




































 AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL STUDIES 9(1) (2024), 35-45  

 

35 

 

 

      AGRICULTURAL STUDIES 
                                                               AIJAS VOL 9 NO 1 (2024) P-ISSN 2641-4155   E-ISSN 2641-418X 

                                                                                                                      Available online at www.acseusa.org      

                                                                                                                                  Journal homepage: https://www.acseusa.org/journal/index.php/aijas 

                 Published by American Center of Science and Education, USA 

MITIGATING POSTHARVEST LOSSES IN CUCUMBER 

PRODUCTION: X-RAYING THE CAUSES, DRIVERS, AND COPING 

MECHANISMS AMONG SMALLHOLDERS    

 

 Ikenna Charles Ukwuaba (a)   Oluchi Mary Ndigwe (b)  Angela Chidimma Igweh (c)1  Ejiofor Emmanuel Omeje (d)  

 Ifeyinwa Cynthia Ukwuaba (e)       

 

(a) Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Nigeria Nsukka, Nigeria; E-mail: ikenna.ukwuaba@unn.edu.ng 
(b) Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Nigeria Nsukka; Nigeria; E-mail: mary.ndigwe.242308@unn.edu.ng  
(c) Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Nigeria Nsukka, Nigeria; E-mail: angela.igweh@unn.edu.ng 
(d) Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Nigeria Nsukka, Nigeria; E-mail: ejiofor.omeje@unn.edu.ng 
(e) Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Nigeria Nsukka, Nigeria; E-mail: ifeyinwaofoleta@gmail.com 

 

 
A R T I C L E I N F O 
 

 

Article History: 
 

Received: 28th October 2024 

Reviewed & Revised: 28th October 2024 
to 26th December 2024 

Accepted: 27th December 2024 

Published: 31st December 2024 

 
Keywords: 

 

Postharvest Losses, Mitigation, Pest,  

Economic Loss, Food Insecurity, Cucumber. 

 
JEL Classification Codes: 

 

Q1, Q12, Q13, Q18 

       

Peer-Review Model:  

 

External peer-review was done through  
double-blind method.  

 
A B S T R A C T 

 
Food losses resulting from poor post-harvest management hamper achieving the sustainable 

development goal of zero hunger and improved food security in most developing countries. There is thus 

a need to understand the underlying causes and factors influencing postharvest losses among farmers 

to reduce postharvest losses. The study examined the primary and secondary causes of postharvest 

losses, the extent of postharvest losses, the drivers, and the mitigation strategies. A multistage sampling 

procedure was used in the selection of 200 respondents. Primary data was collected with the aid of a 

structured questionnaire. The data was analyzed using descriptive statistics and Ordinary Least Square 
regression. The results of the socioeconomic characteristics of the farmers indicated that the majority 

(54.0%) were female, with mean age, education, household size, and monthly income of 45.15 years, 

11.88 years, six persons, and ₦129,400 ($180.57), respectively. The major primary and secondary 

causes of postharvest losses were pathogens and pests (89%) and poor road networks (x̄ = 4.5), 

respectively. About 41% reported a postharvest loss of between 21% and 50% of cucumber. The drivers 

of postharvest losses were off-farm income, harvest time after maturity, household size, the quantity of 

cucumber produced, and market distance. The major mitigation strategies devised by the respondents to 
reduce postharvest losses include timely harvesting, improved handling and transportation techniques, 

and adopting improved pest and disease management practices. The findings of this study suggest that 

improving road networks, especially those connecting farmers to the markets, would significantly reduce 

post-harvest losses. 

 
 

© 2024 by the authors. Licensee ACSE, USA. This open-access article is distributed under the terms 

and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license 

(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).                           

