2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100434
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Loss and waste in fish value chains: A review of the evidence from low and middle-income countries

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
54
0
3

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 57 publications
(73 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
54
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Greater recognition of links between wild capture fisheries and mariculture will improve management of diseases and parasites (Godwin et al 2020 ; Hayward et al 2011 ). Seafood waste in developed countries, and loss of quality and nutritional value in developing countries in particular, will be markedly reduced as a result of both improved fishing practices, value chain improvements and consumer education (Bogard et al 2019b ; Kruijssen et al 2020 ). A more diverse range of species will be available, as well as a more stable supply of seafood products, as a result of improved fisheries management, more effective use of species that might have been underutilised or discarded in the past (van Putten et al 2019 ) and improved packaging (de la Caba et al 2019 ).…”
Section: Results and Discussion—imagining The Futurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Greater recognition of links between wild capture fisheries and mariculture will improve management of diseases and parasites (Godwin et al 2020 ; Hayward et al 2011 ). Seafood waste in developed countries, and loss of quality and nutritional value in developing countries in particular, will be markedly reduced as a result of both improved fishing practices, value chain improvements and consumer education (Bogard et al 2019b ; Kruijssen et al 2020 ). A more diverse range of species will be available, as well as a more stable supply of seafood products, as a result of improved fisheries management, more effective use of species that might have been underutilised or discarded in the past (van Putten et al 2019 ) and improved packaging (de la Caba et al 2019 ).…”
Section: Results and Discussion—imagining The Futurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…108 Post-harvest processing and distribution Aquatic foods vary widely in terms of edible yields, nutritional content, processing techniques, distribution, consumption, and food loss and waste. [109][110][111][112] These factors vary widely with geographical and cultural context and strongly influence environmental performance. 109 Alongside species selection, increasing edible yields and reducing food loss and waste are arguably the most efficient short-term interventions for improving the environmental performance of aquatic foods, as less needs to be produced in the first place.…”
Section: Regulations and Tradementioning
confidence: 99%
“…112 In Africa and Asia most discards are at the production stage or during processing and distribution, 114 often with accompanying losses in nutritional quality. 111 There is, however, an ongoing shift in low-income countries from subsistence production toward sourcing food from markets, and from home cooking to consumption of processed food and food eaten away from home, which implies longer supply chains that will influence utilization rates. 113,115 Other reduction strategies for food loss and waste range from simple changes in prac-tices, such as handling fish with care, avoiding contamination, using insect nets, improved drying techniques, better hygiene and public awareness, to refrigeration, improved infrastructure, clean water, improved packaging material, food safety legislation, and promotion of value-added products from low-value fish species.…”
Section: Regulations and Tradementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Background and understanding 2 Regional drivers (Kruijssen et al 2020), but it is clear that losses can be significant. In Ghana, for example, physical losses at production (landing) level for purse seine fisheries were estimated at 16-20 percent of total weight (Akande and Diei-Ouadi 2010), with losses of 3-17 percent for the entire smoked fish value chain (Diei-Ouadi et al 2015).…”
Section: Production Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Apart from physical losses, economic and nutritional outcomes may also be affected when quality is reduced. Nutritional losses, such as the loss of crude protein and fatty acids, may be a result of smoking, freezing, or storage (Kruijssen et al 2020). Food safety is also of concern as a wide range of acute health issues such as diarrhoea can occur along with long-term effects, such as chronic disorders of the kidneys, heart, eyes, and brain.…”
Section: Production Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%