For much of the past century, agricultural policy around the world has been driven by one central goal: increasing yields. From the Green Revolution in South Asia to large-scale mechanisation in North America, governments and development institutions have measured success largely by output per acre. This approach helped avert food shortages and raise production at a time when supply was the binding constraint. Today, that constraint no longer exists.

Global food production today is sufficient to feed the world’s population, yet an estimated one-third of all food produced is lost or wasted every year. According to the Food and Agriculture Organisation, this amounts to nearly 1.3 billion tonnes annually, with losses occurring across every region and income group. The implication is clear. The core challenge facing agriculture today is not how much food is grown, but how much of it actually reaches markets and consumers.

The nature of these losses differs by country, but the underlying problem remains the same. In low and middle-income countries, including Pakistan, 20 to 45 per cent of fruits and vegetables are lost after harvest, largely due to poor storage, inadequate transport and weak market linkages. In cereals, post-harvest losses typically range between 10-20pc, eroding farmer incomes before produce even enters formal markets.

In high-income countries, the scale is no less striking. In the United States, studies estimate that over 30pc of the food supply is lost or wasted, with fruits and vegetables experiencing the highest losses. While consumer behaviour and retail practices play a role, supply chain rigidities such as strict cosmetic standards, oversupply and logistical mismatches account for a significant share of this waste. Food is often discarded not because it is unsafe or unusable, but because markets are unable to absorb it efficiently.

In a world where food is increasingly lost after it is grown, the real frontier of agricultural reform lies in strengthening supply chains

Pakistan’s experience reflects a similar pattern, albeit at an earlier stage of the value chain. Agriculture employs close to 38pc of the country’s labour force and contributes roughly one quarter of GDP, yet farmer incomes remain volatile and persistently low. This disconnect cannot be explained by production alone. In several crops, output has increased over time, but weak post-harvest systems continue to undermine returns.

Cold storage capacity in Pakistan covers only a fraction of perishable output. Most small farmers rely on informal transport and wholesale markets where prices are opaque, and quality is rarely differentiated. As a result, higher production often leads to gluts, price crashes and greater losses rather than improved incomes. When supply chains fail, producing more simply magnifies inefficiency.

Policy responses, however, remain heavily skewed towards boosting yields. Input subsidies, support prices and emergency interventions dominate agricultural spending. While such measures can stabilise production in the short term, they do little to address the structural weaknesses that determine how value is distributed along the supply chain. International evidence increasingly suggests that investments in storage, logistics and market infrastructure generate higher and more durable income gains than comparable spending on yield enhancement alone.

Port rejections, quality downgrades and inconsistent supplies are rarely the result of poor farming practices; instead they stem from weak aggregation systems, a lack of grading and insufficient traceability

The export sector illustrates this imbalance clearly. Many countries with strong agricultural production potential struggle to compete in high-value markets due to post-harvest shortcomings. Rejections at ports, quality downgrades and inconsistent supply are rarely the result of poor farming practices. More often, they stem from weak aggregation systems, a lack of grading and insufficient traceability. In such cases, the financial burden is borne upstream by farmers who have little control beyond harvest.

A growing body of research now points to post-harvest interventions as one of the most effective ways to improve farm incomes without expanding cultivated land or increasing environmental pressure. Reducing losses by even five to 10 percentage points can raise effective supply and farmer earnings more reliably than pushing yields higher on already stressed land and water resources.

This is not an argument against productivity growth, but a recognition that yield alone is no longer the binding constraint. Agriculture today is as much about coordination as cultivation. Without functioning supply chains that connect farmers to markets in a timely and efficient manner, higher production will continue to deliver diminishing returns.

The fixation on yields has outlived its usefulness. In a world where food is increasingly lost after it is grown, the real frontier of agricultural reform lies beyond the farm gate. Until supply chains are strengthened, farmers in both rich and poor countries will remain trapped in systems that reward production but fail to translate it into sustainable income.

The writer is the Founder and CEO of Zarai Baramdaat.

Published in Dawn, The Business and Finance Weekly, January 5th, 2026