ministry of Urban and Rural Development
NAB Namibian Agronomic Board
NAP National Agricultural Policy
NAU Namibia Agricultural Union
NDP National Development Plans
NFNP National Food and Nutrition Policy
NNFU Namibia National Farmers Union
NSFR National strategic food reserve
NSI Namibian Standards Institute
RDC Rural Development Centres
SAFEX South African Futures Exchange
Mahangu is the name of pearl millet in Namibia.
iii
List of figures
Figure 1: Map of major pearl millet producing regions .......................................................................... 2
Figure 2: Production patterns per farmer............................................................................................... 3
Figure 3: Comparison of production, number of farmers and yields in different regions ..................... 3
Figure 4: Pearl millet grain production (ton) from 2008/09 to 2012/13 seasons (NAB, 2013) .............. 5
Figure 5: Flow diagram of the pearl millet supply chain....................................................................... 24
Figure 6: Drying and threshing .............................................................................................................. 25
Figure 7: Pearl millet storage ................................................................................................................ 26
Figure 8: Sieving of grain ....................................................................................................................... 28
Figure 9: The pearl millet market chain in Oshikoto Region (modified from Mallet and Rigourd, 2003)
...................................................................................................................................................... 29
List of tables
Table 1: Production information of the pearl millet subsector .............................................................. 4
Table 2: Pearl millet Quality Standards ................................................................................................. 11
Table 3: Food supply chain in the pearl millet subsector ..................................................................... 15
Table 4: Importance of the pearl millet supply chains ......................................................................... 16
Table 5: Products in the pearl millet supply chain ................................................................................ 16
Table 6: Food safety management mechanisms .................................................................................. 17
Table 7: Estimates (%) of quantitative pearl millet losses at different stages from different sources 18
Table 8: Screening of food losses in the selected FSC (Pearl Millet flour, Oshikoto) ........................... 19
Table 9: Detailed description of the food supply chain basics: (Pearl Millet, Oshikoto) ...................... 21
Table 10: Detailed description of the food (Pearl Millet), supply chain impacts in Oshikoto .............. 30
Table 11: Pearl millet prices from milling to retail................................................................................ 33
Table 12: Output ii-4: Detailed Description of the Food Supply Chain Social Structures .................. 34
Table 13: Output Ii-5: Detailed Description of the Food Supply Chain Economics............................ 35
Table 14: Food Loss Risk Factors ........................................................................................................... 37
Table 15: Quantity loss in the supply chain .......................................................................................... 37
Table 16: Summary results matrix of food losses ................................................................................. 41
Table 17: Summary table of food losses, causes and solutions ............................................................ 43
Table 18: Develop national postharvest management strategy and implementation plan ................. 46
Table 19: Budget for Training of farmers on good postharvest management (e.g. timeous operations,
promotion of threshers, crop varieties, mechanisation of activities) ........................................... 46
Table 20: Cost Benefit Analysis for Development of National postharvest management strategy and
implementation plan and recruitment including logistical arrangements ................................... 47
Table 21: Cost Benefit Analysis for Training on Good postharvest management practices................. 48
Table 22: Budget for Piloting mechanisation of PH operations (threshers, dryers) ............................. 49
Table 23: Cost Benefit Analysis for Piloting mechanisation of operations (threshers, dryers) ............ 49
Table 24: Budget for Marketing and financing of appropriate technology manufacturing (threshers,
dryers) ........................................................................................................................................... 50
Table 25: Cost Benefit Analysis for Marketing and financing appropriate technologies and
manufacturing (dryers, threshers ................................................................................................. 51
Table 26: Provision of storage facilities (PICS bags, Grain pro, metal/plastic silos) ............................. 52
Table 27: Cost Benefit Analysis for Provision of storage facilities (PICS bags, Grainpro, metal/plastic
silos) .............................................................................................................................................. 52
Table 28: Budget for Crop breeding for improved varieties and Integrated Pest Management ......... 53
iv
Table 29: Cost Benefit Analysis for Crop breeding for improved varieties and integrated pest
management ................................................................................................................................. 53
v
Executive summary
The main objective of this study was to assess food losses and obtain a clear view of the weak points
in selected food supply chains (FSC) in the mahangu (pearl millet) subsector in Namibia, and the
identification of interventions to reduce food losses and improve the FSC efficiency. The first step
was to conduct a situational analysis involving a review of relevant information from secondary data,
documentation and reports and expert consultations (by phone, e-mail and in person) without
travelling to the field. This initial screening step provided insight into the information gaps and gave
an overview of the food supply chains in the pearl millet subsector and subsequently enabled the
selection of a pearl millet supply chain in the Oshikoto Region to conduct a more detailed
assessment. In order to get more information on the supply chain, a study was conducted by
interviewing 130 smallholder producers and several experts in the Oshikoto Region.
It is estimated that about 5% of the grains (750 tonnes) is lost in the drying in the field stage. These
losses are mainly due to bird attacks (red-billed quelea, 85% of households) domestic animals (48%),
rodents (38%), weather (36%) and termites (23%). Post-harvest handling (drying) losses are
estimated at 3% of the grain (423 tonnes) mainly caused by birds (72% of HH), domestic animals
(39%), rodents (35%), termites (18%) and weather conditions (15%). The major causes of grain loss
at threshing are incomplete threshing (94% of households), grains mixed with sand (80%), birds
(39%), broken grains (29%), poor weather (26%); rodents (22%) domestic animals (16%), theft (10%)
and termites (10%). It is estimated that a 2% (274 tonnes) aggregate loss of the dried pearl millet is
suffered during threshing.
In the Oshikoto Region, quantitative food loss during pearl millet storage was estimated to be 4%
(537 tonnes) due to the practice of the farmers keeping the grains for more than 1 year as a way of
ensuring household food security in years of limited productivity. However, quality losses can be as
high as 40%. There are health and marketing implications for these qualitative losses.
In order to reduce food loss as well as lighten womens labour burden (the study shows that they are the
main actors in the pearl millet supply chains) and increase income for the smallholder producers some
affordable interventions were suggested. These include: developing a national postharvest
management strategy and implementation plan, research on improved varieties, integrated pest
management, improved storage capacity and quality, piloting and providing appropriate postharvest
technologies (dryers/threshers) and training on postharvest reduction management practices.
Food security in Namibia needs to be improved through reduced food losses and increased value
addition and this entails designing specific strategies and policies on these issues. Farmers need to be
supported by both the public and private sectors to strengthen their capacity in storage, processing,
marketing, safety standards and quality assurance of grain so that they may access local and
international markets.
vi
1 Introduction and background
Although Namibia is one of the driest countries in the world, the agriculture sector remains central
to the lives of the majority of the population as it supports over 70 % of the country's population,
directly or indirectly. It also contributes about 7% to the national Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
Namibias agricultural sector is dominated by livestock farming, followed by crop farming. The
difference between the two sectors was huge in the 1980s but reduced significantly since 1996. Crop
farming even contributed more to the GDP than livestock farming between 2001 and 2005. Farming
can also be divided into three subsectors as: private commercial farming (capital intensive, relatively
well developed and export oriented), government farms (comprised of about 15 irrigation schemes)
and communal farming (subsistence-based, high-labour, low-technology and input). There are
roughly 4,000 commercial farms occupying approximately 44% of farmlands of which, 3,000 are
white-owned. The communal sector is comprised of roughly 170,000 households (NSA, 2015)
occupying about 38% of the total farming area of Namibia.
Due to the dryness of the country, cereal production is limited to subsistence dry land production of
pearl millet, maize and sorghum in the Northern Communal Areas (NCA) comprising the North
Central Regions -NCR- (Omusati, Oshana, Ohangwena and Oshikoto), Kunene Region; Kavango East
and West Regions; and the Zambezi Region (Figure 1). Commercial production of maize (mainly
white maize), wheat, pearl millet and rice occur in large-scale farms and irrigated schemes around
the country. Cereals contributed 14% to the Gross Agricultural Production of which pearl millet
grown in the NCAs accounted for 64% (Mendelsohn, 2006).
a) Government and private sector involvement in the pearl millet subsector: developments over
the last 15 years
Pearl Millet, locally known as mahangu, is the preferred grain staple grown by the majority of small-
scale farmers primarily under subsistence, rain-fed cultivation systems on communal land in the
eight Northern Communal Areas (Omusati, Oshana, Ohangwena, Oshikoto, Kavango East, Kavango
West , Zambezi and Kunene) (Figure 1). To a limited extent, it is also grown in some parts of the
Otjozondjupa Region and by some commercial farmers mainly in the Tsumeb-Grootfontein-Otavi
area (so called maize triangle).
This crop is highly adapted to low rainfall and the prevailing soil conditions in these regions. Low and
sporadic rains during early season significantly interfere with crop establishment while same events
towards the end of the season adversely affect grain formation (CAC, 2010). For many years, small-
scale farmers have survived on the low yields generally obtained from pearl millet (FAO, n.d.). The
crop is the backbone of the economies of rural households in the NCAs and is a staple food for at
least 60 % of the Namibian population.
1
Figure 1: Map of major pearl millet producing regions
The most common size of production land units in NCAs ranges between 1 and 5ha per household,
but some operators, especially wealthy influential households, cultivate at least 20 ha. Average yield
of pearl millet were 0.2 tonnes/ha in Omusati, Ohangwena, and Oshana Regions, while in Oshikoto
Region it was 0.3 tonnes/ha and 0.5 tonnes/ha in Kavango and Zambezi Regions (CAC, 2011) (Figure
2). The average household pearl millet cultivated area in Omusati, Ohangwena, Oshana, Oshikoto,
Kavango and Zambezi Regions were 1.6 ha, 1.7 ha, 0.9 ha, 1.5 ha, 0.4 ha and 0.1 ha respectively
(CAC, 2011).
2
Production per farmer in the regions
1.8
1.7
1.6 1.6
1.5
1.4
1.2
1
0.9
0.8
0.6
0.5 0.5
0.4 0.4 0.45
0.2 0.3 0.32 0.32
0.2 0.1 0.2 0.18 0.2 0.2
0 0.05
Zambezi Kavango Oshana Oshikoto Omusati Ohangwena
Yield per farmer (t/ha) Area per household (ha) Total production per farmer (MT)
Figure 2: Production patterns per farmer
No of farmers, production and yield per producing region

50000 0.6
45000
0.5
40000
35000
0.4
30000
25000 0.3
20000
0.2
15000
10000
0.1
5000
0 0
Zambezi Oshana Kavango Ohangwena Omusati Oshikoto
No of mahangu farmers MT produced per region Yield t/ha
Figure 3: Comparison of production, number of farmers and yields in different regions
The number of producing households in Omusati, Ohangwena, Oshana, Oshikoto, Kavango and
Zambezi were 43,896, 39,350, 20,133, 32,538, 26,086 and 14,685 respectively (NSA, 2011) (Figure 3).
The producers were 53% male and 47% female (NSA, 2015) based on the headship of households,
however, women are usually the main producers even in married households though culturally the
husband is recognized as the producer. Moreover, women account for 59% of all those engaged in
skilled and subsistence agricultural work in the food supply chain process while men contribute only
3
up to 41% of labour in the production processes (Japan International Cooperation Agency -JICA,
2009). The production information for pearl millet subsector is presented in Table 1.
The NCAs estimated pearl millet production is about 52,430 tonnes (Figure 4) based on a five year
average from 2008/09 to 2012/13 seasons with a corresponding average of 2,460 tonnes of pearl
millet imported, (Namibian Agronomic Board -NAB, 2014). The average price per ton during the
corresponding period was N$2,646, thus the average value of production was US$ 10.7 million
(Table 1). However, all the major dry land crop producing regions noted a massive reduction in
harvests in the 2014/15 season with about 20-70% lower yield compared to the average production
and the previous seasons harvest. The poor crop harvest is due to poor rainfall performance
experienced in the country this season and both communal and commercial dry land crop
production sectors are affected.
Table 1: Production information of the pearl millet subsector

