This piece is part of the weekly series “Growing Forward: Insights for Building Better Food and Agriculture Systems,” presented by the Global Food Institute at the George Washington University and the nonprofit organization Food Tank. Each installment highlights forward-thinking strategies to address today’s food and agriculture related challenges with innovative solutions. To view more pieces in the series, click here.
Despite global efforts to create more sustainable and resilient food systems, post-harvest food loss—especially in lower-income regions—remains a major obstacle. In Sub-Saharan Africa, this loss isn’t just about poor storage or transportation; it’s a symptom of deeper structural challenges tied to global trade, poverty and inequality.
Moses Kansanga—a human-environment geographer, assistant professor at the George Washington University, and affiliate faculty member at the Global Food Institute—has spent years studying how these dynamics play out on the ground in rural farming communities. His research weaves together issues of agricultural development, environmental sustainability, and local knowledge—offering a grounded, systems-level view of food loss and hope for solutions.
In this conversation, Kansanga explains why we need to rethink how we tackle postharvest losses, the role of gender equity, and what he’s learned from the farmers at the center of this story.
What led you to focus your research on food systems and post-harvest loss, and what are the key questions you try to answer in your work?
What I do today reflects my lived experience growing up in northern Ghana, where food insecurity and climate change are profound issues.
I experienced a famine when I was only about three years old. I remember my mother going to the southern part of Ghana–which has better agroecological conditions–to work for food and send it back to us. I started to wonder why certain areas were doing better than others, even within the same country. That curiosity led me to study geography, a discipline that gave me the tools to explore inequality not just spatially, but also economically and politically.
The overarching question at the heart of my work today is: why do certain geographies continue to struggle with hunger? And, how can we do agriculture in ways that ensure higher yield and environmental integrity?
You’ve described food loss in Sub-Saharan Africa as more than just a technical issue–but rather, one tied to deeper structural challenges. Can you walk us through what that means, and why it matters for how we try to address it?
The solutions we pursue today are often like putting a bandage without antiseptic properties on a wound. It may provide cover alright, and perhaps be outwardly appealing, but it won’t suppress disease-causing microorganisms to ensure healing. When it comes to post-harvest food loss, we have focused more on proximate solutions like infrastructure and technology provision without addressing the underlying political economy dynamics that hold the key to preventing it.
Prevention requires addressing the politics behind food systems. A major issue is food dumping. Even with better infrastructure and technology, farmers in Africa will be outcompeted by cheaper imports from Europe and North America. For example, Ghana—a major tomato producer in Africa—imports a large amount of tomatoes from the Netherlands. Local farmers can’t compete with subsidized produce, so many have abandoned farming altogether. Ironically, some now work on tomato plantations in Europe!
So yes, road networks and cold storage are timely, but if international trade terms aren’t equitable, local farmers will still suffer losses. That’s why I argue that food loss isn’t just technical—it’s deeply political.
In your view, what kinds of changes–whether in policy, funding, or infrastructure–are most urgently needed to reduce food loss in ways that actually stick?
Because the problem is both technical and political, any effective solution must address both issues simultaneously.
We need technical infrastructure—roads, storage facilities, processing tools. But we also need to rethink trade agreements to address food dumping, particularly perishable commodities. African countries need the autonomy to say: we produce enough tomatoes, so we don’t need imports right now.
If some governments are unable to control the inflow of surplus perishable commodities from wealthier countries, even when local supply can meet demand, then we’re stuck. That’s where international organizations like the WTO must engage—if we want to end food loss, we must address trade policies.
If I had a magic wand, I would correct the power imbalances in trade between the Global North and Global South. If we create a level playing field, Africa’s innovative capacity will evolve to address these challenges.
What’s the role of gender inequality when it comes to postharvest loss?
I see gender reflected at two levels. First is the everyday material reality—women often don’t have access to productive resources like land. They dominate the production, processing, preservation, and marketing stages of the value chain, but they don’t control the resources. Women have little access to efficient technology, so they lose more of their harvest.
Second is political exclusion. Women are largely absent from decision-making spaces—from local government to community leadership. That means their challenges are often invisible in the policy making sub-system. So food loss is a gendered problem—which has deep implications for household income, education, and well-being.
What kinds of solutions can address those gender dynamics?
In Ghana, we are focusing on using a “gender transformative approach” which includes creating shared spaces for discussing post-harvest loss issues at the community level. We’re training women in post-harvest loss practices and helping them engage with traditional leaders to negotiate and challenge norms—like the belief that women shouldn’t own land.
We’re starting to see shifts. Some traditional leaders are recognizing these gender gaps and granting women access to productive resources. As women’s voices grow stronger, I believe the gendered food loss burden will be addressed. This form of community-led change is driven by the people, not imposed from outside.
One thing that stands out about your work is that you have spent a lot of time talking with farmers and centering their experiences. What have farmers taught you about the pressures they face, and what they actually need to farm sustainably and successfully?
Before I started engaging farmers in the fields, I had some preconceived ideas as a young scholar. I thought that smallholder farmers were isolated from or less knowledgeable about the global-level food politics that critical scholars talk about.
Over the years I’ve been amazed at how deeply knowledgeable they are about these issues. If we had farmers on national television around the world, you would be amazed at all the things that they know! Unfortunately, they lack such a platform to share their knowledge and experiences. So in my work, I like to make sure I am there with them, being physically connected to what they do and understanding how that relates to broader challenges.
Despite the challenges your work explores, what gives you hope about where things are headed in the communities you work with?
The resilience of the farmers. I’ve seen many communities that have been neglected for so long, but they haven’t given up. They’re still working, feeding their families with the little they produce and pushing for change.
When I see women innovating with no support, or young people who say, “we want to farm,” despite the odds—that keeps me going. It gives me hope. If we fix the politics and give farmers the tools they need, we can solve this.
Interview conducted by Priya Fielding-Singh
