Enhancing Food Security in Pakistan

Pakistan can strengthen food security by reducing post-harvest losses, modernizing supply chains, improving storage, and maximizing the value of every tonne produced.

FOOD AND NUTRITION

Nadeem Riyaz

9/4/2026

selective focus photography of tray of food

For decades, Pakistan's food security debate has centered on a seemingly simple question: how much food can the country produce? More wheat, more rice, more maize, and higher yields have long been considered the primary path towards food security. Increasing production remains important, but it tells only half the story. Food that is produced but never reaches consumers cannot improve nutrition, strengthen food security, or generate income for farmers.

Between the farm and the dinner table, a substantial share of Pakistan's agricultural output is lost through poor harvesting practices, inadequate storage, inefficient transport, weak cold-chain infrastructure, limited processing capacity, and poor market management. This represents far more than wasted food. Every kilogram lost also represents wasted water, fertilizer, energy, labor, land, capital, and months of farmers' effort. In a country facing water scarcity, high production costs, and persistent economic pressures, such losses are an increasingly serious national concern.

The available evidence is particularly worrying about perishable commodities. While losses for cereals may range around 10 to 15 percent depending on the commodity, location, and stage of the supply chain, losses for fruits and vegetables can reach 30 percent or more. These percentages translate into enormous economic consequences. Some estimates have placed wheat losses at approximately 2.53 million tonnes, with an estimated value of around Rs158 billion. Other assessments have reported major losses valued at roughly Rs80 billion for rice, Rs116 billion for maize, and Rs142 billion for potatoes.

Although these estimates are derived from different studies and methodologies and should not simply be added together, they reveal the scale of the problem. Pakistan is potentially losing hundreds of billions of rupees in agricultural value before food reaches consumers. Reducing these losses could improve food availability without requiring equivalent increases in cultivated land or water use. For Pakistan, the next agricultural revolution may therefore depend not only on producing more food, but also on saving more of what is already produced.

Where Pakistan’s Food Value Disappears

The journey from farm to fork is filled with risks, and at every stage a portion of Pakistan's agricultural production can lose quality, market value, or become completely unfit for consumption. Different commodities face different challenges, but the result is often the same: food that requires land, water, labor, energy, and investment fail to generate its full economic or nutritional value.

Cereals such as wheat, rice, and maize are particularly vulnerable after harvest. Moisture, insects, rodents, fungal contamination, and inadequate storage facilities can damage grain that took months to produce. Poorly ventilated warehouses and traditional storage systems can gradually reduce both quantity and quality, turning a valuable harvest into an economic loss.

Fruits and vegetables face even greater risks because of their highly perishable nature. Harvesting methods, handling, packaging, transport, temperature management, and the speed at which produce reaches consumers can determine whether a crop remains profitable. Without effective cold-chain facilities, a perfectly marketable tomato, mango, or vegetable can lose quality within days and become difficult or impossible to sell.

Dairy and meat products require reliable refrigeration from production through processing, transport, and retail. Interruptions in electricity, inadequate cold storage, and weak logistics can therefore result in substantial losses.

Yet food loss is not simply an infrastructure problem. It also reflects failures in market coordination. Many farmers lack reliable information about expected prices, consumer demand, quality standards, and market conditions. When large numbers of farmers harvest and market the same perishable crop simultaneously, supply can exceed demand and prices can collapse. With produce deteriorating rapidly, farmers have little bargaining power and may sell at extremely low prices or leave crops unsold.

In such circumstances, the loss is both physical and economic. Pakistan's food-security challenge is therefore not only about producing enough food, but about building smarter systems that connect production, storage, markets, and consumers more efficiently.

The Political Economy and Resource Cost of Food Waste

Pakistan’s agricultural policies do not operate in an economic vacuum. Decisions about what farmers produce, how commodities are priced, and where public resources are invested are shaped by competing political and economic interests. Governments must balance the demands of farmers seeking remunerative prices with those of consumers concerned about rising food costs. Provincial governments seek to protect regional agricultural interests, while commodity groups, traders, processors, and other organized stakeholders advocate policies that favor their particular sectors.

Government procurement programs illustrate this complexity. Public procurement and support prices can provide important income security for farmers and help governments maintain strategic food reserves. However, poorly designed interventions can also create unintended incentives. When guaranteed procurement or attractive support prices are concentrated on particular commodities, farmers may understandably expand production of those crops even when market demand, storage facilities, processing capacity, or export opportunities are insufficient. The result can be excessive stocks, market gluts, storage pressures, and ultimately greater post-harvest losses.

Political incentives can further complicate the problem. Highly visible measures, such as announcing higher support prices or opening new procurement centers, often generate immediate political benefits. Investments in cold chains, warehouse management, market information systems, grading facilities, digital supply-chain platforms, and post-harvest technologies may receive less attention because their benefits are gradual and less visible. Yet these investments can potentially generate far greater long-term economic returns by reducing losses and improving market efficiency.