Value
Volume
NATIONAL USD/yr Remarks
ton/yr
(million)
Raw materials annual production:
Yield and area based on CAC (2011), total
number households based on population
census (2011), pearl millet average price
Omusati 14,310 2.9 N$ 2 646/ton
Ohangwena 13,540 2.8 census (2011)
Oshana 3,620 0.74 census (2011)
Oshikoto 14,930 3.04 census (2011)
Kavango (west & east) 5,220 1.1 census (2011)
Zambezi 810 0.2 census (2011)
Kunene n.s n.s Yield figures are not known
Pearl millet grain 52,430 10.7 census (2011)
N$5 600/ton Namib Mills price, assumed
Whole pearl millet meal that conversion factor from grain to flour is
formal 8600 3.7 1:1
Whole pearl millet meal
(small scale processors
and household milling) >46,280 >20 N$5 600 meal price per ton
5 year average of 2008/9 to 2012/13
season (NAB, 2014).
Imports 2,460 1.1 Imports ceiling is 5 000 tonnes per year.
4
2 460 1 large registered processor (processes
(import) both domestic and imported grain)
Level of processing
900 (local) domestic marketed pearl millet average
operations : Large
3 360 908 tonnes
(Total) 1.4
17 registered medium processors process
from local and illegal imports, 10% of total
Medium 5,240 2.3 production (NAB, 2014).
Unknown number of small millers and
Small >46,280 >20 household milling (pounding)
Large
Level of trading/ Medium Trading and Wholesale (number unknown)
wholesale operations Small
Level of retail operations: Large
Small formal and informal, large formal
Medium
supermarkets (number unknown)
Small
NB: US$1 = N$13
80000
70000
60000
50000
tonne 40000
30000
20000
10000
0
2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/2012 2012/2013
Figure 4: Pearl millet grain production (ton) from 2008/09 to 2012/13 seasons (NAB, 2013)
Domestically Namibia is not self-sufficient in terms of pearl millet production (Table 1) and some
tightly controlled importation of pearl millet grains from India is done by the government, through a
formal market chain. Although the quality of the Indian pearl millet grain is not as good as the locally
sourced grain, the formal milling sector requires it to meet the commercial market demand, as the
local harvest is insufficient. NAB issues permits to millers to import pearl millet according to the
appropriate standards according to guidelines. The NAB also prescribes and collects permit fees and
imposes levies of 1.4% per tonne of grain marketed from producers and 0.95% per tonne milled
from the millers (NAB, 2014). Relatively smaller quantities of pearl millet, mainly for household
consumption, are also brought by relatives from Angola. It is important to note that sometimes
these grains from Angola also end up in the Namibian informal market (open markets) (Thomas and
Mpofu, 2013). For the 2013/14 season, around 3,863 tonnes were imported (NAB, 2014).
5
Pearl millet was gazetted as a controlled crop by the Namibian Government under the Namibia
Agronomic Act 20 of 1992 No.465. This means that, in principle, the Namibia border is closed for
imports. The rationale is to protect domestic produce from fierce competitive threats of cheaper
imports. Being a controlled crop, the pearl millet markets are well regulated by government. The
price of pearl millet is determined by producers and millers in the industry, taking into account the
cost of production based on SAFEX pricing. For the 2013/2014 season, the Namibian average
producer price for pearl millet grain per kg was N$3.50 (NAB, 2014). According to Lucas (2010), the
pearl millet price at national food reserve (silos) will be the same as the price paid to farmers at
collection centres provided the pearl millet stored in silos is no older than 18 months. Nevertheless,
the quality standards of pearl millet grains traded is not specifically well articulated and farmers are
not well informed. For example, grading, sorting and packaging standards need to be improved as
they are important marketing functions.
b) Inventory of activities and lessons learnt from past and on-going interventions
The government recognised the economic potential for pearl millet growing shortly after
independence (1990) and has promoted its production over the years. A number of documents and
analyses describing pearl millet production and related issues have been produced for wide
circulation (Sattar et al., 2003). Many programmes and projects focus(ed) mainly on production and
marketing and aim to integrate or coordinate production with post-harvest management and
marketing aspects with a few aiming at commercial export markets, rather than on post-harvest
food losses. The following section is a review of some important pearl millet subsector programmes
and projects.
Mahangu (Pearl millet) Marketing Intelligent Unit MMIU (1995 2006):
The MMIU was established to promote the commercial utilisation of pearl millet in Namibia and its
primary beneficiaries were rural farmers. The MMIU provided marketing information to rural
farmers and traders and technical information to grain processors in Northern regions. The project
functioned from 1995 2006 and it created the Small Scale Millers Association with its regional
office in Rundu, which helped about 500 mills operating in the country. The project, funded by
MAWRD (Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Rural Development, the forerunner to MAWF), was
partially successful but its funds were depleted by early 2006 after which the MMIUs activities were
then transferred to the Namibian Agronomic Board (NAB).
Mahangu (Pearl millet) Urban Consumption Survey (2002-2003):
The Pearl millet urban consumption study prepared a strategic marketing plan, market research and
proposal to launch a generic pearl millet campaign. The study was conducted in two phases
(qualitative and quantitative) in Oshakati and Windhoek between May and October 2002. Pearl
millet consumption is significant in both Oshakati and Windhoek, in terms of both the quantity
consumed (7.4 kg and 2.1 kg respectively per person and per month) and the frequency of
consumption (more than 80% of consumers eat porridge more than 3 times a week) (Leporrier et al.,
2002). The study found that there was a clear trend towards substitution amongst the wealthiest
households, and young urban dwellers who tend not to prepare millet, even if they eat it in their
village. The programme was funded by the French cooperation and MAWRD and implemented by a
French cooperation-research marketing company.
Comprehensive Conservation Agriculture Programme of Namibia (2015-2019)
The Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry has launched a five-year (2015 to 2019)
Comprehensive Conservation Agriculture Programme for Namibia to encourage farmers to adopt
conservation agricultural practices. The programme is based on the premise that the future of food
6
security relies not only on higher production and access to food, but also on the need to address the
destructive effects of production practices on the environment and the devastating and negative
impacts of climate change. The programme is expected to address the problem of low and erratic
rainfall, through the use of practices that reduce water losses and increase infiltration and improve
low soil nutrients, by increasing soil carbon and nitrogen through the use of organic soil covers and
legumes in rotation. The programme also aims at providing government assistance in the form of
subsidies to communal crop and livestock producers in the Omusati, Oshana, Ohangwena, Oshikoto,
Kavango East, Kavango West, Zambezi, Otjozondjupa, Kunene and Omaheke regions, as well as in
Hardap, Erongo and //Karas. Commercially rain-fed farmers, including resettlement farmers,
affirmative action farmers and irrigation farmers in the maize triangle, as well as farmers in
horticulture programmes and those involved in green scheme irrigation projects will also benefit.
Namibia Census of Agriculture (2013/14)
The Namibia Statistics Agency (NSA) conducted an Agricultural Census in the 2013/14 Agricultural
Year in collaboration with the Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry, and with funding from
FAO and the African Development Bank (AfDB). The Namibia Agricultural Census collected detailed
data on crop production, crop storage, livestock production, and fish farming. The census was
extensive in its scope and coverage as it provides data disaggregated by sex and by region level. The
census covered both the Communal Agriculture and Commercial Agriculture Sectors, however only
the results of the Communal Sector are released at the time of this report. According to the Census,
about 10% of the total pearl millet produced in the communal sector for the 2013/14 year was lost
by the farmers of which around 93% were lost in the field (including shelling and drying). The
remaining 7% of the post-harvest losses took place during storage and transportation process.
Support to the processing of indigenous fruit & pearl millet (2000-2003):
The project was started in 2000 to assist smallholder farmers in processing their produce and pearl
millet grains. Beneficiaries were poor farmers in rural areas. French experts demonstrated how to
process pearl millet grains for sale to generate additional income. The French cooperation and
MAWRD funded the project which was implemented by NAB. The project was partially successful
and provided for a roadmap for pearl millet subsector development. However, stable and suitable
long-term markets for the pearl millet subsector were not achieved by the time the project ended in
2003.
Integrated grain storage (1998-ongoing):
This project aims to address post-harvest grain handling and storage problems through funding
interventions at the household, village and regional levels and to enable rural farmers to deal with
grains surpluses/gluts in the Regions. This project started in 1998 with the construction of three
community stores at Sangwali, Chinchimani and Muyako in the Zambezi (Caprivi) region. However,
there were no more stores built after this and the stores visited in the course of this study were
abandoned and/or being used for other purposes. Rather, in 2006, the Government embarked on
establishing silos in different grain producing regions to ensure food security. Silos were constructed
in Katima Mulilo (Zambezi region 7,400 tonnes), Rundu (Kavango East region 4,000 tonnes),
Omuthiya-Gwiipundi (Oshikoto region 3,000 tonnes), Okongo (Ohangwena region 500 tonnes)
and Tsandi (Omusati region 3,000 tonnes). The plan is to have food reserves with 60,000 tonnes
capacity, equivalent to four months of emergency food relief.
7
Rainfed Crop Production Programme (RCPP) (2010-on-going):
The RCPP aims to promote food security at the household level through the provision of improved
seeds and fertilizers as well as ploughing and weeding services to communal farmers at subsidized
prices. The RCPP started first in 2010 and was implemented in Kavango (west and east), Zambezi
(Caprivi), Oshikoto, Oshana, Ohangwena and Omusati Regions. This programme is funded by MAWF.
In the 2011/12 financial year, about 15,294 subsistence farmers benefited from the programme (Iita,
2012). However, the programme is marred by some farmers limited knowledge on how to apply
fertilizers to improve crop production. In addition, insufficient funds and limited availability of
ploughing service providers prevent the programme to reach out to all targeted beneficiaries.
Though the programme does not specifically include post-harvest issues, there are prospects that
these may be easily integrated into it.
The Mahangu (Pearl millet) Marketing Plan (2010 2013):
The Mahangu Marketing Plan aimed to improve the wellbeing of farming communities through
guaranteeing a market for surplus pearl millet. The programme also helped to strengthen and
encourage entrepreneurs to establish pearl millet processing facilities. The Mahangu Marketing Plan
was started in 2010 and ended in 2013. A National Mahangu Advisory Committee was established to
oversee the project. Amongst the problems experienced during the projects were inadequate
surplus from pearl millet farmers and insufficient access to affordable processing (milling)
technologies. The project was funded by MAWF and implemented by NAB and the Agro-Marketing
and Trade Agency (AMTA). It provided the road map to continue with the next phase namely the
Mahangu Development and Marketing Plan 2014-2019.
Research and extension:
Extension services include training, technology dissemination (including postharvest handling

technology), advice, and implementing research findings. Between 1990 and 1992, research
proposals on the "Storability of Pearl Millet Varieties using Selected Mini-mode Structures Typically
Employed by Farmers in Ovambo, Kavango and Caprivi" were developed by MAWRD and submitted
to the National Planning Commission for funding. However, the research programme was not
implemented (MAWRD, 2003). During 1998 and 1999 a programme of replicated trials was
conducted at Mahenene and Okashana Research Stations by NRI (Natural Research Institute of UK)
and MARWD Technicians, using funding from the UK DFID. The objective of the trials was to
determine the source of infestation of the moth Corcyra cephalonica, which is the most common
insect pest of stored pearl millet. The results clearly demonstrated that the grain was already
infested before it was placed in store. The study further demonstrated that there was no statistically
significant difference in insect infestation between untreated pearl millet stored in traditional
Mopane baskets and untreated pearl millet stored in corrugated metal grain tanks. The use of wood
ash applied in layers significantly reduced insect infestation. However, there were differences
resulting from different varieties of pearl millet and different types of ash (MARWD, 2003).
Mahangu (Pearl millet) Development and Marketing Plan (2014-2019):
The Mahangu (Pearl millet) Development and Marketing Plan is a continuation of the Mahangu
Marketing Plan (2010-2013). The plan continues to support surplus production initiatives for farmers
and promote buying of pearl millet surplus by AMTA at Agriculture Development Centres (ADCs) and
other collection centres in the pearl millet producing regions for the GRN silos. The implementing
agencies are NAB and AMTA and the programme is funded by the MAWF.
8
Promoting Mahangu and Sorghum in Namibia (2000):
A study on Promoting Mahangu (Pearl millet) and Sorghum in Namibia was carried out by CRIAA SA-
DC (2000) for MAWRD and the Namibian Agronomic Board (NAB). It was aimed at coordinating
national efforts to promote increased commercialization and processing of indigenous grain in
Namibia. A Mahangu and Sorghum Task Team was formed to improve coordination and institutional
linkages for pearl millet and sorghum marketing and processing activities.
Grain Management Review:
A series of studies were carried out on the Analysis of the Mahangu Post-Harvest Chain and Review
of the Progress of Implementation of the Mahangu and Sorghum Action Plan. These studies were
summarized in the final report National Agricultural Support Services Programme (NASSP) Report
No. 005/2003 and the results are used to compare/validate the current study.
Namibia Country Pilot Partnership Programme: Adapting to Climate Change Through the
Improvement of Traditional Crops and Livestock Farming:
The project was implemented as part of Namibias Country Pilot Partnership for Integrated
Sustainable Land Management (CPP ISLM), which sought to enhance the adaptive capacities of
subsistence farmers and natural resource managers to climate change in agricultural systems. The
project was funded by the Global Environment Facility, implemented by the UNDP, executed by the
MAWF and was piloted in the Omusati region in the northern part of Namibia from 2007-2011. The
project piloted the use of plastic storage granaries to assess their resilience to pest attacks, water
contamination and long-term storage compared to the traditional structures made of wood. Plastic
granaries were found to protect against the damage caused by pests (a particular problem with
improved seed), and flood damage, as well as helping to combat deforestation by substituting
demand for wood (MAWF, 2012). Although the rural farmers showed interest in the plastic
granaries, they were found to be too expensive.
Food Security and Nutrition Development Programme (FSNDP):
The FSNDP was established to assist in implementing the Food Security and Nutrition Policy in
Namibia aimed at raising and maintaining an acceptable level of nutrition and standard of living for
Namibian people. It started in 1995 and ended in 2006. The programme resulted in the
establishment of Food Insecurity and Vulnerability Information and Mapping Systems (FIVIMS) and
the Food Security and Early Warning Information System (FSIEWS) for Namibia. The programme was
implemented by the Division of Rural Development Planning, MAWRD, in collaboration with the
Nutrition Unit within the Ministry of Health and Social Services. The Government funded the
programme and FAO provided technical assistance.
c) National policy framework or strategy related to pearl millet food loss
Vision 2030:
The national long-term development goal outlined in the Vision 2030 commits the Government of
the Republic of Namibia to devise programmes and projects to ensure food security at national and
household levels. Therefore, the agricultural sector's vision is to modernise agriculture in line with
the Vision 2030. It is hoped that modernised agriculture will contribute to high incomes and food
security at household and national levels, which in turn will lead to sustainable and equitable
economic growth, whilst maintaining and improving land capability. The focus on agriculture under
National Development Plan 4 (NDP, 2012-2017) goes beyond production to include large-scale
development of the agribusiness and agro-industrial (agro-processing) sector.
9
National Development Plans (NDPs) (1995- ongoing):
Agriculture continues to be the priority focus under the NDPs. For example NDP 4 strategies to be
deployed to increase agriculture production and real growth include the promotion of a green
scheme and the establishment of national food reserve infrastructure (silos) and research stations.
The Green Scheme Policy (2008):
The Green Scheme Policy aims to increase Namibias food production capacity for both domestic and
export markets through irrigation on both commercial and communal land. The policy promotes an
increased synergy between government and the private sector for investment in agro-projects.
Green scheme policy aims at encouraging the development of irrigation based agronomic
production. The policy makes provision for developing cereals (including mahangu) storage
infrastructure for strategic food reserves. By recognizing the need to improve access to finance for
agricultural production, the policy also supports the reform of the existing finance scheme. Finally,
the policy states that government will continue to strengthen capacity building programmes through
the provision of training and extension services to ensure that the MAWF employs the best
technologies and farming practices that will make Namibias agriculture sector productive,
competitive and sustainable.
National Food and Nutrition Policy (NFNP) 1995:
The NFNP aims to improve the nutritional status of the population, taking into account the policy
initiatives in other sectors, particularly in health and agriculture. One of the specific objectives of the
NFNP is to improve the quantity and quality of food consumed by the population with the aim of
ensuring an adequate diet for all.
Namibia Food Safety Policy (2014):
The overall objective of the policy is to ensure food safety for all consumers in Namibia and provide
sufficient food safety guarantees on all food products traded nationally, or exported to other
countries in line with Codex Alimentarius Commissions requirements. The food safety policy
stipulates guidelines and standards that must be followed during the processing of food so that it
can be fit for human consumption. MAWF is responsible for the safe production of foods of animals
and plant origin, including primary processed forms.
Namibia Agricultural Policy (NAP) 2015:
The NAP aims to (1) ensure food security and improve nutritional status; (2) create and sustain
viable livelihood and employment opportunities in rural areas; and (3) improve the living standards
of farmers and their families, as well as farm workers. The Namibia Agriculture Policy of 2015 is a
revision of the 1995 NAP that brought it in line with current development realities. The policy puts
more emphasis on expanding production through intensification, innovation and marketing, as well
as encouraging government to work in partnership with private enterprises to jointly plan and
exploit the agricultural expansion potential.
Disaster Risk Management Policy (2004):
The policy aims to contribute to the attainment of sustainable development in line with Namibias
Vision 2030 through strengthening national capacity to significantly reduce disaster risk and build
community resilience to disasters.
10
Seed policy (2005):
It focuses on the development and implementation of seed programmes in order to avail adequate
high quality seed and planting material to the farming community. This policy addresses the
challenges in the seed sector with respect to research and extension, seed imports, seed production,
processing and quality control, marketing, distribution and strategic seed reserves, as well as the
institutional and legal framework.
National Gender Policy (2010-20):
This policy aims to serve the following purposes: i) provide mechanisms and guidelines for all sectors
and other stakeholders for planning, implementing and monitoring gender equality strategies and
programmes in order to ensure effective strategies for gender equality and womens empowerment;
ii) create an enabling environment for the empowerment of women in order to ensure their full
participation in socio-economic and decision-making processes in all sectors and at all levels; iii)
define mechanisms and structures for institutional frameworks that can coordinate and guide
implementation of gender equality programmes amongst partners and in the society, and to
monitor and evaluate gender programming.
Cooperative Act of 1996:
The Cooperative Act mandates MAWF to promote the development of the cooperative movement.
Multipurpose Cooperatives are relevant to the farming community because they provide for
farmers savings and credits, agricultural inputs supply and farm produce marketing, and consumer
goods supply.
Quality standards and regulatory frameworks for pearl millet:
The quality standard for Pearl millet is stated in General Notice No. 89 Grading Standards for Whole
and Decorticated Pearl Millet (Mahangu) Grains as published in the Government Gazette, No. 2353
of 20 June 2000. The standard recognises two types of grains as: Whole Grains (grains of pearl millet
obtained as such after proper threshing with no mechanical treatment) and Decorticated Grains
(grains of pearl millet from which outer parts, amounting to 20-22% of the weight of the whole
grains have been removed in an appropriate manner using mechanical treatment (for example,
simple abrasion)). It also divides pearl millet into 2 groups of improved (Okashana) and local variety
with 3 grades (1, 2, 3) each (Table 2).
Table 2: Pearl millet Quality Standards