 

INTRODUCTION 

Cucumber is an edible fruit produced and consumed globally for its nutritional, health, and economic benefits (Adeoye & 

Balogun, 2016; Onuwa et al., 2023). Nutritionally, cucumbers are rich in fiber, potassium, manganese, magnesium, and 

vitamins A, C, and K (Chakraborty & Rayalu, 2021). It supports antimicrobial and antifungal activities, aids detoxification, 

hydration, and anti-inflammatory effects on the skin (Akhtar et al., 2020; Chakraborty & Rayalu, 2021). It is also 

instrumental in treating diabetes, reducing cancer risk (Tuama & Mohammed, 2019), and other health benefits such as aiding 

digestion, wound healing, weight loss, and reducing blood pressure and eye puffiness. Economically, studies on cucumber 

production have shown that the crop has high economic significance; it is a profitable venture for small-scale farmers with 

the highest benefit-cost ratio (Adeoye & Balogun, 2016; Onuwa et al., 2023). Similarly, Onuwa et al. (2023) and Adeoye 

and Balogun (2016) posited that cucumber production in areas where the soil is suitable and favourable climatic conditions 

can support farmers' earnings at regular intervals. Hence, increased cucumber production can catalyze farmers' income and 

welfare, enhance food security, and achieve zero hunger in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). However, the realization of zero 

hunger, the second goal of the United Nations Sustainable Goals, and food security are under threat in SSA due to the high 

level of waste resulting from postharvest losses. While improvements at the farm level to increase on-farm yields are 

                                                      
1Corresponding author: ORCID ID: 0009-0007-8008-9920 

© 2024 by the authors. Hosting by ACSE. Peer review under the responsibility of the American Center of Science and Education, USA.  

https://doi.org/10.46545/aijas.v9i1.320 
 

To cite this article: Ukwuaba, I. C., Ndigwe, O. M., Igweh, A. C., Omeje, E. E., & Ukwuaba, I. C. (2024). MITIGATING POSTHARVEST LOSSES IN 

CUCUMBER PRODUCTION: X-RAYING THE CAUSES, DRIVERS, AND COPING MECHANISMS AMONG SMALLHOLDERS. American 
International Journal of Agricultural Studies, 9(1), 35–45. https://doi.org/10.46545/aijas.v9i1.320 

https://doi.org/10.46545/aijas.v9i1.320
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
https://www.openaccess.nl/en
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3534-9785
https://orcid.org/0009-0002-7456-2842
https://orcid.org/0009-0007-8008-9920
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1448-7003
https://orcid.org/0009-0009-4827-9112


Ukwuaba et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 35-45 

 

36 

 

generally effective and contribute to higher supply (Sheahan & Barrett, 2017), they do little to improve profitability as a 

result of postharvest losses. Consequently, an increase in yields has not translated to significant benefits for smallholder 

farmers, mainly due to postharvest losses. Thus, to end global hunger and food insecurity, especially in developing countries, 

it has become imperative to significantly reduce the ugly trend and ensure that food wastage is reduced to the barest 

minimum.  

Globally, food waste and loss are estimated at around one-third of all the food produced in the world (FAO, 2019), 

with most losses happening by far in developing countries.  It is estimated that over 40% of annual perishable crops, such 

as fruits and vegetables produced in the region, are lost before they reach the final consumers due to poor handling and 

storage (Sheahan & Barrett, 2017). These losses are costly and have essential implications economically, socially, and 

environmentally, such as loss of farmer income resulting in poverty in some cases, intensified food insecurity, and 

environmental externalities, which, combined with others, ultimately lead to economic stagnation (Ogundele, 2022). 

Postharvest losses can thus be defined as quantitative or qualitative measurable food loss occurring shortly after harvest 

until it reaches the final consumer or any other utilizable points (Hodges et al., 2011). Quantitative losses are assessed by 

evaluating the reduction in the physical quantity of food commodities over some time and space. Conversely, qualitative 

losses are assessed regarding the decline in nutritional content, aesthetic attributes, viability, and overall nutritional 

properties of food commodities (Falola et al., 2023; Sheahan & Barrett, 2017). According to Ishangulyyev et al. (2019) and 

Ogundele (2022), such losses can occur due to environmental, technological, social, economic, or managerial causes; they 

can happen anywhere in the food supply chain – from production, processing, and storage to marketing/distribution. 

