Jean C. Buzby

Postharvest losses and waste in developed and less developed countries: opportunities to improve resource use

This review compares and contrasts postharvest food losses (PHLs) and waste in developed countries (especially the USA and the UK) with those in less developed countries (LDCs), especially the case of cereals in sub-Saharan Africa. Reducing food losses offers an important way of increasing food availability without requiring additional production resources, and in LDCs it can contribute to rural development and poverty reduction by improving agribusiness livelihoods. The critical factors governing PHLs and food waste are mostly after the farm gate in developed countries but before the farm gate in LDCs. In the foreseeable future (e.g. up to 2030), the main drivers for reducing PHLs differ: in the developed world, they include consumer education campaigns, carefully targeted taxation and private and public sector partnerships sharing the responsibility for loss reduction. The LDCs’ drivers include more widespread education of farmers in the causes of PHLs; better infrastructure to connect smallholders to markets; more effective value chains that provide sufficient financial incentives at the producer level; opportunities to adopt collective marketing and better technologies supported by access to microcredit; and the public and private sectors sharing the investment costs and risks in market-orientated interventions.

MEASURING CONSUMER BENEFITS OF FOOD SAFETY RISK REDUCTIONS

Microbial pathogens and pesticide residues in food pose a financial burden to society which can be reduced by incurring costs to reduce these food safety risks. We explore three valuation techniques that place a monetary value on food safety risk reductions, and we present a case study for each: a contingent valuation survey on pesticide residues, an experimental auction market for a chicken sandwich with reduced risk of Salmonella, and a cost-of-illness analysis for seven foodborne pathogens. Estimates from these techniques can be used in cost/benefit analyses for policies that reduce food safety risks.

The economics of enteric infections: human foodborne disease costs.

The World Health Organization estimates that in 2005, 1.5 million people died, worldwide, from diarrheal diseases. A separate study estimated that 70% of diarrheal diseases are foodborne. The widely cited US estimate is that there are 76 million foodborne illnesses annually, resulting in 325,000 hospitalizations and 5200 deaths. However, there are epidemiologic and methodologic challenges to accurately estimate the economic burden of foodborne disease on society, either in terms of monetary costs or non-monetary units of measurement. Studies on the economic burden of foodborne disease vary considerably: some analyze the effects of a single pathogen or a single outbreak, whereas others attempt to estimate all foodborne disease in a country. Differences in surveillance systems, methodology, and other factors preclude meaningful comparisons across existing studies. However, if it were possible to completely estimate the societal costs for all acute foodborne diseases and their chronic sequelae worldwide, on the basis of currently available data, worldwide costs from these illnesses would be substantial. Moreover, foodborne infections are largely manifested as intestinal illnesses and are largely preventable. Total costs of foodborne disease would be much smaller in the United States and the world if economic incentives for industry to produce safer food were improved. However, costs of implementing new food safety prevention and control rules must be weighed against the estimated benefits of reducing foodborne disease to determine net benefits so that governments have information to efficiently allocate funds among competing programs.

The Economic Burden of Campylobacter-Associated Guillain-Barré Syndrome

Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is an autoimmune disease characterized by acute neuromuscular paralysis. Of an estimated annual number of 2628-9575 US cases, 526-3830 are triggered by Campylobacter infection. Research objectives were to identify the lifetime consequences of GBS and, when possible, to quantify their economic burden. The cost-of-illness method was used to calculate annual societal resources spent on medical care and lost productivity due to illness or premature death from Campylobacter-associated GBS. Estimated total costs (in US

Food safety and product liability

) of Campylobacter-associated GBS (

Can Low-income Americans Afford to Satisfy MyPyramid Fruit and Vegetable Guidelines?

0.2-

The Economic Efficiency of Sampling Size: The Case of Beef Trim

1.8 billion) were added to previously estimated costs of campylobacteriosis (

Response to Mark Powell's Comments

1.3-

The farm: retail price spread: the case of postharvest pesticides in fresh grapefruit packinghouses

6.2 billion) for a total annual cost from Campylobacter of

Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States

1.5-