Maximum percentage of deviation allowed (m/m)
Description of deviation Okashana I Farmers local variety
Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3
Foreign matter above 3.35 mm 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0%
sieve
Foreign matter above 1.4 mm 0.5% 0.6% 0.7% 0.5% 0.6% 0.7%
sieve
Foreign matter below 1.4 mm 5% 10% 15% 5% 10% 15%
sieve
Total deviations 7.5% 13.6% 19.7% 7.5% 13.6% 19.7%
Generally, the maximum moisture content of pearl millet should not exceed 12.5%. All grains must
be free from abnormal flavours, noxious seeds, filth (impurities of animal origin including dead
11
insects), odours, and living insects; and grain shall be safe and suitable for human consumption. The
grain shall be free from contaminants such as heavy metals, pesticide residues and mycotoxins or
meet the maximum limits established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The total allowable
deviations of foreign matter content for grade 1 is 7.5%, grade 2 is 13.6% and grade 3 is 19.7% (Table
2).
d) Relevant institutions and their roles in terms of policy and management in small and medium
pearl millet subsector
The following institutions are involved in the pearl millet subsector:
Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry (MAWF)
The mission of the Ministry is to realize the potential of the Agricultural, Water and Forestry sectors
towards the promotion of an efficient and sustainable socio-economic development for a
prosperous Namibia. The Directorate of Agricultural Production, Extension and Engineering Services
(DAPEES) and the Directorate of Agricultural Research and Development (DARD) and the Directorate
of Planning and Business Development (DPBD) are especially important to post-harvest of pearl
millet subsector.
DAPEES was created to provide agricultural extension services to farmers, agro-based industries and
other stakeholders in the form of information communication, advisory and training services.
DAPEES exists to promote the adoption of improved agricultural technologies and practices in order
to increase agricultural production, empower farmers and facilitate sustainable improvement in
living conditions of rural communities.
DARD aims to facilitate the development and management of MAWF human resources at all levels
and in all disciplines, and to undertake well-balanced crop, livestock and natural resource research
within the communal and commercial sectors, contributing to increased productivity and sustainable
utilisation of natural resources under arid, semi-arid and sub-humid condition, thereby improving
the living standards of the Namibian population.
DPBD: aims to inform and advise decision makers and other role players in the private and public
sectors on policy issues as well as facilitating and implementing some of the policies, programmes
and activities in the fields of agriculture and co-operatives.
Agricultural Business Development Agency (AGRIBUSDEV):
AGRIBUSDEV was created by the Namibian Government in 2011 as an Agency within the MAWF to
oversee the management of government Green Scheme Projects through monitoring and creation of
an ideal environment in order to achieve the Green Scheme Policy objectives. Smallholder farmers in
the green scheme have no organized formal structures such as cooperatives.
The Namibian Agronomy Board (NAB):
The NAB is a statutory body instituted by the government of the Republic of Namibia in terms of the
Agronomic Industry Act (Act 20 of 1992). This Board was originally constituted as a statutory body on
1 April 1985 in terms of the Agronomic Industry Proclamations AG11 and AG12 of 1985 (NAB, 2005:
2). Its main objectives are to promote the agronomic industry and to facilitate the promotion,
processing, storage and marketing of controlled agronomic products (maize, pearl millet, and wheat)
in Namibia. The NAB also issue imports permits for maize grain. Under NAB, there are other
committees responsible for organising farmers and producers, namely the Namibia National
Producers Association (NNPA), the Namibia Grain Producers Association (NGPA) and the Namibia
Forum for Grain Producers (NFGP).
12
Agro-Marketing and Trade Agency (AMTA):
The Agro-Marketing and Trade Agency was created in 2013 as a specialized Agency to coordinate
and manage the marketing and trading of Agricultural Fresh Produce Business Hubs and the National
Strategic Food Reserve (NSFR) infrastructure, towards the attainment of food safety and security in
the country. AMTA officials are responsible for border controls and checking of import permits for
pearl millet that are issued by Namibian Agronomic Board (NAB).
Namibia National Farmers Union (NNFU):
The NNFU is a national federation of regional farmers unions. It was established in June 1992 to
serve as a mouthpiece for Namibias communal and emerging farmers. NNFU aims to increase food
production for household food security, enhance marketing of farming product to increase
household income, increase participation and recognition of women in farming, contribute to
environmental protection and sustainable utilization of natural resources. To reach these objectives
NNFU runs an advocacy/ policy education program that aims to influence national policies, ensures
capacity building of farmers and facilitates the launching of tangible grassroots projects. NNFU also
participates in networks at sub regional and international levels. For example NNFU signed a
contract with NAB from 2007 to 2010, for supporting smallholder farmers in marketing of pearl
millet, maize and melon seeds.
The Small Millers Association of Northern Namibia (SMANN):
The Small Millers Association of Northern Namibia who opens its membership to service millers and
small-scale commercial millers, was constituted in 2001 with facilitation and support of MMIU.
The Ministry of Industrialization, Trade and SME Development:
The Ministry is responsible for promoting growth and development of the economy through the
formulation and implementation of appropriate policies to attract investment, increase trade,
develop and expand the countrys industrial base. For instance the ministry contributes to the
development of agro-processing sector in Namibia. The Ministry was also tasked to include pearl
millet as a sensitive product (infant industry) in the SADC Free Trade Agreement (NAB, 2008).
Rural Development Centres (RDC): The Rural Development Centres are expected to develop and
produce appropriate equipment for land preparation, planting, weed control, crop harvesting,
threshing, de-hulling, milling etc. Because all labour is paid for by the government, the RDCs can sell
equipment at subsidized rates as the price is only determined by raw materials and a 25% overhead.
During the period from January 2014 to November 2015, the Ongwediva centre sold 23 hammer
mills and 21 threshers and 18 pearl millet storage tanks. The Ongwediva RDC has been
manufacturing improved grain stores for many years and is presently promoting corrugated iron
bins. Three sizes are being sold: the 1-sheet bin for 0.5 tonne of grain at N$ 2,750; the 2-sheet bin
for 1 tonne at N$ 3,500 and the 3-sheet bin for 1.5 tonne at N$ 4,250. These are subsidized prices
and reflect only the hardware inputs as the State pays for all labour involved.
Agricultural Bank of Namibia (AGRIBANK):
The Agricultural Bank of Namibia Act No. 5 of 2003 as amended was promulgated in order to expand
the scope of business to capitalize on opportunities in the market and transform the bank into a
more versatile and responsive institution to all stakeholders in order to meet the demands of the
ever-changing business environment. For example Agribank provide a production loan facility that
be used for the acquisition of seeds, fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides, weeding, fuel and oil,
transportation costs, wages for temporary worker, horticulture and micro-irrigation.
13
National Commission for Research, Science and Technology (NCRST):
The NCRST is established in terms of section 4 of Research Science and Technology Act, 2004 (Act no
23 of 2004). The mission for NCRST is to establish a national system that promotes, develops,
coordinates and informs Research, Science, Technology and Innovation towards a knowledge-based
society.
Institutions of Higher Learning (e.g. UNAM & NUST):
Two institutions namely: The University of Namibia and The National University of Science and
Technology offers courses in agriculture including crop production. They have divisions that are
responsible for research and development in agriculture production including postharvest
management.
Northern Namibia Farmers Seed Growers cooperative (NNFSGC):
These are producers responsible for seed multiplication including Katima Mulilo Farmers Seed
Producers Association (KAFASEPA) and Likorere Farmers Cooperative (LFC) in Kavango. NNFSGC
tried to produce seeds during the dry season and lost foundation seeds harvest to birds.
14
2 Situation analysis
a) The Pearl millet Supply Chain
The supply chain for Pearl millet in Namibia (Tables 1 and Table 3) is based mainly on communal
production and some imports (mainly from India). Though imports from India can be critical in
drought years, they are usually of less significance economically and socially (nobody is employed at
Namib Mills solely for pearl millet milling). The major pearl millet producing regions under
subsistence, rain-fed cultivation systems are Omusati, Oshana, Ohangwena, Oshikoto, Kavango (East
and West), and Zambezi. They are all of high economic and employment opportunity significance
with the exception of the Zambezi Region where maize is more important (Tables 3 and 4). However,
the communal farmers in Oshikoto region cultivate much larger pearl millet fields and are regular
surplus producers, thus this particular chain was selected for this assessment. Moreover, there are
more lead farmers1 in Oshikoto Region who are willing to take up new technologies as well as
initiatives for commercialization of pearl millet.
The main products in the supply chain are pearl millet grain (whole and dehulled/decorticated) and
pearl millet flour (plain and fermented) (Tables 3 and 5). Pearl millet is mainly consumed as thick
porridge (oshithima) made from the pearl millet flour. The flour can also be used to make thin
porridge (okatete), mixture of both fermented and unfermented nonalcoholic drinks (oshikundu),
fermented and plain flour based products such as pancakes (oshikwiila) and uncooked flour mixed
with sour milk (olumbololo). The grains can also be consumed as boiled decorticated grain (onona).
Table 3: Food supply chain in the pearl millet subsector

FSC # Geographic Final Volume Sex of Market of Project Economic Employment Generation Contribution
al area of product (ton/year) producers final support importance provision of foreign to national
production (%) product exchange food security
M F
Pearl millet RCPP* significant Very insignificant Very
grain 14,310 significant significant
Pearl millet
plain Home and
Omusati 45 55
(unfermen informal
ted) flour 1,288 market
fermented and AMTA
flour 11,334 and millers
Pearl millet Home and RCPP significant Very insignificant Very
grain 13,540 informal significant significant
Plain Pearl market
Ohangwena 43 57
Communal millet flour 1,219 and AMTA
production fermented and millers
flour 10,724
Pearl millet Home and RCPP significant Very insignificant Very
grain 3,620 informal significant significant
Plain Pearl market
Oshana 46 54
millet flour 326 and AMTA
fermented and millers
flour 2,867
Pearl millet 14,930 Home and RCPP significant Very insignificant Very
grain informal significant significant
Oshikoto 51 49
Plain Pearl market
millet flour 1,344 and AMTA
1
As recognised by extension officials. They are used to train other farmers.
15
flour 11,825
Pearl 5,220 Home and RCPP significant Significant insignificant Very
millet grain informal significant
Kavango
Plain Pearl market
(west & 57 43
east)
flour 4,134
Pearl 810 Home and RCPP Slightly Moderately insignificant Very
millet grain informal significant significant significant
plain Pearl market
Zambezi 56 44
flour 642
* RCPP Rainfed crop production programme
Table 4: Importance of the pearl millet supply chains

FSC # Economic Employment Generation of Contribution to
Importance provision foreign national food security
(USD) million exchange tonnes

Communal Pearl millet grain 99,040 n/a 52,430
(farmers & (10.7)
family and Pearl millet flour +900 n/a
workers) (24.7)
the 8 pearl millet producing regions contribute about 46% to total agriculture labour force
Table 5: Products in the pearl millet supply chain

Weight from
Process Product 100 Conversion Factor
Harvesting and
Pearl millet whole grain
threshing 100 1.00
Dehulling and
Dehulled grain
fermentation 88 1.13
Pearl millet flour
Milling service
(fermented) 80 1.25
Harvesting and
Pearl millet whole grain
threshing 100 1.00
Pearl millet flour (plain/
Milling large
unfermented) 90 1.1
16
Table 6: Food safety management mechanisms
Controller Control Actual Situation in the FSC Responsible agent

Exists and applies to
the whole FSC Namibia Standards
National food safety/
Institute (NSI), (NAB)
quality standards Exists but not rigorous YES
AMTA
Doesnt exist
Harvest None
Government Transport None
Frequency of checking
regulation and (None, Low, Medium, Storage None AMTA
requirements High)
Process Medium
Market Medium
Obligatory registration of Exists YES
the food processing/ NSI and AMTA
preparation unit Doesnt exist
FSC actors - GAP Medium AGRIBUSDEV
food safety GHP/ GAP/ HACCP/
HACCP High NSI/AMTA
management voluntary standards
system ISO High NSI/AMTA
Governments are duty bound to ensure food safety for all citizens through enforcing legislation
(Table 6) governing safe production, handling, processing, preparation and serving of food. These
legislations are wide and involve several ministries and departments, hence require central
coordination through a national food safety policy. In Namibia, food production is primarily the
responsibility of Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry, through its agencies (AGRIBUSDEV and
AMTA) which are responsible for enforcing food safety regulations at production and primary
handling level, including silos, pack-houses and slaughter houses. in compliance to food safety, in
line with Codex Alimentarius Commission requirements. The Namibia Standards Institute under the
Ministry of Trade and Industry is responsible for implementing the Standards Act, which controls
standards such as additives, processing aids, and all products traded in Namibia. Food safety
standards of plant (e.g. pearl millet) and animal products exported from Namibia is the responsibility
of Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry. Registration of food business operators, including
food retail and abattoirs for meat destined for national markets is done by regional authorities.
b) The selected pearl millet supply chain: Oshikoto region
The supply chain selected is that of pearl millet and its products (whole and dehulled/ decorticated
and pearl millet flour (plain and fermented) in the Oshikoto Region. The post-harvest processing of
pearl millet includes: drying in the field, harvesting (cutting), drying at homestead (at the drying
place known as oshipale), threshing and winnowing, storage, transport of surplus to the millers,
milling (large scale for formal markets and service milling for home consumption/local retail) and
marketing (Figure 5). These smallholder producers important post-harvest activities in rural areas of
Oshikoto are predominantly carried out manually by women and children and are often time
consuming and labour intensive (see Table 12 and Table 13). Of the total pearl millet produced, it is
projected that 65% of the threshed grains is consumed at home, 20% is kept for long term storage,
3% is kept for seeds, while 7% is marketed and 4% is lost during the long term storage (Figure 5).
17
In order to get more information about the supply chain, a Food Loss Assessment Survey was carried
out by administering questionnaires to 130 smallholder producers and interviewing some vendors,
millers and post-harvest experts (Annex 2) in Oshikoto region. This was complemented with field
observations and collection of samples where possible. However, the Load Tracking and Sampling
Assessment (Sampling) that was to follow this did not take place due to several reasons. Firstly, the
field visit to Oshikoto did not take place until mid-October 2015, by which time most of the pearl
millet processing had been accomplished. Secondly, the Terms of Reference given to the consultants
only require them to carry out the Screening and did not include the Load Tracking exercise as
part of their scope of work. Subsequently, no logistical provisions (sample bags, moisture meters,
sampling tubes etc.) were made to collect samples for load tracking. However, samples of grains
found at the producers stores and with some vendors were taken and analysed for qualitative losses
(Annex 4) using a quality analyses table as presented in Annex 3 (Quality Scoring Of Pearl Millet
Grains).
The quantitative losses in this study were arrived at from a combination of data from several sources
(Table 7). The first source was data gathered by the consultants from the post-harvest actors
(farmers, vendors, millers and extension officers). These data were found to be too variable as it was
difficult for these people to properly recollect and/or quantify the losses. The second source was
data from the National Census of Agriculture 2013/14 (NSA, 2015). These data were only given for
three post-harvest stages as: pre-storage, storage and post storage, thereby making it difficult to
assign values to individual stages since data were collected in a limited period of six months or less.
The third source was data from The African Post Harvest Losses Information System (APHLIS,
http://www.aphlis.net) which were estimated for different stages for the years 2003 and 2004 for
Ohangwena and Caprivi (now Zambezi) regions. The APHLIS estimates came from using results from
other countries that have different socio-economic and geo-political elements from Namibia. The
last source was data measured by extension officers over 3 years as part of the National Agricultural
Support Services Programme (NASSP) project on the pearl millet grain management survey and loss
assessment baseline. However, these data were collected for the storage stages only and not for
other post-harvest stages. These values were, therefore, adopted in this study for the storage stage.
For other stages, the consultants had to depend on arriving at a guestimate of the losses based on
a consideration of loss values from these sources as shown in the last column of Table 7. These
values were later validated at the National Stakeholders Workshop.
Table 7: Estimates (%) of quantitative pearl millet losses at different stages from different sources
Step in the FSC Estimates from several sources (%)