However, the cost of post-harvest losses is higher for perishable crops like fruits and vegetables like tomatoes, mangoes, 

and cucumbers. Empirical studies estimated that postharvest losses for fruits and vegetables could exceed 40% in Nigeria, 

leading to enormous financial losses among farmers and the country (Obanubi et al., 2021). 

Postharvest losses have a more severe and far-reaching effect than just waste of farm produce, especially in 

developing countries that have yet to attain self-sufficiency in food production. Postharvest losses indicate an inefficient 

food-functioning system (Chikez et al., 2023), and the causes of these losses could be classified into primary, secondary, or 

tertiary factors (Sugri et al., 2021). Globally, integrated and innovative approaches have been established to facilitate the 

efforts to ensure sustainable food production and consumption. In Nigeria, the Nigerian Stored Products Research Institute 

(NSPRI) was established, and one of the targets was to research and enhance postharvest management of farm produce to 

meet appropriate standards of local consumption and export. Despite these efforts, the problems of postharvest losses 

continue to persist and worsen. The perishable nature of most agricultural produce, especially vegetables and fruits, makes 

it prone to high post-harvest losses.  

Cucumber is one of the highly perishable crops characterized by its high moisture content and lack of refrigeration 

capability. This predisposes the crop to rapid deterioration, leading to significant potential for losses if not managed properly. 

Thus, in transporting harvested cucumbers from places of production to consumption, a significant proportion of the farm 

produce is lost. In Nigeria, cucumber is consumed in all regions but is produced mainly in the northern region. The southern 

regions, including Enugu state, have recorded increased cucumber production. Cucumber productivity in Nigeria is 

relatively low and unranked compared to other vegetables like tomatoes and citrus. Thus, little attention is paid to the crop, 

especially its postharvest management. Along the cucumber value chain, freshly harvested cucumbers encounter qualitative 

and quantitative losses, which have implications for marketing and price, especially given the perfectly competitive nature 

of the agricultural market. Since over 60% of Nigerians are engaged in agriculture, devising practical solutions to mitigate 

post-harvest losses is crucial for advancing sustainable development in this sector. The output of this study is an indication 

of the primary causes and drivers of post-harvest losses among small-scale cucumber farmers, and this will serve as a guide 

to policymakers in devising effective measures to reduce postharvest losses among farmers and boost overall food security 

The main result from this study shows the primary and secondary causes of post-harvest losses and the factors that 

drive post-harvest losses among small-scale cucumber farmers. It further highlights the coping strategies adopted by 

cucumber farmers to mitigate post-harvest losses. 

The article is presented in various sections. It follows with a brief review of related literature that have conducted 

various studies on post-harvest losses globally. The next section presents the methodology adopted for achieving the study 

objectives which includes a description of the study area, method of sampling survey participants, and statistical tools 

employed for analyzing data. The results are presented tabularly and extensively discussed in subsequent sections. This is 

finally followed by the concluding section and appropriate recommendations based on the research findings. 

 

LITERATURE REVIEW 

Across the globe, several studies have been done on postharvest management and the effect and intensity of postharvest 

losses of various crops. Studies by Akaagerger et al. (2023) examined the effect of X-rays and charcoal cooler bins on shelf-

life extension for cucumbers. In other studies, Hodges et al. (2011) and Aidoo et al. (2014) found that postharvest losses 

negatively impacted farmers, consumers, and the economy in diverse ways. These studies emphasized the need to reduce 

postharvest losses as it would enhance the pathway to food security and sustainable development. This is supported by other 

research reiterating that minimizing postharvest losses translates to increased levels of farmers' income and savings (Mlambo 

et al., 2017; Shee et al., 2019). The irregular patterns of post-harvest losses also negatively affect food security (Balana et 

al., 2022; Kikulwe et al., 2018), reducing the income for farmers, increasing prices for consumers, and declining food 

security level (Ibrahim et al., 2022; Okadonye et al., 2022). With the tremendous adverse effects of postharvest losses on 

economic and food security, SSA must spend an estimated $940 billion by 2050 to end hunger (Porciello et al., 2020). This 



Ukwuaba et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 35-45 

 