This mismatch between political visibility and economic efficiency contributes to a troubling cycle: Pakistan continues to focus heavily on producing more food while insufficient attention is given to preserving, processing, storing, and efficiently marketing what is already produced. Breaking this cycle requires agricultural policy to be evaluated not only by production targets but also by measurable outcomes such as reduced post-harvest losses, improved farmer incomes, water productivity, food availability, and consumer welfare.

The hidden cost of food loss extends far beyond the market value of spoiled produce. Agriculture consumes vast quantities of land, water, fertilizer, energy, machinery, and human labor. When food is produced but never consumed, these resources have effectively generated little or no nutritional or economic return. In a water-stressed country such as Pakistan, this represents a particularly serious concern.

Every tonne of wasted wheat, rice, fruit, or vegetables embodies scarce irrigation water, land, fertilizer, fuel, labor, and capital. Reducing food losses therefore offers a powerful double dividend: it increases food availability without requiring proportional expansion in production while improving the economic productivity of scarce natural resources. Saving food is, in effect, another way of producing more, with less pressure on Pakistan’s land, water, environment, and public finances.

From Producing More to Losing Less

Pakistan faces an increasingly important choice in how it approaches food security. For decades, agricultural policy has focused primarily on increasing production through expanded cultivation, additional irrigation, improved seed varieties, greater fertilizer use, and technological intensification. These investments remain important, particularly as population growth continues to increase demand for food. Yet there is another, equally important path: protecting more of the food that Pakistan has already produced. Better storage, improved harvesting and handling, reliable cold chains, efficient transport, value-added processing, and stronger market coordination can increase the availability and value of food without requiring equivalent increases in land, water, or other agricultural inputs.

The choice between producing more and losing less should not be treated as an ideological debate. It is fundamentally an economic question. Policymakers should ask where each additional rupee invested can generate the greatest return. In some commodities and locations, investment in higher yields may be the most efficient option. In others, an investment in cold storage, drying facilities, warehouses, or processing may preserve more food value than an equivalent investment in additional production. The most valuable additional tonne of food may, in some cases, be the tonne Pakistan has already produced but failed to preserve.

The first requirement for change is better measurement. Pakistan needs reliable and commodity-specific information showing where losses occur and why. Food losses should be measured across different stages of the supply chain rather than represented by a single national percentage. This would allow policymakers and investors to identify the most serious bottlenecks and target resources accordingly.

Second, investment should follow the economic source of the loss. Where poor storage damages cereals, modern warehousing and pest management should receive priority. Where fruits and vegetables deteriorate because of heat and delays, cold chains, improved packaging, and faster logistics may offer the greatest returns. Where recurring market gluts depress prices and leave produce unsold, processing facilities, market diversification, and stronger links between farmers and buyers become essential.

Third, markets must reward quality, efficiency, and coordination. Improved grading standards, reliable market information, digital platforms, farmer aggregation, and stronger connections with processors and retailers can reduce uncertainty and improve farmers' bargaining power. Agricultural incentives should also be assessed not only by how much additional food they produce, but by their effects on resource use, market signals, storage capacity, and overall food-system efficiency.

The private sector must be an essential partner. Government alone cannot finance the cold storage, logistics, warehousing, processing, and technology required to modernize food supply chains. Public policy should therefore create conditions that make investment in reducing food losses commercially viable.

Pakistan does not need to choose between producing more and losing less. It must pursue both. However, in a water-stressed country with limited land, rising production costs, and a growing population, reducing food loss may be one of the fastest and most resource-efficient ways to strengthen food security. The next frontier of agricultural policy should therefore focus not only on how much more Pakistan can grow, but on how much more value it can retain from every tonne it already produces.

Conclusion

Pakistan’s food-security challenge is no longer simply about producing more; it is increasingly about preserving what the country already produces. Food lost between farms and consumers represents wasted water, land, labor, energy, capital, and opportunities to improve nutrition and rural incomes. Reducing post-harvest losses can therefore strengthen food availability without placing additional pressure on scarce natural resources. Achieving this requires better measurement, targeted investment in storage and cold chains, improved processing and logistics, stronger market information, and policies that reward efficiency rather than production alone. Public and private sectors must work together to modernize agricultural supply chains and create profitable incentives for reducing losses. In a water-stressed and economically constrained country, saving food is both sound economics and responsible resource management. Pakistan's next agricultural transformation should focus not only on growing more, but on ensuring that every tonne produced delivers its maximum value to farmers, consumers, and the national economy.

Please note that the views expressed in this article are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of any organization.

The writer is a former Pakistan Ambassador and Permanent Representative to FAO, WFP and IFAD and can be reached at nriyaz60@gmail.com

Enhancing Food Security in Pakistan

Related Stories