Farmer and APHLIS NASSP NCA Consultants
Experts i. 2003/4 ii. 2006 iii. iv. v.
Drying in the field 1-15% 5%
2-3.5
Harvesting: 0- 1% 0.5%
Transport to drying place 0- 1% 0.5%
(homestead)
Drying at the homestead (second 1-5% 3%
drying)
10
Threshing and winnowing manually 1-5% 0-2 2%
Threshing by tractor and winnowing 2-10% 3.5%
manually 2
Threshing and winnowing by 1-5% 2%
thresher
Transport to storage facility n.s 0-2.5 n.s
Storage on farm (granary up to 1 1- 3% 0.5 2 2 2% 4
18
year)
Storage on farm (granary 1 -3 years) 3% to 10% 5 5%
Bagging n.s n.s
Transport to market/miller n.s 1 n.s
De-hulling and fermentation n.s n.s
Milling manually n.s 1 n.s
Drying de-hulled pearl millet flour n.s n.s
Milling using milling machine 0.5% 0.5%
Market/retail n.s 1.3-2-7 n.s
i. Farmers and experts estimates varied widely, thus the need to look for other sources before
arriving at the loss values
ii. Values generated for Ohangwena and Caprivi (Zambezi) by African Postharvest Losses
Information System (APHLIS) but are based on data from other countries where the socio-
economic and political situations are different from Namibia (large farm)
iii. Values measured by Extension officers over 3 year (but for storage structures only) as part of the
National Agricultural Support Services Programme (NASSP) project on the pearl millet grain
management survey and loss assessment baseline
iv. Data gathered from the field and reported in the Namibian Census of Agriculture 2013/2014.
Data were gathered for a short period (within 6 months) and not for all the post-harvest
segments.
v. Consultants guestimates of the loss values based on evaluation of the data from the other
sources and as validated in a National Workshop.
Table 8: Screening of food losses in the selected FSC (Pearl Millet flour, Oshikoto)
FSC # 1___, <Oshikoto>, <pearl millet flour>

Step in the FSC Presumed losses
Quantit Qualitat Description of cause of loss
ative (%) ive (%)
Drying in the field 5 1 Birds, domestic animals, rodents,
weather (rain) termites, insect
infestation
Harvesting/transport to 0.5 1 Poor handling, late rain
drying place (Homestead)
Drying at the Homestead 3 5 Birds, domestic animals, rodents,
(second drying) late(rain termites
Threshing and winnowing 2 5 Grain mixed with sand, birds, broken
manually grain, poor weather, rodents,
Threshing by tractor and 3.5 5 domestic animals, theft, termites,
2
winnowing manually incomplete threshing
Threshing and winnowing by 2 3 Broken grains, failure to adjust the
thresher thresher properly.
Transport to storage facility n.s 0 Spillage
Storage on farm (traditional 2 10 Moths, weevils, rodents, termites,
granary up to 1 year) flour beetle, fungi, theft
Storage on farm (traditional 5 4 40 increased activity of moths, weevils,
granary 1 -3 years) rodents, termites, flour beetle, fungi,
theft
Bagging n.s 1 Handling
Transport to market/miller n.s 1 Spillage
19
De-hulling and fermentation n.s n/a Poor handling and spillage
Milling manually n.s n/a Poor handling and Spillage
Drying de-hulled pearl millet n.s 0.5 Blown by wind, Eaten by chicken
flour
Milling using milling machine 0.5 n/a handling, wind blower, no proper
drying, some flour remaining in the
machine
Market/retail n.s n.s Handling
20
Table 9: Detailed description of the food supply chain basics: (Pearl Millet, Oshikoto)
FSC stage Location Months of Number of actors (%) Products Quantity Facilities/equipment Duration/ Inputs and services
the year Men Women (ton) Distance
Primary Oshikoto Dec-April Ploughing Ploughing (10%- Pearl millet 14,930 Animal drawn plough, 3-5 months manure, seeds,
Production region 60-90%; 40%); Sowing cultivator, tractor drawn extension services
Weeding (90%)Weeding ploughing, and planter and labour
(30%) (60%+)
Drying in the Oshikoto May/June +10% 70%-90% (+ Pearl millet head (Less 5% 14,183.5 1 month labour
field region children, elderly field loss = 746.5 tonnes) Scare crow
and workers)
Harvest/ Oshikoto May-June +10% 70%-90% (+ Pearl millet head (Less 0.5% 14,112.6 scotch cart, hired truck, 2 months labour
transport to region children, elderly field loss = 71 tonnes) baskets, wheelbarrow,
drying place and workers) headload
Drying Oshikoto May-August <10% Over 90% (+ Pearl millet head (Less 3% 13689.2.4 Drying place up to 4 labour
region children, elderly loss =423.4 tonnes) months
and workers)
Threshing & Oshikoto June-August <10% Over 90% (+ Pearl millet grain (Less 2% 13,415.4 thresher, beating rod, up to 3 labour
winnowing region children, elderly loss =273.8 tonnes) winnowing baskets, months
and workers) carrying baskets and
containers
Oshikoto August up 15% 85% grain (consumption) 65% 8720 granary varies labour
region to 3 years Grain (seed) 4% 537 between 1-
Storage at the Grain (long term storage) 2683 3 years
farm 20%
Grain loss 4% in storage 537
Grain marketed 7% 939
Transportation Oshikoto June - 20% 80% pearl millet grain 939 Scotch cart, tractor and 4 months/ loading labour,
from farm to region September trailer, hired truck and 0km-150km transport hire
market lorry, bags
Sales Oshikoto June-Sept Joint decision for married Pearl millet NFSR (1%) 134 grain cleaner, bags, scale, 4 months cleaning, weighing,
region couples grain Millers (2%) 268 moisture meter, storage grading, packaging,
Vendors (4%) 537 storage
Storage (NFSR) Omuthiya Jan-Dec Pearl millet grain (loss 69.5 Silo labour,
unknown)
service Small 10% 90% (workers at Unfermented Pearl millet grinding mill (hummer mill), Family labour,
Agro- 53.7
millers amounts on (workers mills) flour pounding (mortar and hired labour,
processing
and home demand at mills) Fermented Pearl millet flour pestle) electricity
(milling) 483.
pounding through the
21
year
medium Small 10% 90% (workers at Unfermented pearl millet industrial hummer mills, workers, electricity
26.8
millers amounts on (workers mills) flour bags
demand at mills) Fermented pearl millet flour
through the 241.5
year
Storage by Oshikoto All year Workers 10% Unfermented Pearl millet warehouse, shelf labour,
millers region round (90%) flour
Fermented flour
Transportation Oshikoto All year Workers 10% Unfermented Pearl millet trucks, lorries throughout labour,
to retail region round 90% flour the year
market Fermented flour
Wholesale/ Oshikoto All year Workers Workers 70% Unfermented Pearl millet warehouse, shelf throughout labour, transport
Retail region round 30% flour the year
Fermented flour
22
Production
The region (like the whole country) recorded a very poor agricultural production following a poor
and below average rainfall received this season. Crop estimates for the Oshikoto Region showed
enormous reduction in the harvest with pearl millet estimated to have declined by 25-60%
compared to average production and 30-69% less than last seasons harvest. Subsequently, the
survey questions were based on the average/normal information from previous seasons. The total
producing households in Oshikoto were 32,528 with 51% Male Headed Households (MHHs) and 49%
Female Headed Households (FHHs) producing 14,930 tonnes of pearl millet (five year average,
Tables 1 and Table 3).
Land preparation is mainly by draft animal ploughing and it is mainly carried out by men (60-90%);
while sowing (90%) and weeding (>60%) are still perceived as womens jobs. Men, however,
participated more in weeding (30%) due to the introduction of draught animal mechanical weeders.
In Oshikoto, the majority of the interviewed households (78%) plant the local variety of mahangu,
followed by okashana (50%) and kangara (10%). There is no gender differentiation in terms of crop
variety for planting. The majority also ranked the local variety as the first choice for planting (73%),
followed by okashana (22%) and kangara (5%).
Harvesting: Drying in the field
Farmers normally wait for pearl millet heads to partially dry while the crop is still in the field before
harvesting take place. At physiological maturity, the crop still contains a high percentage of moisture
and is therefore vulnerable to damage during handling and subsequent pest attack. This is why the
crop is often left to dry in the field beyond physiological maturity. However, leaving the crop in the
field too long may result in negative consequences: higher losses to birds and other field pests,
increased insect infestation, etc. (Mallet and du Plessis, 2001). The biggest concern to the farmers
during field drying is bird (red billed quelea) attack with 85% of the respondents mentioning it
followed by domestic animals (48%), rodents (38%), weather (36%) and termites (23%). Big flocks of
birds attack the crop when it is close to harvest and are very difficult to combat. It was reported that
losses caused by birds can sometimes reach up to 60% (CAC, 2010). The timing of harvest is,
therefore, a compromise made by farmers balancing crop moisture and field loss, as well as
availability of labour, risk of roaming animals, etc. During this stage, about 5% (750 tonnes) of grain
may be lost (Tables 7, 8 and 9).
Harvesting: Cutting and transport to the drying platform
Harvesting is mainly carried out by women (90%) (Table 9) and this takes place as soon as the crop
has lost enough moisture to enable safe and easy handling and before excessive field losses have
taken place. Depending on rainfall and earliness with which the pearl millet variety was planted,
harvesting usually takes place around May June. All crops were harvested by hand (the stem is cut
beneath the head with a sharp knife, placed in the harvesting basket and taken away to the
threshing floor). None of those interviewed measure the moisture content of the grain at harvest or
at any other stages. Nearly 30% of the MHHs harvested nothing in 2014/15 season compared to 25%
of female headed households FHHs. As at the time of the survey (November 2015), no FHH has sold
any pearl millet while 6% of MHHs sold some pearl millet despite the general low production for the
year. However, the five year average quantity harvested in Oshikoto region is 14 930 tonnes. It is
estimated that about 0.5% of the grains (71 tonnes) is lost in this stage mainly due to poor handling.
23
Inputs and Actors
services FSC activities (products)
Farmers
Farming 37400
(mahangu plant)
Seed,
Fertiliser,
pesticides
labour
Farmers
Harvesting
37400
Drying in the field, Cutting, transportation
(mahangu plant)
qn=4%
Drying
Farmers
structure, Drying
37400
fuel temporarystorage mahangu head (oshipale)
ql=1% qn=1%
Farmers
Threshing , Threshing and Winnowing mahangu head (manual, thresher, tractor )
85% home consumption, 3% stored for seed andhome 5% marketed,
37400
winnowing&
7% lost
bagging hh=95%
s=1.5%
qn=0.25 s=0.5%
qn=1%
Collection Storage, seed Farmers

s=2.5% Consumption at 37400
point (ADC) qn=0.25% s=0.5% qn=0.25%
qn=0.25% household
cleaning &
grading (mahangu grain)
Transportation
market facilities Sales Sales Sales Sales
(mahangu grain) (mahangu (mahangu grain) (mahangu Farmers/ village
Millers ( medium) grain) rural households grain) traders
AMTA Urban traders 37400
ql=25% qn=4%
Home consumption stored seed (3%)

Storage (Millers) Storage (AMTA)
(National Strategic (65%)
(temporary)
reserve)
Longterm storage
(20%)
Milling Milling Milling(service & Milling Millers : medium

Milling (mahangu grain) (millers) traditional)(mahangu (service& - 2, service -270
services (mahangu grain) traditional) traditional)
grain)
Retail Retail Open market Home