37 

 

is 47% of the designated money for forming functional postharvest technologies (Sugri et al., 2021). Despite the efforts 

from governments to increase farmers' profit margins and food security by drastically reducing postharvest losses, there is 

a need for policies that focus on understanding the determinants of postharvest losses (Falola et al., 2023). To bridge this 

gap, this study identified the causes and extent of postharvest losses, assessed drivers of these postharvest losses, and 

investigated the coping mechanisms adopted by smallholder cucumber farmers. The findings are expected to inform policies 

that will help to improve the understanding of the postharvest challenges faced by smallholder farmers in the region and 

enable the promulgation and adoption of measures that will minimize postharvest losses, increase the economic viability of 

cucumber production, alleviate the poverty of farmers, and increase the income levels of small-scale farmers in Enugu state. 

Based on this premise, the study intends to assess the primary and secondary causes, determine the drivers of post-

harvest losses among small-scale cucumber farmers and identify the coping strategies adopted by cucumber farmers to 

mitigate post-harvest losses.  

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS 

Study Area 
The study was conducted in Enugu State, one of Nigeria's five states in the southeastern region. It has a total land area of 

8,022.95 Km2 and an estimated population of over three million (National Population Commission, 2006). Enugu state has 

a high production potential for cucumbers (Okafor & Yaduma, 2021). However, postharvest losses remain a significant 

challenge in the area, threatening food security and reducing farmers’ income and sustainability of the enterprise (Ozioko 

et al., 2019) 

 

Sampling Procedure  
The study adopted a multistage sampling procedure in the selection of respondents. In the first stage, five out of the six 

Agricultural Zones (AZs) in the state were purposively selected based on their agrarian nature. In the second stage, one 

Local Government Area was also purposively selected from each of the selected AZs due to the concentration of cucumber 

farmers. Similarly, in stage three, two communities with high cucumber production were purposively selected, giving ten 

communities. In the final stage, 20 cucumber farmers were randomly selected from the list of cucumber farmers in each of 

the ten communities, giving 200 respondents for the study.  

 

Data Collection  

Data was collected using structured questionnaires. The questionnaires were designed to capture information on the farmers' 

socio-economic characteristics, postharvest losses, drivers of postharvest losses, and mitigation strategies. Data on their 

socioeconomic characteristics such as age, sex, farming experience, level of education, and number of agricultural extension 

visits per annum. We also collected information on the quantity of cucumber harvested, the quantity sold, and the quantity 

lost. Data on the possible socioeconomic and institutional drivers and the various mitigation strategies employed to reduce 

the magnitude of postharvest losses were also obtained.  

 

Econometric Estimation 

The collected data were analysed using descriptive statistical tools such as frequency, percentage, mean, Likert scale rating, 

and inferential statistical tools like the ordinary least square regression model.  

 

Ordinary least square regression model 

The ordinary least square regression (OLS) model was used to determine the drivers of postharvest losses among cucumber 

farmers. The model is specified as follows: 

 

Y = β0 + β1X1 + β2X2 + β3X3 + β4X4 + β5X5 + β6X6 + … + β14X14+ ε ……………………… (1) 

 

Where: 

Y = Postharvest losses (kg) 

X1 = Sex (male=1, female=0) 

X2 = Age (Years) 

X3 = Farming experience (Years) 

X4 = Extension contacts (No of contacts in a year) 

X5 = Household size (No of persons living in a household) 

X6 = Access to credit (Access =1, No = 0) 

X7 = Distance to Market (km) 

X8 = Cooperative Membership (Yes =1, No = 0) 

X9 = Quantity produced (kg) 

X10 = Farm size (Ha) 

X11 = Monthly Income (Naira) 

X12 = Time of harvest after maturity (days) 

X13 = Off-farm Income (Yes =1, No = 0) 

X14 = Ownership of Transport facility (Yes =1, No = 0) 



Ukwuaba et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 35-45 

 

38 

 

β0 = Intercept 

β1-β14 = Coefficients 

ε = Error term 

 