(flour) (flour) consumption supermarkets, open
supermarketsand shops supermarkets (flour) markets
and shops
qn=quantitative, ql=qualitative, s=sales, hh=household consumption, seeds and losses
Figure 5: Flow diagram of the pearl millet supply chain
24
Drying at the drying place in the field
Straight after harvesting, pearl millet heads are sun-dried, most often on a raised wooden platform
near the fields (in the field (oshipale), Figure 6a) and kept a watch over against birds and other grain-
eating animals during the day. Drying can take a few weeks (to get the grain moisture content down
to 9-10%; Mallet and du Plessis, 2001, Hodges 2006). Women and children are mainly responsible
for drying at the oshipale (90%) (Table 9)..
Threshing and Winnowing
After drying, threshing and winnowing take place at the threshing floor (Figure 6b), usually adjacent
to the raised platform (Figure 6a). Threshing and winnowing is considered to be womens job by 90%
of the households. Depending on when the rain stops and how long harvesting and drying takes,
threshing generally starts around June. It can last until July/August in a bad harvest year, but it can
continue into September/October in an especially good year. The methods used in the Oshikoto
Region in order of importance are stick beating and manual winnowing (51%), tractor treading and
manual winnowing (46%), light pounding (okuyungula, 11%, (Figure 6c)) and mechanical threshers
for both threshing and winnowing (and even sorting, 6%). A few farmers also use animal trampling
followed by manual winnowing. There seems to be no noticeable gender differentiation in the
choice of which threshing and winnowing methods used. Compared to the results of Hodges (2006),
the percentage use of tractor treading has increased by 12% (from 34% to 46%) in the last 10 years
while 6% have taken up the use of mechanical threshers (compared to none in 2005). Since manual
threshing and winnowing (including light pounding) are labour intensive farming activities carried
out by women, this trend means that some women have been relieved of this onerous task. A loss of
about 2% is expected during manual threshing and winnowing stage (Table 8).
6a: The raised drying platform ) 6b: The threshing floor in the 6c: The pestle used for light
field (oshipale) pounding (okuyungula)
Figure 6: Drying and threshing
During tractor treading, grain panicles are gathered on the ground in a ring or a heap over which a
tractor runs. The rolling tractor tyres (deflated to avoid breaking the grain) do the threshing
operation. The farmers and family members stand around the heap and push back the pearl millet
heads drawn aside. Winnowing is carried out thereafter. Farmers are charged per heap. Although
tractor threshing saves time and labour, it is estimated to cause about 3.5% grain loss in the pearl
millet food supply chain. Both stick beating and tractor threshing of pearl millet heads directly on the
ground results in sand (and dust) contamination of the grain. It is not easy to subsequently separate
the sand from the grain and this has serious implications for the millers.
Traditional threshing takes a lot of time and effort from the women and while the tractor trampling
helps, the grain still has to be winnowed manually by the women. Meanwhile, use of mechanical
25
threshers is still limited in the region and where used, there are problems of incomplete threshing
and broken grains mainly due to the operators not knowing how to use the machines efficiently.
These threshers have an additional advantage with their in-built winnowing system, and discharge
the clean grain directly to bags or baskets. Thus mechanisation of threshing is considered important
not only for alleviating these time and work constraints (especially for women), but also to reduce
post-harvest qualitative losses such as grain infestation by pests, as well as grain contamination by
sand, dust and micro-organisms. Mechanical threshing is mainly performed on a service basis by
urban and rural entrepreneurs, who are farmers themselves.
Storage
Traditionally, straight after threshing, the grain is brought to the homestead for storing. At
household level, the grains are commonly stored in traditional granaries made out of wood and
plastered with mud or plastic granaries. Each granary may carry between one and two tonnes of
grain. Of the Oshikoto farmers interviewed, 60% use traditional granaries (Figure 7a), followed by
metal drums (38%), propylene sacks (9%), plastic containers (9%) and plastic granaries (7%, Figure
7b). Very little bag usage was reported and these were for transporting grains to the ADC. Nearly
half (46%) of those growing Kangara reported it as having the highest quantity loss, followed by 42%
of those who grow Okashana and 19% of those who grow the local variety. Okashana was reported
as having the highest quality loss by 42% of households growing it, followed by 38% of those who
grow Kangara and 24% for the local variety.
7a: Traditional granary 7b: Plastic granary
7c: Grains stored for more than a year showing 7d: Grain stored for less than a year with neem
serious pests infestation leaves for pest reduction
Figure 7: Pearl millet storage
26
On-farm storage losses for pearl millet appear to be unusually high due to practise of storing the
grain threshed and retaining surpluses on farm to provide about two years supplies. Since the oldest
crop is eaten first, insect infestations have two years to develop in storage. The most significant
pearl millet storage pest causing losses is reported by Mallet and du Plessis (2001) to be rice moth
(Corcyra cephalonica). They also reported that infestations by the moth were determined to have
actually started in the field before the grain was brought to storage. Farmers in Oshikoto reported
that pest attacks start in August but peaks out in October. The most important causes of storage
losses as reported by the households from the survey are moths (65% of households), weevils (52%),
rodents (38%), termites (18%, attacks only the traditional granaries), flour beetle (16%), fungi (14%)
and theft (10%).
Food loss during storage was estimated by some (Mallet and du Plessis, 2001; Vigne and Associates,
2004) to vary between 10% after one storage year to more than 30% over longer storage periods.
However, observations from surveys reported by Hodges (2006) indicated that when the storage
period was short (1 to 3 months) there were no grain weight losses due to insect infestation and the
grain still always fell into a contamination class of less than 2 (see Annex 3 for the visual scale used
for assessing pearl millet loss); conversely, grain stored for longer periods (13 to 16 months) showed
a weight loss of 2-5% due to insects. Hodges concluded that observed weight losses are relatively
low and typical of those observed for subsistence pearl millet farming in other East/Southern Africa
countries. Nonetheless, quality losses were quite high. After storage periods exceeding 12 months,
no grain presented a quality acceptable for commercial milling and most grain was now only fit for
local sales and home consumption, despite associate food safety risks. It is estimated that 2% of
grain loss occur in the traditional granary within one year of storage (Figure 7d) and 3-5% of grain
loss in traditional granary within 1 to 3 years of storage (Figure 7c). An estimated aggregate loss of
4% (537 tonnes) was therefore apportioned to storage losses in the Oshikoto Region since the
farmers keep the grains for more than 1 year.
Information collected during this study show that households use control methods such as
application of ash (60% of households who responded to using control methods), plant leaves
(neem, bitter bush, eucalyptus, 20%) and chilli pepper (12%). Farmers also store grain for seed
mainly in clay pots (52%), bucket (25%), calabash (10%) and small drums (9%). Seed storage is the
responsibility of women (99%) as reported by Hodges (2006). At national level, pearl millet grain is
stored in national storage facilities (silos) as food reserve. There are no rejections at storage as grain
is cleaned before being put in the silos and at household level any grain that is infested by any
insects it is cleaned before using.
Sales
Most farmers interviewed mentioned that they sell grains between August and November because
this is when they have to replace old pearl millet grain with the new one. The surplus pearl millet
grain is regularly traded although in relatively small quantities compared to the overall production,
which is mainly used for home consumption. The traded amounts vary according to how good the
harvest is in a year, but even in years of deficit some grain is traded. The farmers sell to villagers
(neighbours), traders (vendors), small and medium scale millers and the national food reserve
facilities managed by AMTA. From national food reserves (silos), pearl millet grain is sold to millers
and serves poor households as drought relief through the Emergency Management Unit (EMU). It is
important to note that farmers prefer to sell older grain from their stores while the formal market
demands for new grain. This is partly why most of the grain is sold at the informal market where the
demand for cleaner grain is not very strict. It is therefore important for pearl millet farmers to
improve the quality of grain stored on-farm as this is important for the trading and milling industry.
27
A common practice among the farmers is the exchange of pearl millet grain in small quantity to
traders, relatives, or neighbours as gift or in barter. The most common barter transactions are pearl
millet grain for meat, fish, animal fat and clothes. The common exchange unit for measuring pearl
millet grain in Oshikoto region (and in all north central regions) is the lata (approximately 20 kg).
Milling
There are no large pearl millet millers such as Namib Mills in the Oshikoto region. The survey,
however, reveals that there are 2 medium scale pearl millet millers (Sammy Mills and Onyaanya
Mills) who do both service milling as well as milling to supply to retailers and individuals. Moreover,
there are more than 270 small service millers in Oshikoto region. The millers experience high milling
volumes from May to August soon after harvest as well as from December to January due to an
influx of people on holiday with a concomitant increase in the demand for pearl millet flour. The
medium scale millers charge about N$12 per lata to mill while small service millers charge about
N$14 per lata.
The main challenges the millers face with pearl millet grain brought by individuals for milling include
dirty grain that has sand, stones or mice droppings as well as weevils. Such uncleaned grains
constantly damage the machines sieves. Millers normally reject such grain when there are many
people that need milling service but when people are fewer they can sift the grain to clean the dirt
(Figure 8).
Millers mill both fermented and unfermented grains. The main advantage of unfermented flour is
that it is cheaper compared to fermented flour and it is also good to prepare fermented drinks
(oshikundu). The main disadvantage of unfermented meal is the poor quality with a bitter taste
when prepared into stiff porridge (oshithima) which is often not preferred by consumers. The millers
collect most of the spill over flour and sell it as animal feed. It is estimated that machine milling
contributes about 0.5% to food loss (Table 8). In the Oshikoto region, 80% of the mills in the survey
were owned by men while women own only 20% of the mills. On the average, 50 kg of pearl millet
grain will yield about 45 kg of processed pearl millet flour, varying with the variety produced (Sattar
et al., 2003) while fermented pearl millet flour has a conversion factor of 1.25 (Table 5).
Traditionally, pearl millet grains are processed into flour for household consumption by women and
girls (100%) using wooden mortar and pestle. Pearl millet grains are de-hulled wet, fermented to
improve flour quality, dried and milled. De-hulling separates the bran, consisting of the outside
envelopes (pericarp, testa) and a portion of the germ, from the endosperm (mainly consisting of
starch; Mallet and du Plessis, 2001).
Sieving of pearl millet grain

Figure 8: Sieving of grain
28
Transport is a challenge especially when taking grain to different markets. The grains are carried
from the farm to the main road (1-7km) by head, donkeys or donkey carts from where they are
transported by public transport or hired private cars. Transport costs range from N$20 to N$50 per
50kg bag from the farmers place to the (open) market in Omuthiya.
c) Marketing systems
Marketing of pearl millet normally starts soon after harvest in June/July and can go up to December
each year. The pearl millet marketing chain for Oshikoto region is shown in Figure 9 while Table 9
shows the detailed description of the food supply chain in Oshikoto region.
Figure 9: The pearl millet market chain in Oshikoto Region (modified from Mallet and Rigourd,
2003)
Communal farmers in Oshikoto store pearl millet grain for consumption and seed and only sell
surplus from the pearl millet produced. As a result of low production yields (varying from to year),
shortage of labour and in some areas shortage of fertile arable land, communal farmers have
difficulties producing enough pearl millet to feed their families. Consequently, there is a limited
quantity of pearl millet grain available for trading and this hinders the development of marketing
systems and severely restricts the options for secondary processing and value-adding. When
surpluses are produced, the traditional practice is to store grain on-farm as insurance against the
failure of the next rainy season and/or to trade small quantities in local markets (often through
barter). The grain that is marketed is often of poor and variable quality, resulting in unacceptably
high processing losses. Most of the pearl millet trading takes place in the informal market by
individual traders and through bartering among households and often given as gift to other
members of the family. The exact quantities of pearl millet surplus marketed by the farmers are
unknown but are estimated to be 7% in this study.
Pearl millet is a controlled crop in Namibia therefore its commercial price is fixed by the government
through NAB based on SAFEX pricing system in consultation with producers and processors in the
29
industry. This price (which was N$4000/tonne at the time of this study) is meant for good quality
grain free from contaminants as per the grading shown in Table 2. Farmers can however get
premium price from uncleaned grain sold informally. The issue becomes at what stage should pearl
millet grains be cleaned: at the farms or at the national silos and/or millers? Traditionally, pearl
millet cleaning is considered as an integral part of the traditional processing of grain into flour
(dehulling and pounding) so farmers expect stores and mills to be responsible for cleaning, destoning
and sorting of grains. Pearl millet marketing was associated with the following challenges (i) reduced
yield to sell due to fluctuation in climatic conditions (flood or drought) and pest/birds attacks and (ii)
lack of pre-cleaning machines (to clean pearl millet before being taken to millers).
d) The supply chain actors
The food supply chain in Oshikoto region has several actors including producers, transporters, grain
collectors (urban vendors and traders), national strategic food reserve, and millers and retailers.
Producers:
There are 32,538 communal producers in the Oshikoto region producing about 14,930 tonnes of
pearl millet with an estimated percentage share of 47% female and 53% male producers based on
the head of household. Approximately, 65% of threshed grains is consumed at home, 20% is kept for
long term storage, 3% is kept for seeds, and 7% is marketed while 4% is lost during long term
storage. The quantity marketed varies according to the quantity harvested and climatic conditions
(drought, normal or flood), household size and food requirements and losses (especially from pests
and birds). Farmers sell the highest proportion of their surplus pearl millet grain to vendors because
they offer the highest price. Sales to large and medium scale millers come second and remaining
surplus is sold to the national food reserve security (NFRS) through assembly points at the ADCs.
None of the producers are contracted to supply any miller or national food reserve or traders.
Limited sales of pearl millet take place at the farm (home) but some grain is bartered. The major
problems faced by the smallholder producers are high transport costs and inadequate market
information; the main source of information is radio followed by extension services. Farmers do not
have any incentive for marketing clean grain since they can get a better price from the informal
market (which does not demand strict cleanliness of grains) compared to the formal market where
price is related to grain cleanliness.
Table 10: Detailed description of the food (Pearl Millet), supply chain impacts in Oshikoto
10a. FSC stage medium millers

Input costs Cost of Value of Value-
FSC stage
production products added/Margi Energy Gender/social pattern
(Medium millers)
N$/kg (N$)/kg ns (N$)kg
Labour, Men do most of the ploughing (60-90%),
manure, while women do (10-40%). Sowing:
Primary seeds, women do more than 90% and the
production extension remainder is done by children and elderly.
Human
services 60%+ of weeding is done by women, while
power
men do less than 30%
1.2 4.5 0.1
Labour Men are involved up to 10% while women
Drying in the
do about 70%-90% with the remainder
field/Harvest
done by children, workers and elderly
Post-harvest Labour
Men only do up to 10% while women do
Handling Diesel/
over 90% of the threshing
(threshing)
30
Family Women are responsible for 85% while men
Human
Storage (granary) labour on take care of storage for less than 15%
power
of the time
Transportation 4.6 1 Fuel Men (20%), women 80%
Market sales Labour
5.6 Workers and mainly men
(offloading)
Agro-Processing Labour Milling machines operated by workers
0.7 6.3 0.7 Electricity
(milling) (men or women)
Storage Labour Workers (M (90%), F(10%))
0.5
Transportation Labour 0.5 6.8 Fuel Workers (M(90%), F(10%))
Retail at millers Labour 15 8.2 Workers (M(30%), F(70%)
10b. FSC stage: vendors (Pearl Millet flour, Oshikoto)

Cost of Value of Value-added/
FSC stage
Input costs production products Margins Energy Gender/social pattern
(vendors)
N$/kg (N$)/kg (N$)kg
Labour, Men do most of the ploughing (60-
manure, 90%), while women do (10-40%).
Primary seeds, Sowing: women do more than 90% and
production extension the remainder is done by children and
services elderly60%+ of weeding is done by
Human women, while men do less than 30%
Labour power Men are involved up to 10% while
Drying in the (hired) Diesel women do about 70%-90% with the
1.2 3.2 2.0
field/Harvest remainder done by children, workers
and elderly
Post-harvest Labour
Men only do up to 10% while women
Handling (hired)
do over 90% of the threshing
(threshing)
Family Women are responsible for 85% while
Storage Human
labour men on take care of storage for less
(granary) Power
than 15% of the time
Transportation Transport 1.0 5.5 3.3 Fuel Men (20%), women 80%
Labour Traditionally processing is done by
Agro-Processing
0.7 6.2 0.7 Electricity women and girls, milling machines
(milling)
operated by workers (men or women)
Open market Labour 31 24.3 Female (100%)
Vendors/Grain Traders
Vendors, who are all women, either sell their own grain or buy grain from the farmers directly at the
farm gate or at open-markets and resell in the Omuthiya market. They rarely handle large quantities
of pearl millet as they buy between one to six 50 kg bags at a time. Most of the vendors do not use
standardized packaging and some tend to reuse packaging from other products such as wheat flour
bags, as well as tins of different sizes while there is no weight measurement. They do not have any
organized structures for buying and they use public transport which costs between N$20 N$50 per
50kg bag. They buy a 50kg bag for N$225 ($4500/tonne) and sell the pearl millet grain between
N$5N$6/kg (N$5,000-N$6,000/tonne) which is considered too expensive by customers. They
process most of the grain into slightly fermented pearl millet meal produced by wet processing
which most of the consumers prefer and which they are able to sell at a premium price of N$31/kg
which translates to N$31000/tonne (Table 10b). Their main source of information is through words
of mouth from fellow traders and long standing relationships with producers. The main food loss
point occurs when they transfer grain from one container to the other.
31
Agricultural Development Centres (ADC), Regional or Traditional Authority offices
Farmers take the pearl millet for sale to NSFR at the nearest collection centre usually the ADC or the
regional or traditional authority offices in their constituencies. From there, AMTA officials arrange
for the cleaning, sorting and bagging of pearl millet. Producers are paid + $4000/tonne for cleaned
grains. The cleaning and sorting can appreciably reduce the weight of grains brought by farmers and
this is a major reason for farmers not wanting to deliver to AMTA. The grains are later transferred to
the National Silos. The silos serve a dual purpose of creating a National Grain Reserve and levelling
the prices, by procuring pearl millet around harvest time and selling off when prices started
increasing.
Millers:
Small scale processors (service millers)
The number of the millers is estimated at about 270 (Chigariro and Mallet, 2015), however they do
not buy pearl millet from farmers but rather mill farmers grain for household consumption. They
are owned by private individuals who are not organized in any structures. Even if they do not follow
regulatory standards, they encourage clients to bring cleaned pearl millet grain free from foreign
matters like sand, stones, mice droppings, sticks etc. for milling. They sift the grains using metal or
plastic sieves to remove foreign matters, but grain that is too dirty is rejected. The major problem
they have is to measure moisture in the grain (clients prefer wet milling). They currently gauge the
moisture by sticking their hands in the grain; when some grains stick to their hands, it is too moist
then it needs to be dried. They can mill between 15-100 latas2 (300-2000kg) per day at a price of
N$12-N$14/lata. Milling frequency and volumes are high in May-August due to harvest and
December January due to holidays.
Medium millers
The two medium millers (Sammy and Onyaanya) mill their own produced pearl millet (Table 10a) or
buy grain from farmers (60-70% of the sellers are women, the remaining are male farmers who
prefer to deliver grains by themselves) or AMTA. They own medium sized equipment to mill pearl
millet flour and their mills are equipped with temporary storage facilities (store for 2-4 weeks
depending on quantity). They are also equipped with cleaning and destoning machines to clean the
grains before milling. They have problems in measuring moisture of grain as some farmers bring
pearl millet grain that is too moist and may stick to the machine during grinding. They also complain
of farmers only willing to sell grain that is too old (stale) which compromises their flour quality. They
normally store the grain or flour in bags in the buildings. Milling frequency and volumes are high in
May-August due to harvest and December January due to holidays. The millers buy pearl millet
grain at N$4 500/tonne. Flour is lost during milling mostly through the air vent on the machine. The
millers sell flour for N$150/10kg bag (N$15,000/ton) while Namib Mills price is N$4,800/ton and the
vendors price is N$31 000/ton of pearl millet flour (Table 11). Pearl millet flour is more expensive
than maize flour on average.
2
A lata is approximately 20 kg.
32
Table 11: Pearl millet prices from milling to retail
Actor Price of grain Price of flour

(N$/Tonne) Wholesale Retail
(N$/Tonne) (N$/10 kg)
Millers (medium 4500 12000 150
scale/small scale)
Namib Mills 4200 4800
Vendors 4500 310
Retail (market) 56
Smaller shops 150
Supermarkets 56
Supermarkets/retailer shops
Pearl millet flour products are now commonly available on the shelves of wholesalers, supermarkets
and smaller retailer shops throughout the country. Wholesalers and supermarket usually stock the
Meme Mahangu brand from Namib Mills while the retailers normally buy the processed pearl millet
flour from the medium scale millers and in turn sell to the consumers.
Consumers
Apart from the farmers themselves who produce mainly for home consumption, other pearl millet
consumers (mainly urban dwellers) buy pearl millet flour at supermarkets or retailer shops, straight
from medium scale millers, directly from the farmers or as gifts from relatives. They also buy grain
from traders from the open markets which they then take to the service millers for milling into flour.
Within the farmers themselves, pearl millet grain is bartered with other commodities.
Transporters
The number of transporters is unknown in Oshikoto region, however, smallholder producers make
use of own transport, hire transport from private individuals or public transport. There are some
producers who transport from the homestead using headload or donkeys or donkey carts to the
main road to get public transport.
33
Table 12: Output ii-4: Detailed Description of the Food Supply Chain Social Structures
Involvement of Women Involvement of Men Who is

mainly Gender / social patterns
involved: Organization level of Observations and remarks that explain the
FSC STEPS Girls Adult women Boys Adult men women, FSC actors3 chosen qualifiers and/or give additional
men, information
children
Qualifier4 Qualifier Qualifier Qualifier
Men do most of the ploughing (60-90%), while women do
Primary Men and 10-40%. Sowing: women do more than 90% and the
1 3 1 3 Household
production women remainder is done by children and elderly. 60%+ of weeding
is done by women, while men do less than 30%
Men are involved up to 10% while women do about 70%-
Mainly
Harvest 1 3 1 1
women
Household 90% with the remainder done by children, workers and
elderly
Post-harvest, Mainly Men only do up to 10% while women do over 90% of the
3 1 Household
handling women threshing
Mainly Women are responsible for 85% while men on take care of
Storage 3 1
women
Household
storage for less than 15% of the time
Transportatio Mainly
3 1 Household/individual Men (20%), women 80%
n women
Market sales 3 women Household/individual women
Agro- Traditionally Milling machines operated by workers (men or women)

1 3 2 Household/individual
processing mainly Traditional milling done by women
3
Options: Individual/Household level/Cooperative
4
Qualify the equipment, conditions, access to services and training: 4: excellent, 3: good, 2: moderately good, 1: bad.
34
women,
mechanical
workers
(men/wome
n)
Workers
Storage 1 3
mainly men
Workers (M (90%), F(10%))
Transportatio Workers
1 3 Workers (M(90%), F(10%))
n mainly men
Workers
Wholesale 1 3
Mainly men
Workers (M(90%), F(10%))
Workers
Retail 3 1 mainly Workers (M(30%), F(70%)
females
Table 13: Output Ii-5: Detailed Description of the Food Supply Chain Economics
FSC Stage (Medium millers)
Main Cost of Value of Value-

FSC stage (Medium millers) Products production products added/Margins Remarks
USD/kg USD/kg USD/kg
Grain
Standing crop in the field at harvest
Primary production
maturity
Grain
Standing crop for drying or heads cut
Drying in the field/Harvest 0.09 0.35 0.01
from the stalk piled for drying
Post-harvest Handling Grain Done at threshing place in the field to
(threshing) separate grain from chaff
Grain
Storage (granary) Grain stored in granaries
Transportation Grain 0.35 0.08 Grain transported to millers
35
Grain Millers purchase from individual farmers
Market sales (offloading) 0.43
and bring to the processing plants
Flour
Agro-Processing (milling) 0.05 0.48 0.05 Grain is milled and packaged
Flour Flour is temporarily stored at the
Storage
0.04 premises before selling
Transportation Flour 0.04 0.52 Flour is transported to retailers
Retail at millers Flour 1.15 0.63 Flour is sold directly to consumers
FSC stage (vendors)
Grain Standing crop in the field at harvest

Primary production
maturity
Grain
Standing crop for drying or heads cut
Drying in the field/Harvest
from the stalk piled for drying
0.09 0.25 0.15
Post-harvest Handling Grain Done at threshing place in the field to
(threshing) separate grain from chaff
Grain
Storage (granary) Grain stored in granaries
Transportation Grain 0.08 0.42 0.25 Grain transported to markets

Flour
Agro-Processing (milling) 0.05 0.48 0.05 Vendors mill traditionally or mechanically
Flour Vendors sell to consumers at the the

Open market 2.38 1.87
open market
36
3 The Food losses Study findings and results
a) Food Loss risk variables along the Pearl Millet supply chain
Table 14: Food Loss Risk Factors
Relation to food losses:

Result (observed in
Variable Unit contribution to low
Oshikoto region)
losses
Traditional pearl millet Least resistant to
Name Resistant variety
(local) variety postharvest loss
Good Agricultural
Y/N Yes Yes (Not much practiced)
Practices
Rainfall during production Mm Optimum range 483 (range 255 - 710)
Production
Ratio <1 0.83
supply/demand ratio
Rainfall during
Mm Low rainfall <20mm (Very low)
postharvest phase
Postharvest technology L/M/H High Moderate
FBOs / Coops Y/N Yes No
Processing technology L/M/H High Moderate
Good Manufacturing
Y/N Yes No
practices (GMP)
Packaging materials and
L/M/H High Low
facilities
Transport duration Hour Low duration + 1.5 hours
Market information L/M/H High Moderate
Price incentive for quality Y/N Yes No
Knowledge of FSC actors L/M/H High High
Consumer access to food
L/M/H High High
product
Legend: Y/N = yes / no; L/M/H = low / medium / high.
b) Description of the losses along the maize supply chain
Table 15: Quantity loss in the supply chain
Loss Quantity
Losses (ton)
fraction (ton)
Primary Production 14,930.0
Field Drying 0.05 14,183.5 746.5
Harvest/Drying in the field/ 0.005 14,112.6 70.9
Drying 0.03 13,689.2 423.4
Threshing & winnowing 0.02 13,415.4 273.8
Available for productive use (Consumption,
sales etc 13,415.4
Home consumption 65% 8720.0
Store for seed 4% 536.6
37
Long term storage 20% 2683.1
Short term Storage loss 1% 0.01 134.2
Long term Storage loss 4% 0.04 536.6 536.6
Quantity for sale 7% 939.1
Transportation from farm to market 939.1
Market sales AMTA 1% 134.2
Market sales millers 2% 268.3
Market sales vendors 4% 536.6
Total Loss 1,304.7
Loss Percentage 9.2%
The main causes of losses for the pearl millet supply chain are summarized in Table 16 and the loss
quantities at each stage are given in Table 15. The major pearl millet supply chain actors discussed
here are producers, vendors, and service millers.
Producers
Farmers experience losses at harvesting drying in the field or at the homestead, threshing especially
manual threshing (beating with stick and tractor trampling), and storage on the farm in traditional
granaries after a long time. At harvesting stage while drying in the field, the farmers lose most of the
pearl millet grain due to birds, domestic animals, rodents, weather (rain) and termites. Moreover,
the same factors cause food losses at drying place. During storage at household level, pearl millet
grain is lost due to moths, weevils, rodents, termites, flour beetles, fungi and theft.
Vendors
Vendors experience pearl millet grain loss during transportation due to spillage, as bags might be
torn and while transferring grain from one container to the other. However, these losses are not
considered critical.
Millers
Service millers do not have moisture measuring equipment and as a result they use their hands to
feel the wetness and might not be very accurate leading to the possibility of some grains getting
stuck in the machine if too wet. Hammer mills have cyclone effect (flour dust) and do not recover
100% of the processed flour. A tiny amount of processed flour is lost in the form of dust due to the
cyclone effect. Flour might also spill over during this process on dirty surfaces that may cause the
flour to be unfit for consumption.
c) Critical loss points in the pearl millet food supply chain: Oshikoto
The major critical loss points from interviews with key informants (experts) and producers in the
pearl millet supply chain in order of importance are drying in the field/harvesting, drying at
homestead, threshing and at storage in traditional granary for a long period. The critical loss points
are summarized in Table 11 and 12.
Table 16 shows, among other aspects, the major causes of food loss in the pearl millet supply chain
are birds and insect pests especially when the crop is still drying in the field or at the homestead
after harvesting. Other causes of food loss in the chain include broken grains especially at threshing
using mechanical means and to a lesser extent, when using sticks. Domestic animals and rodents
also cause food loss when drying and in storage. The major cause of loss during the storage stage is,
38
however, pests infestation (moths, weevils and flour beetles) due to the lengthy time of storage
(Table 17).
Farmers reported heavy losses at field drying due to pests and diseases, with 85% of the HH
reporting birds as the main pest. Big flocks of birds attack the crop when it is close to harvest and are
very difficult to combat. Because of the danger of late rain and bird damage, farmers sometimes
harvest pearl millet before the grain is dry after which the grain is then dried in a crib. However, this
early harvesting may also lead to losses from insufficient drying (fungi, insects etc.). There is,
therefore, a need to carry out research into the hairy variety of pearl millet which is difficult for birds
to eat and into the moisture qualities of different varieties. There is also a need to improve the
farmers traditional cribs and provide incentives to build new cribs.
Drying at homestead
During this stage about 3% (423.4 tonnes) of the grain is lost to birds (as reported by 72% of HHs),
domestic animals (39%), rodents (35%), termites (18%) and weather conditions (15%) (Table 8).
There are also qualitative losses due to contaminations with animal excrements (especially rodents),
sand and dust. There were no discerning differences between female and male headed households
view of these grain losses in the drying place (Table 9)
Threshing and Winnowing
The majority of the households reported incomplete threshing (94% of HH) and mixing of grains with
sand (80% of HH) as the consequences of the two common threshing operations at Oshikoto Region
(manual threshing by beating the grain out of the ears on a hard surface of compacted soil and
threshing by tractor trampling, each followed by winnowing with baskets) which results in dirty grain
containing up to 10% sand and producing a gritty flour. Apart from quantitative (2-3.5%) and
qualitative (up to 5%) losses, such threshing practices also affect storability.
Threshing and winnowing using a mechanical thresher in Oshikoto is estimated to contribute 2%

(274 tonnes) of grain loss (Table 8) and farmers reported the causes of these losses as being:
incomplete threshing (94% of households), grains mixed with sand (80%), birds (39%), broken grains
(29%), poor weather (26%); rodents (22%) domestic animals (16%), theft (10%) and termites (10%).
Whether done by stick beating, tractor treading or by machines (threshers), threshing is perceived to
be costly when evaluated from an economic point of view. It has been reported that due to
inadequate technical knowledge and lack of skills on how to operate the threshers, a lot of pearl
millet grain breaks during threshing leading to an increase in qualitative food loss.
Storage
Insects (moths and weevils) are the most common storage pests in pearl millet granaries as reported
by all farmers. Moth is particularly endemic in all the observed granaries. This is because it starts
infesting the grain in the field (when the eggs in the grain are not seen, so no actions taken against
them); it subsequently develops in the grain placed in storage and are manifested as worms,
webbing of pupae and flying adults thereby resulting in quantitative (1-5%) and qualitative (10-40%)
losses. The problem is increased if the store is not properly cleaned from earlier infestation and
when the grain is kept for long storage.
d) 2.7 Low loss Points
The low loss points in the pearl millet chain in Oshikoto are the transporting stages (field to drying
place, drying to storage and storage to market). This is because the distances travelled are short and
39
because not much of the grain is sold commercially. Other low loss points are the post storage
processing stages including dehulling and processing of grains into flour (milling). This could be due
to good handling at these stages.
40
Table 16: Summary results matrix of food losses
FSC stage/process Type of loss in Cause of loss/Reason for Reduced CLP/ Impact/ Stake-holders affected Perception of stakeholders Suggested solutions
the FSC (%) low loss market LLP (men/women) (men/women)
Quantit Qualitat value (%)
ative ive
Drying in the field 5 1 QN - Birds, domestic CLP Reduced farm output thus less food Quelea birds causing a lot Change farmers perception and attitude (Training,
animals, rodents, termites -whole family of damage and loss of Awareness creation) to good post-harvest practices
and weather (rain) Delayed harvesting probably due to grain; both men and such as timely harvesting, proper handling etc.).
lack of labour with only women women feel these are the Place emphasis on training women.
doing most of the harvesting until major causes of loss Crop breeding for improved varieties (hairy variety)
school holidays National Policy for food loss reduction
Harvesting/ 0.5 1 QN - Poor handling and late LLP Labour intensive, mostly carried out Laborious and time Harvesting machines (hand harvester)
Transport to drying rain; heads falling & by women consuming for women. Use big containers to cover grain; avoid falling
place (Oshipale) rodents eating some of headload Headload is perceived to heads
grains be womens job
Drying at the 3 5 QN- Birds, domestic CLP Birds and animal scaring is time Responsibility of women Use plastic cover; Birds scaring; Rodents proofing;
Oshipale (second animals, rodents, termites consuming on women and children and children Use of ash; Fencing off the area; Training
5
drying) and weather (rain)
QL - overdrying
Threshing and 2 5 QN - incomplete threshing, CLP Labour intensive for women Womens responsibility to Research on hand/manual operated threshers
winnowing , broken grains, birds 5 carry out this activity Training, Appropriate threshers, Subsidy
manually rodents, domestic animals,
3.5 5 and termites CLP Labour and time saving to thresh Men operate tractors while
QL- incomplete threshing, with tractor done by men and women winnow
Threshing by tractor grains contaminated with
and winnowing 15 labour intensive for women to
sand, birds & rodents winnow
manually droppings, broken grains,
rotten grain
Threshing and 2 3 QN- incomplete threshing & 5 CLP Labour and time saving for men and Machine operation is Training on proper adjustment of threshers,
winnowing by broken grains women as the thresher also perceived to be a mens job Subsidy, duty free provisions for equipment,
thresher QL- broken grains winnows
Transport to storage n.s n/a QN- Poor handling and LLP Labour intensive as is mainly done Headload transport is
facility spillage by headload by women and children perceived to be a womens
job
Storage on farm 2 10 QN - Moths, weevils, 5 CLP Not time consuming done by both Both men and women take Cleaning/disinfection before use, Fumigation,
(traditional granary rodents, termites flour men and women care of storage granary properly closed or managed, use of
up to 1 year) beetle, theft hermetic bag; Use of plastic bins
41
Storage on farm 5 40 QL insect frass, rodents 10 CLP Not time consuming done by both Both men and women take Treatment using tradition methods e.g. ash; Training
(traditional granary droppings men and women care of storage
1 -3 years)
Bagging n.s 1 QN- Poor handling and LLP Time consuming and done by Perceived to be a womans covering floor for example with clean polythene to
spillage women job collect spilled grain
Transport to n.s 1 QN-Poor handling and LLP Costly to hire transport. Both men and women covering floor for example with clean polythene to
market/miller spillage transport to the market collect spilled grain
De-hulling and n.s n/a QN-Poor handling and LLP Labour intensive and time It is perceived to be a proper handling, training
fermentation spillage consuming. Done by women womans responsibility
Milling manually n.s n/a QN-Poor handling and LLP Labour intensive and time It is perceived to be a Cover or clean floor to recover grain spilling over.
Spillage consuming. Done by women womans responsibility Training on proper handling to recover spills
Drying de-hulled n.s n/a QN-Blown by wind, eaten LLP time consuming Done by women It is perceived to be a
pearl millet flour by chicken womans responsibility
Milling using milling 0.5 n/a QN-Grain stuck in flour LLP Fast and saves time and mainly It is perceived to be a Training of workers, use tiles to cover floor
machine remaining in the machine operated by men mans job to operate
machines
Market/retail n.s n.s QN-Poor handling and LLP Time consuming done by women It takes too long to sell and Use hermetic bags
spillage needs patience thus better Sewing bags
suited to women Set up dates for selling to registered millers and
AMTA
42
Table 17: Summary table of food losses, causes and solutions
Magnitude
Intervention to reduce losses Food
Critical Loss Point of losses in Cause of loss Economic Social Environmental
Loss reduction per year security
the FSC implications implications implications
implication
% Intervention Actors Responsible
Cross Cutting Lack of understanding 1. Awareness raising, capacity 1. Farmers, vendors, 1. MAWF More surplus to Improved Increased Not likely to be
(Affect all loss and/or appreciation of building (training in good PH millers, NGOs, FAO (training and sell/and more understanding food any
points) post-harvest losses practices; business and Development advocacy as well as income of post-harvest availability
marketing skills) and agencies, awareness materials issues
organization. Availability of especially in
2. Develop National 2. PH Specialists, 2. MAWF. FAO to income to relation to
Postharvest Management Farmers, vendors support purchase food marketing
Strategy and Implementation Millers, academics
Plan NGOs, Parastatals
Drying in the field QN 5 Bird damage (85% of 1. Timely harvesting Farmers, 1. Farmers, MAWF More surplus to Improved skills Increased Not likely to be
HH) domestic animals 2. Promote use of cribs and 2. Farmers NGOs, 2. Farmers, MAWF, sell/and more More time food any
QL1 (48%), rodents (38%), raised platforms Development NGOs income available to availability
weather (36%) and 3. Crop breeding for improved agencies 3. Farmers, MAWF, Availability of women Concerns about
termites (23%) varieties (hairy & improved 3. Farmers Donor Agencies, income to biodiversity
storability) Researchers, purchase food
Drying at the QN 3 Birds (72% HH), 1.Marketing and financing of 1. Local financing 1. Farmers, Farmers Better quality Improved skills Increased
oshipale QL 5 domestic animals (39%), appropriate technologies institutions, farmers, union, Ministry of grain gives food Not likely to be
rodents (35%), termites 2.Mechanisation of PH traders, Vendors, Finance, MAWF higher prices availability any
(18%) and weather operations for small grains e.g. NGOs 2. Private sectors
Threshing & conditions (15%) solar drying, and threshers 2. Artisans, Farmers, with governments Increased costs Reduced
winnowing QN 2 (hand/pedal; tractor pto, diesel Traders, researchers, facilitation; rural to producers labour and
QL 5 Incomplete threshing powered) development development time for
(94% of HH), grains agencies, farmers centres, women
mixed with sand (80%), union
birds (39%), broken
grains (29%), poor
weather (26%); rodents
(22%) domestic animals
(16%), theft (10%) and
termites (10%)
43
Magnitude
Intervention to reduce losses Food
Critical Loss Point of losses in Cause of loss Economic Social Environmental
Loss reduction per year security
the FSC implications implications implications
implication
% Intervention Actors Responsible
Storage on farm QN 2 Moths (65% HH), weevils 1. Expand grain market for Farmers union, MoF, MAWF
(traditional QL 10 (52%), rodents (38%), farmers farmers coop, Fear of
granary ( 1 year) termites (18%, attacks 2. Pilot & provide storage farmers, vendors, MAWF, Artisans and Cost of poisoning If not handled
Storage on farm only the traditional facilities (GrainPro/PICS bags, millers, AMTA, local manufacturers, technologies are through properly
Increased
(traditional granaries), flour beetle Metal/Plastic silos, Community NGOs, Parastatals Financial Institutions high but incomes misuse of chemicals might
quantity
granary 1 -3 years) (16%), fungi (14%) and storage, cocoons) will increase as chemicals as it affect other
and quality
QN 5 theft (10%). 3. Integrated pest management MAWF there will be less is dangerous if unintended
of food
QL 40 PH specialists, quantity and handled by animals and
Insect frass, rodents quality loss untrained plants
contamination, fungi & people
long time storage
44
e) Food loss reduction plan and strategy
Farmers do not seem to consider qualitative losses at storage stage as a priority because the grain is
kept for food security purposes rather than commercial profits. While this is understandable, given
the need to prioritize time dedicated to all the different activities in the homestead and knowledge
of food safety issues, potential health consequences that may arise from eating contaminated food
should be of concern. Moreover, not selling crop surpluses may negatively impact food security at
national level as indicated by the low level of delivery of pearl millet to National Strategic Food
Reserve silos. There is, therefore, a need to introduce interventions that can improve the pearl millet
post-harvest processing and marketing systems thereby leading to a reduction in food losses. The
proposed intervention strategies were prepared in consultation with stakeholders in the agriculture
industry value chain and the government through the Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry.
Identified areas of interventions for loss reduction