Likert scale rating model 

A 5-point Likert scale was employed to determine the causes of postharvest losses. The causal items were designated as 

very high, high, moderate, low, and very low, corresponding to 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1, respectively. This was ranked using a 

weighted mean (x). The mean score (MS) of the respondents based on the four 5-point scale was obtained thus:  

Σfx

𝑛
 =   

5+4+3+2+1x

5
  = 3.0. ……………………………………………………………. (2) 

 

A 3.0 cut-off point using the interval scale of 0.05 was adopted. Therefore, any item with a mean score (MS) less than 3.05 

(i.e., MS < 3.05) was considered as a weak factor and thus not significant, while mean values above 3.05 (i.e., MS > 3.05) 

were regarded significant and thus was rated as major causes of post-harvest losses. 

 

RESULTS 

Table 1. Socioeconomic characteristics of small-scale cucumber farmers 

 

 

Table 2. Primary causes of post-harvest losses in cucumber production 

Socio-economic characteristics     Freq. Per. (%) Mean 

Sex    
Female 108 54.0  

Male 92 46.0  

Age    
20-40 72 36.0  

41-60 114 57.0 45.45  

61-100 14 7.0  

Household size    

3-5 92 46.0  

6-8 86 43.0 6.21 
9-12 33 11.0  

Years in formal education    

Primary school 16 8.0  
Secondary school 148 74.0 11.88 

Tertiary education 54 18.0  

Years of farming experience    

2-10 126 63.0  
11-19 38 23.0  

20-28 10 5.0 10.43 

29-37 33 11.0  

Monthly income from cucumber farming (₦)    

≤ 50000 98 49.0  

51000-150000 58 29.0  
151000-250000 14 7.0  

251000-350000 14 7.0  

≥351000- 16 8.0 129,400 

Source of Farm Labor    

Family 81 27.0  

Hired 88 44.0  
Both 58 29.0  

Cooperative membership    

No 130 65.0  

Yes 70 35.0  

Source of credit    

None 130 65.0  
Commercial banks 8 4.0  

Cooperative society 36 18.0  

Microfinance bank 4 2.0  

Friends 8 4.0  
Personal savings 14 7.0  

Extension visits    

Never 152 76.0  

Once 16 8.0 0.4 

Twice 32 16.0  

Variables Frequency Percent (%) 

Have you experienced post-harvest losses? 

Yes 

No  

 

200 

 

100.0 

Causes of post-harvest losses   



Ukwuaba et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 35-45 

 

39 

 

   

Table 3. Psychometric scale of the secondary causes of postharvest losses in cucumber production 
 

        

Table 4. Extent of post-harvest losses among small-scale cucumber farmers 

 
Postharvest Loss Frequency Percentage (%) 

≤ 20 %   

Yes 132 66.0 

No 68 34.0 

21-50 %   

Yes 81 40.5 

No 119 59.5 

≥50 %   

Yes 54 27.0 

No 146 73.0 

 

Table 5. OLS regression on the drivers of post-harvest losses 

 
 

Table 6. Strategies for mitigating post-harvest losses 

 

 
 

 

Harvesting at incorrect maturity 144 72.0 

Poor handling and storage 72 86.0 

Pathogens and pest 178 89.0 

Ethylene sensitivity 56 28.0 

Temperature and humidity (water loss) 132 66.0 

Mechanical damage 152 76.0 

Variables Mean Standard Deviation 

Secondary causes   
Poor road network 4.5200 0.75852 

Lack of proper storage facilities 3.3900 1.36252 
Market-related issues (lack of demand due to high prices) 3.3500 1.29002 

Financial constraints 3.9100 1.34911 

Inadequate knowledge of post-harvest management 3.2300 1.21319 
Climate-related factors 4.0800 1.06059 

Insufficient market info and opportunities 3.0000 1.26331 

Poor extension services 2.7400 1.26826 
Long distance to markets 3.2700 1.34731 

Cucumber variety cultivated 2.1400 1.03494 

Variables Coefficient t-value Sig. 