The areas that are identified for intervention to reduce losses include establishment of a National
Postharvest management strategy and implementation plan, training of farmers on good
postharvest management, piloting mechanisation of PH operations, marketing and financing of
appropriate technology for manufacturing, provision of storage facilities such as PICS bags and
Research on improved varieties and integrated pest management.
For all the different solutions described here below, the actors involved are farmers, vendors,
millers, extension workers, academics, parastatals and may also include NGOs and post-harvest
experts.
Intervention strategies to reduce pearl millet postharvest losses
The major problem facing post-harvest management in Namibia had been the lack of a Division
within MAWF solely responsible for post-harvest training and management (including services) for
small scale producers. The latest restructuring of the Ministry has however led to the creation of a
Post-Harvest Unit within its Crop Production Division. Hitherto, most of the efforts of the Ministry
are directed to increasing production with many laudable programmes such as RCPP, the
Conservation Agriculture programme, Green Schemes etc. This in turn has led to farmers being more
focussed on production issues and being largely unaware of several postharvest issues. There is little
doubt that these production incentives are being constrained by post-harvest factors. A priority
intervention, therefore, would be to recruit staff for the Post-Harvest Unit recently created within
the Crop Production Division of MAWF (To be funded from budgetary allocations to MAWF). The
other interventions proposed are as follows:
Develop a National Postharvest Management Strategy and Implementation Plan
Reducing post-harvest losses should be considered as part of an integrated approach to realizing

agricultures full potential to meet the increasing food needs along with improving productivity on
existing farmland, and sustainably bringing additional acreage into production.
One of the first interventions will be the development of a National Postharvest Management
Strategy and Implementation Plan that will drive the quest to reduce food loss at the communal
level thereby improving the market potential of this sector. This strategy shall be an integral
component of strategies already in place (e.g. RCCP, etc.) to improve agricultural productivity and
linkages between farmers and markets which will help contribute to food security and economic
development of Namibia. The strategy shall include: Advocacy, Awareness Creation, Capacity
building (training of Trainers - Government and private Extension Officers, Lead Farmers, Farmers
and other actors in the supply chain), and mainstreaming of postharvest issues in school and training
45
institutes curricula. The responsible institution will be MAWF with FAO providing support in
awareness creation and training.
It should be mentioned that in the late 1990s, FAO helped MAWF in releasing three extension
leaflets entitled "Improved methods of threshing, cleaning and storage of mahangu", "Mahangu
post-harvest processing technology" and "Improved methods of primary processing of mahangu.
These leaflets constitute a good beginning to developing a range of extension leaflets to support
good farming and post-harvest practices for pearl millet as well as sensitising farmers on postharvest
losses reduction.
The budgets for these interventions are shown in Tables 18 and 19 and the cost benefit analyses are
shown in Tables 20 and 21.
Table 18: Develop national postharvest management strategy and implementation plan
Inputs Required Associated cost Total Cost of

items/person intervention per
USD year USD
Setting up office and logistics (Post-harvest unit) 100 000
(To be funded from budgetary allocations to MAWF)
Awareness campaigns on postharvest technologies in 40 000
the 3 regions
Grand total 140 000
Table 19: Budget for Training of farmers on good postharvest management (e.g. timeous
operations, promotion of threshers, crop varieties, mechanisation of activities)
items/person intervention per year
USD USD
Training of Agricultural Extension officers (Duration 5 days)
Transport of officers to central training place (35) 139 4 846
Accommodation 5 days 308 10 769
Per diem (S&T) 154 5 385
Stationery 2 81
Venue costs and food 5 days 165 5 769
Subtotal 767 26 850
Training of Agricultural extension Technicians (35)
Transport of officers to central training place (35) 138 4 846
Perdiem (S&T) 154 5 385
Stationery 2 81
Venue costs and food 5 days 165 5 769
Field visits to the interventions e.g. Improved storage
88 3 077
granaries, etc.
Subtotal 855 2 9927
46
Training of the farmers by Agricultural extension technicians (35 technicians)
Transport of agricultural extension technicians 519 18 173
Stationery 4 154
Daily Allowance for 20 days 615 21 538
Subtotal 1 139 39 865
Stakeholder postharvest awareness campaigns
Transport of participants to central training place (50) 194 9 692
Daily allowance 154 7 692
Stationery 3 154
Venue costs and food 154 7692
Subtotal 812 40 615
Grand total 137 258
Table 20: Cost Benefit Analysis for Development of National postharvest management strategy and
implementation plan and recruitment including logistical arrangements
Item Value unit Calculation

a Product quantity 14,930 ton/year (0.3*1.53*37,400*0.87)
marketed and home
consumption
b Product value 3,504 N$/ton Average SAFEX pearl millet
price/ton (NAB, 2015)
c Loss rate 10 % Cumulative loss FSC
d Anticipated loss reduction 15 % CLP average
e Cost of intervention N$2.1million N$
f Depreciation 5 years
g Yearly costs of N$413,000 N$/year e/f
investment
h Yearly costs of operation N$50,000 N$/year Administration
i Total yearly costs of N$463,000 N$/year g+h
solution
j Client costs per ton N$31 N$/ton i/a
product
k Food loss 1,493 ton/year cxa
l Economic loss N$5.3 million N$/year kxb
m Loss reduction 448 ton/year kxd
n Loss reduction savings N$0.78 million N$/year mxb
o Total Client costs N$463,000 N$/year i=axj
p Profitability of solution N$0.32 million $/year n-o
47
Table 21: Cost Benefit Analysis for Training on Good postharvest management practices
Item Value (N$) Unit Calculation

a Product quantity 14,930 ton/year (0.3*1.53*37,400*0.87)
marketed and home consumption
d Anticipated loss 15 % CLP average
reduction
e Cost of intervention N$1.8 million N$
g Yearly costs of N$0.36 million N$/year e/f
investment
h Yearly costs of N$50,000 N$/year Administration
operation
i Total yearly costs of N$0.41 million N$/year g+h
solution
j Client costs per ton N$27.46 N$/ton i/a
product
k Food loss 1,493 ton/year C xa
m Loss reduction 223.95 ton/year kxd
n Loss reduction savings N$0.78 million N$/year mxb
o Total Client costs N$0.41million N$/year i = axj
p Profitability of solution N$0.4 million $/year n-o
Pilot and provide appropriate post-harvest technologies (Dryers/ Threshers)
Post-harvest technology is essential in reducing post-harvest losses on and off farm activities. It is
therefore important to develop affordable and appropriate technologies and techniques to reduce
post-harvest losses that meet the needs of the smallholder farmers. Due to the variations in socio-
economic situations, agronomic conditions and other variables, a one-size-fits-all solution cannot be
recommended. It is assumed that technologies/innovations at different stages of the value chain are
basically for primary processing, value addition, low-cost storage facilities and transportation. It is,
therefore, important to identify existing technologies/innovations presently used by farmers and
other value chain actors to reduce losses.
Using proper post-harvest management and appropriate handling facilities are the key to minimizing
losses along the post-production chain before suitable storage facilities. In Oshikoto, pearl millet is
left to dry in the field for a long time after physiological maturity thereby exposing it to bird attacks,
rotting due to out of season rainfall, rodent attacks, insect and pest infestation (especially termites)
and fungal contamination. Solar dryers, such as the Solar Bubble Dryers (SBD), can be used to dry the
grains in situ so that it is more quickly transported directly to the granaries. There will be a need to
partner with the private sector to enhance innovations that are beneficial to smallholder farmers.
There is a need to introduce suitable alternatives to the traditional methods of threshing among
small-scale farmers by upscaling the use of mechanical pearl millet threshers. Tests thus need to be
carried out on different types of threshing machines according to the power source: small size hand-
48
operated threshers, medium size threshers powered by a petrol or diesel engine and large size
threshers powered from the power take off (PTO) at the back of a tractor. The threshers already
available for pearl millet threshing in Namibia are the locally manufactured ROVIC pearl millet
thresher, the FUTURA threshers and the large SLATTERY threshers. These technologies will be tested
and piloted among some farmers (budget in Table 22 and the cost benefit analysis in Table 23)
before the most appropriate ones are rolled out to the farmers (Budget in Table 24 and the cost
benefit analysis in Table 25).
Table 22: Budget for Piloting mechanisation of PH operations (threshers, dryers)

USD USD
Pilot use of threshers and dryers to 5 1,200 96,000
farmers in each region (8)
Training component (on proper use of 58,825
equipment)
Grand total 154,825
Table 23: Cost Benefit Analysis for Piloting mechanisation of operations (threshers, dryers)

a Product quantity 14,930 ton/year (0.3*1.53*37,400*0.87)marketed
and home consumption
reduction
e Cost of intervention N$2 million N$
investment
solution
product
n Loss reduction savings N$0.78 N$/year mxb
million
p Profitability of solution N$0.33 $/year n-o
million
49
Table 24: Budget for Marketing and financing of appropriate technology manufacturing (threshers, dryers)

USD USD
Subsidy to RDCs that manufacture to 20,000
produce equipment for piloting
Upscaling of manufacturing of 500,000
appropriate technology subsidy to
equipment manufacturers to reduce
selling price
Grand total 520,000
50
Table 25: Cost Benefit Analysis for Marketing and financing appropriate technologies and manufacturing
(dryers, threshers

reduction
g Yearly costs of N$1.4 million N$/year e/f
investment
h Yearly costs of N$50,000 N$/year Administration
operation
i Total yearly costs of N$1.4 million N$/year g+h
solution
product
n Loss reduction savings N$.78 million N$/year mxb
o Total Client costs N$1.4million N$/year i=axj
p Profitability of solution N$-0.62 $/year n-o
million
Improve storage capacity and quality
Farmers in Oshikoto keep about 85% of their pearl millet for long term use (1 year up to 3 years)
including consumption, seed, and emergency sale. While it is projected that only 4% quantity loss
occurs during this period, quality loss is estimated at 10-40% due to pests infestation, use of
nonstandard bags (e.g. used fertiliser bags) and poor handling. Thus, farmers need to be sensitized
on the importance of proper grain storage in regard to their health and introduced to appropriate
technology that has been proven effective in other places such as hermetic bags Grain Pro/Purdue
Improved Crop Storage (PICS) Bags metal/plastic silos and improved granaries. Technology can
assist in reducing post-harvest food losses from pests and toxins as well as contributing to the
development of improved storage facilities, packaging and transportation (budget in Table 26 and
the cost benefit analysis in Table 27). The responsibility for achieving this intervention will be on
MAWF and Artisans and local manufacturers.
51
Table 26: Provision of storage facilities (PICS bags, Grain pro, metal/plastic silos)

USD USD
Pilot distribution of PICS bags/Grainpro 1,500 60,000
to 5 farmers per region (8)
Pilot distribution of metal/plastic silos to 1,500 60,000
5 farmers per region (8)
Training component on use of the PICS 58,825
bags, grain pro and silos
Grand total 178,825
Table 27: Cost Benefit Analysis for Provision of storage facilities (PICS bags, Grainpro, metal/plastic silos)

reduction
investment
solution
product
million
million
Research on Improved varieties and Integrated pest management
Oshikoto farmers suffer the most loss from bird attack in the field while drying. Hairy varieties of
pearl millet that are less prone to bird attack are currently being researched at MAWF stations. This
research needs to be encouraged, strengthened and positive results passed on to farmers. Farmers
grow varieties of pearl millet seeds (local and hybrid) so as to improve food security (local variety is
preferred but takes long to mature which can lead to poor harvest in drought years while hybrids
52
mature fast but have poor storability). Research needs to be done on specialty/hardy breeds with a
high post-harvest shelf life suitable for the Oshikoto regions conditions (improve pearl millet yields,
size and storability).
Apart from introducing appropriate storage structures, it is also very important to manage pests and
diseases. The leaflet entitled "Improved methods of threshing, cleaning and storage of mahangu"
promotes the use of wood ash to control insect infestation in the granary. However, it is not specific
on the amount of ash to be applied or about the use of other bio-pesticides that have been found to
be useful in treating grains in store. The leaflet also recommends the use of phosphine fumigant in
metal grain tanks and gives details of dosage, application procedures and safety recommendations.
Experience in other countries indicates strongly that farmers need to be provided with training in
the use of fumigants at farm level. It is recommended that MAWF spearhead research and training
on integrated pest management for use in the pearl millet grain storage in the Oshikoto region. The
budget for the research interventions is shown in Table 28 and the cost benefit analysis in Table 29).
The actors involved here will be researchers, farmers and farmers unions. The responsible
authorities will be MAWF, International Agencies and various institutions.
Table 28: Budget for Crop breeding for improved varieties and Integrated Pest Management
Inputs Required Associated cost Total Cost of intervention

items/person per year USD
USD
Breeding improved crop varieties at 35,000 70,000
research centres (Mahanene & Manheim)
and testing in farmers' fields
Seed multiplication and training of 20,000 140,000
farmers
Integrated Pest Management 180,000
Grand total 390,000
Table 29: Cost Benefit Analysis for Crop breeding for improved varieties and integrated pest management

reduction
e Cost of intervention N$2.73 N$
million
g Yearly costs of N$546000 N$/year e/f
investment
h Yearly costs of operation N$50000 N$/year Administration
i Total yearly costs of N$596000 N$/year g+h
solution
53
product
million
o Total Client costs N$596000 N$/year i=axj
million
f) Conclusions and recommendations
Conclusions
The critical loss points in the communal pearl millet food supply chain in the Oshikoto region were
found to be drying in the field, drying at homestead, threshing and storage stages. The major causes
of the losses at drying in the field and drying at homesteads were birds, domestic animals, rodents,
weather (rain) and termites. At the threshing stage, the major causes of food losses were incomplete
threshing and grains mixed with sand. The major storage losses were from insect attack and
contamination especially due to the lengthy time the grain is normally stored for. Interventions
suggested for reducing losses in the pearl millet sector include developing a National Postharvest
Management Strategy and Implementation Plan, piloting and providing appropriate post-harvest
technologies (threshers/dryers), improving storage capacity and quality, and carrying out research
on Improved varieties and integrated pest management. Women have also been found to be the
main actors in most of the post-harvest handling activities in the pearl millet supply chain and play a
significant role in making decisions on harvesting, storage and selling. Any interventions that will
improve the post-harvest processes will most likely benefit the women more and they should
therefore be particularly targeted in implementing the interventions.
Recommendations
It is important to have regular monitoring, evaluation and testing activities that identify food loss
stages for interventions that are tailored for each particular stage and avoid surveys that are carried
out at other times than the harvest season as they will not allow to truly capture the critical loss
points and intervention measures given that they can only rely on farmers memory.
54
Annex 1: References:
Acquah, E. T. & Davis, R., 1997. Stimulating indigenous agribusiness development in the Northern
Communal Areas of Namibia: A concept paper. Washington, D.C. AMEX International US Agency for
International Development.
CAC (Cardno Agrisystems Consortium), (2010). Study to inform the design of an Agricultural Dry Land
Productivity Project in Northern Communal Areas of Namibia. Final Report (Draft). Cardno Emerging
Markets (UK) Limited, United Kingdom:
Chigariro, J. & Mallet, M. (2015). Fortification Potential of Mahangu at the level of service and small
scale commercial millers. Report submitted to NAFIN, food Fortification Working Group. CRIAA SA-
DC
Coulter J.A.& Hindmarsh, P.(1997). Grain Storage in the Northern Communal Areas of Namibia,
Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Rural Development. Windhoek
FAO, n.d. Country Programming Framework for Namibia 2014-2018. http:www.fao/Namibia/en/.

Accessed 14 August 2015.
Hodges R. J., 2005: Workshop to review progress on the grain store management survey and loss
assessment baseline for pearl millet (mahangu) NASSP Report No. 000/2005. MAWRD
Hodges R. J., 2006: Final report on the mahangu grain management survey and loss assessment
baseline. NASSP Report No. 006/2006. MAWRD
Iita, J., 2012. Food Security Situation in Namibia. Development dialogue forum Polytechnic hotel
school.
Ipinge, S.N.A., 1998. Namibia national sorghum and pearl millet improvement programme: a
proposal for release of pearl millet varieties, SDMV 93032 (Okashana 2)and SDMV 92040 (Kangara).
Presented to National Variety Release Sub- Committee and National Seed Production Committee.
Windhoek.
Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), (2009). Namibia: Country Gender Profile..
http://www.jica.go.jp/english/our_work/thematic_issues/gender/background/pdf/e09nam.pdf.
Accessed 01 February, 2016
Leporrier S, Leveau A, Dury S, Bricas N, (2002). Mahangu Urban Consumption Survey. CIRAD_AMS,
Programme Agro-Alimentaire, Montpellier.
Lucas L, (2010). Mahangu Marketing Plan 2010-2013: surplus mahangu marketing in Namibia. NAB
and MAWF, Windhoek.
Mallet M. and du Plessis, 2001. Mahangu post-harvest systems: A summary of current knowledge
about pearl millet post-harvest issues in Namibia. CRIAA SA-DC (Namibia).
Mallet M. and C. Rigourd, 2003. Improving Mahangu Grain Marketing, Training Manual for Farmers
Co-Operatives in the North Central Regions of Namibia, NNFU
MAWF, (2010). Dry land crop production program 2010-2013. MAWF, Windhoek:
MAWF, 2012. Namibia country pilot partnership programme: adapting to climate change through
the improvement of traditional crops and livestock farming (CPP NAM: CCA). Final evaluation report.
55
MAWRD, (1995). National Agricultural Policy. MAWRD, Windhoek: 3-51.
MAWRD, (2003). Grain Management Review: Analysis of the Mahangu Post-Harvest Chain & Review
of the Progress of Implementation of the Mahangu and Sorghum Action Plan
Mendelsohn J, (2006). Farming systems in Namibia. Namibia National Farmers Union, Windhoek.
NAB (Namibian Agronomic Board), (2008). Annual Report, 21. Windhoek.
NAB (Namibian Agronomic Board), 2005. Annual Report, 18. Windhoek.
NAB (Namibian Agronomic Board), 2013. Annual Report, 26. Windhoek.
NAB (Namibian Agronomic Board), 2014. Annual Report Final Windhoek.
NRC (Namibia Resource Consultants), (1997). Constraints to the commercialization of the pearl millet
industry in Namibia, Windhoek
NSA, 2015. Namibia census of agriculture 2013/2014 communal sector. Namibia statistics
agency. Windhoek
NSA, 2011. Namibia Population and housing census 2011. Namibia Statistics Agency. Windhoek
Rohrbach, D. D. 2004. Improving the commercial viability of sorghum and pearl millet in Africa.
Series Report.
Sattar AA, Diz M, Franklin DL, (2003). Competitiveness of the food processing cluster in Namibia.
Sigma One Corporation, Windhoek
Thomas B. and Mpofu I. D.T (2013). Competitive environment of the staple food distribution system
in Namibia: an assessment of the pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum) industry. Agricultural Science
Research Journals 3(4): 121-129.
Vigne and Associates, (2004). Options for the commercialization of mahangu in Namibia: an
investigation of the possibilities of mahangu becoming a controlled crop in terms of the agronomic
industry act (1992) and suitable alternatives. Consultants Report Presented to the NAB.
Windhoek.
Vigne, P. and Whiteside, M., 1997. Encouraging Sustainable Smallholder Agriculture in Namibia.
Hillside. Environment and Development Consultancy Ltd.
56
Annex 2: List of experts consulted and of villages visited
Expert name Title/ position Institution

Ms. Johanna Andowa Director Research and Training MAWF
Ms. Magdalena Hangula Chief Scientific Officer MAWF
Ms. Martha Shigwedha Scientific Officer MAWF
Ms. Irene Mundjele Chief Scientific Officer MAWF
Ms. Megameno Amutenya Scientific Officer MAWF
Ms. Annette Kangumba Agricultural Technician MAWF
Mr. Martin Tyapa Chief Agricultural Technician MAWF
Mr. Stephen Iimbili Silo Control Officer AMTA-Omuthiya
Mr. Lungameni Lucas General manager AMTA
Ms. Wilhemina Handunge Senior manager operations AMTA-
Mr. Oswald Mwanyangapo Chief Agricultural Scientific Officer MAWF-Onankali office
Ms. Lucia T. Shiimi-Nghifikwa Chief Agricultural Technician MAWF-Onankali office
Ms. Anna Shivute Agricultural scientific officer MAWF-Outapi
Mr. Moses Munenge Chief Agricultural Scientific Officer MAWF-Rundu
Ms. Mvoyaha Nakaande Agricultural Scientific Officer MAWF-Ongwediva
Mr. Joseph Moses Miller Fresh and Baker
Mr. Chris le Roux Plant manager Namib Mills Otavi
Ms. Sirkka Iileka NAMAC Chairperson (NAB chairperson) Namibian National Farmers Union
Mr. Akawa Amufufu National Mahangu Manager NAB
Mr. Samuel Martin Farm manager University of Namibia, Ogongo
campus
Mr. Jonas Chigariro Postharvest Specialist University of Namibia, Neudamm
campus
Mr. Petrus Shikomba Centre Manager Ongwediva Rural development
Centre
Pastor Matias Semi Chairman Likwama cooperative, Zambezi
Region
Ms. Tuhafeni Nghilundile Trader/ vendor Omuthiyagwiipundi Open market-
Oshikoto Region
Ms. Beata Iindongo Trader/ vendor Omuthiyagwiipundi Open market-
Oshikoto Region
Ms. Saima Mutaleni Trader/ vendor Onethindi Open market-Oshikoto
Region
Ms. Nepeti Shanika Trader/ vendor Oluno Open market-Oshikoto
Region
Ms. Jacobina Nuugonya Trader/ vendor Oluno Open market-Oshikoto
Region
57
Ms. Ndamonaonghenda Trader/ vendor Oluno Open market-Oshikoto
Hausiku Region
Ms. Rauna Lazarus Trader/ vendor Oshakati Open market-Oshana
Region
Ms. Liina Titus Trader/ vendor Oshakati Open market-
OshanaRegion
Ms. Elina Benny Service milling Omuthiyagwiipundi Namwel
Michael-Oshikoto Region
Mr. Matheus Nkoti Service milling Onankali Okagumbo Natekulu
mill-Oshikoto Region
Ms. Nelago Ngolo Medium Miller Onyanya Mahangu Milling &
Supplier-Oshikoto Region
Ms. Maria David Service milling Omuthiyagwiipundi Andreas
Nikondo-Oshikoto Region
Mr. Matheus Andreas Service milling Omuthiyagwiipundi Sammy mills-
Oshikoto Region
Mr. Festus Hauwanga Regional Mahangu Fora Ohangwena Region
Mr. Pombili Sheehama Regional Mahangu Fora Omusati Region
Ms. Ester Namushinga Regional Mahangu Fora Oshikoto Region
Mr. Egidius Nairenge Regional Mahangu Fora Otjozondjupa Region
Mr. Andrias Kamukwanyama Regional Mahangu Fora Kavango East & Kavango West
Regions
Mr. Richard Mapenzi Regional Mahangu Fora Zambezi Region
Village List
Village No Of Questionnaires
Ekulo 6
Okakoto 2
Okaloko 4
Olukonda 6
Onakamwandi 4
Onashikuvu 9
Ondando 30
Ondjamba 17
Onyaanya 29
Oshikulu 11
Owamavo 2
Uukango Womafuma 10
Total 130
58
Annex 3: Quality Scoring of Pearl Millet Grains
Quality Description of the quality %age reduction Images of Samples
Score/Gr of market value
ade
0 Free from any foreign matter,safe 0
and suitable for human
consumption, free from abnormal
flavours, free from filth
1 Allowable deviation from grade 0 10%

(class 1) foreign matter above 3.35
mm sieve 2%, foreign matter above
1.4mm sieve 0.5%, foreign matter
below 1.4mm sieve 5%,
total deviations 7.5%
(class 1) foreign matter above
3.35mm sieve 3%, foreign matter
above 1.4mm sieve 0.6%, foreign
matter below 1.4mm sieve 10%,
total deviations 15%
(class 1) foreign matter above
3.35mm sieve 4%, foreign matter
above 1.4mm sieve 0.7%, foreign
matter below 1.4mm sieve 15%,
total deviations 19.7%
4 Infested with insects (weevils, 100%
moths), fungi, mould and dead
beetles and other foreign matter, not
fit for human consumption only fit
for animal consumption
59
Annex 4: quality analyses of Pearl millet grains collected from farmers
granaries
Unit Evaluated Overall quality Type of damage Potential cause and
score (deterioration) if any symptoms
1 none none
2 size small and some rain

colouration
3 some foreign matter dirty
3 foreign matter dust
4 Weevilled, holed, webs Weevils, moths,

beetles, holes,
fungi
60
4 Weevilled, drilled holes, Weevils, moths,
powdered beetles, holes,
fungi

fungi

fungi

fungi
61

Namibia Report Millet

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Namibia Report Millet

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

POSTHARVEST ASSESSMENT OF FOOD

LOSSES IN THE PEARL MILLET

Field work and report writing by:

Adedayo A. Ogunmokun (University of Namibia)

Benisiu Thomas (University of Namibia)

Cecil Togarepi (University of Namibia)

Contribution to field work:

Ms. Martha Shigwedha (Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry)

Mr. Martin Tyapa (Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry)

2 SITUATION ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................... 15

Mahangu is the name of pearl millet in Namibia.

Figure 2: Production patterns per farmer

No of farmers, production and yield per producing region

Figure 3: Comparison of production, number of farmers and yields in different regions

Table 1: Production information of the pearl millet subsector

Mahangu (Pearl millet) Marketing Intelligent Unit MMIU (1995 2006):

Mahangu (Pearl millet) Urban Consumption Survey (2002-2003):

Comprehensive Conservation Agriculture Programme of Namibia (2015-2019)

Namibia Census of Agriculture (2013/14)

Support to the processing of indigenous fruit & pearl millet (2000-2003):

Integrated grain storage (1998-ongoing):

The Mahangu (Pearl millet) Marketing Plan (2010 2013):

Research and extension:

Extension services include training, technology dissemination (including postharvest handling

Mahangu (Pearl millet) Development and Marketing Plan (2014-2019):

Grain Management Review:

Food Security and Nutrition Development Programme (FSNDP):

c) National policy framework or strategy related to pearl millet food loss

The Green Scheme Policy (2008):

National Food and Nutrition Policy (NFNP) 1995:

Namibia Food Safety Policy (2014):

Namibia Agricultural Policy (NAP) 2015:

Disaster Risk Management Policy (2004):

National Gender Policy (2010-20):

Cooperative Act of 1996:

Quality standards and regulatory frameworks for pearl millet:

Table 2: Pearl millet Quality Standards

The following institutions are involved in the pearl millet subsector:

Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry (MAWF)

Agricultural Business Development Agency (AGRIBUSDEV):

The Namibian Agronomy Board (NAB):

Namibia National Farmers Union (NNFU):

The Small Millers Association of Northern Namibia (SMANN):

The Ministry of Industrialization, Trade and SME Development:

Agricultural Bank of Namibia (AGRIBANK):

Institutions of Higher Learning (e.g. UNAM & NUST):

Northern Namibia Farmers Seed Growers cooperative (NNFSGC):

Table 3: Food supply chain in the pearl millet subsector

Table 4: Importance of the pearl millet supply chains

Table 5: Products in the pearl millet supply chain

Controller Control Actual Situation in the FSC Responsible agent

b) The selected pearl millet supply chain: Oshikoto region

Step in the FSC Estimates from several sources (%)

FSC # 1___, <Oshikoto>, <pearl millet flour>

Harvesting: Drying in the field

Harvesting: Cutting and transport to the drying platform

Collection Storage, seed Farmers

Home consumption stored seed (3%)

Milling Milling Milling(service & Milling Millers : medium

Retail Retail Open market Home

qn=quantitative, ql=qualitative, s=sales, hh=household consumption, seeds and losses

Figure 5: Flow diagram of the pearl millet supply chain

Threshing and Winnowing

7a: Traditional granary 7b: Plastic granary