(Constant) 1.136 0.339 0.735 

Age -.033 -0.717 0.475 

Sex 1.046 1.368 0.175 

Household Size 0.690 2.880 0.005*** 

Years In Formal Education 0.094 0.363 0.717 

Farming Experience -0.042 -0.502 0.617 

Farm Size -3.457 -1.373 0.173 

Monthly Income -8.203e-6 -1.311 0.193 

Off Farm Income 5.055e-5 2.647 0.010*** 

Quantity Of Cucumber produced 0.002 2.420 0.018** 

Market Distance 14.522 -3.539 0.001*** 

Cooperative Membership -3.716 2.204 0.030** 

Credit Access -1.132 -0.710 0.480 

Extension Service -0.726 -0.597 0.552 

Time Of Harvest After Maturity  0.991 3.069 0.003*** 

R2                                                                       0.424    

Adj.  R2                                                         0.330    

F-value                                     4.477    0.001*** 

Variables   Frequency Percentage (%) 

Timely Harvesting  200 100.0 

Improved handling and suitable transportation 196 98.0 

Use of appropriate storage facilities 126 63.0 

Pest and disease management practices 196 98.0 

Market diversification 134 67.0 

Postharvest management training 58 29.0 

Value addition and processing 54 27.0 

Contract farming 48 24.0 

Sorting and grading 178 89.0 

Regular inspections and monitoring of harvested cucumbers 192 96.0 

Timely marketing and distribution 192 96.0 



Ukwuaba et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 35-45 

 

40 

 

DISCUSSIONS 

Table 1 shows the socioeconomic characteristics distribution of respondents. The table shows that the majority (54.0%) of 

the respondents were females, underscoring women's significant role in cucumber production. This suggests that both 

genders actively participate in agricultural activities, contributing to potential gender equality and economic empowerment 

in cucumber farming. This study contradicts that of Okwuokenye and Petu-Ibikunle (2021), which reported that 82.98% of 

the cucumber farmers were males. The result on age indicates that the majority of the farmers fell within the age range of 

41-60 years (57%), with the mean age of the respondents as 45.45 years. Similar findings were made by Okwuokenye and 

Petu-Ibikunle (2021), who observed that the cucumber farmers had an average age of 44.56 years. This indicates that most 

farmers in the study area are young and active, thus possessing the energy needed for efficient production and management 

after harvest. The mean household size was about six persons, indicating readily available household labor for cucumber 

farming, thus reducing production and post-production costs (Achoja & Obadaya, 2019). A higher level of formal education 

has been linked with higher technology adoption (Onuwa et al., 2023; Ukwuaba & Ileka, 2024); thus, the result on education 

level, which shows that the majority (74%) obtained secondary education, indicates a high literate level. This contrasts with 

the findings of Adepoju (2014) but agrees with the findings of Ukwuaba et al. (2018).  Thus, given the literacy level, the 

respondents will be more inclined to adopt modern farming techniques, technological advancements, and sustainable 

practices to reduce postharvest losses. The average farming experience of respondents was 10.43 years. Thus, it can be 

deduced that the farmers have accumulated a substantial amount of practical knowledge and skills related to cucumber 

farming that could enable them to reduce the number of losses incurred after harvest. 

Cucumber farming is highly lucrative (Onuwa et al., 2023) and substantially contributes to household income and 

improved welfare. Findings from this study revealed that the average income from cucumber farming was ₦129,400 

($180.57). Sources of labor were majorly hired labor (44%). This contrasted with the finding of Abdullah et al. (2019), 

which asserts that smallholder farmers predominantly rely on family labor for their farming activities. Additionally, the 

majority (65%) of farmers were not members of cooperatives, and only about 35% of respondents had access to credit. The 

significant sources of credit were cooperative societies (36%) and personal savings (14%). Only about 12% of respondents 

had access to credit from formal financial institutions like commercial and microfinance banks. This could significantly 

affect production activities as credit is essential to any business. Lack of access to credit could limit farming activities and 

expansion to increase farm output (Falola et al., 2023). Concerning extension visits, the result shows that the majority (76%) 

of the respondents had no contact with extension agents, with an average number of visits of 0.4. This aligns with the 

findings of Asadu et al. (2018) and is strong evidence that extension service delivery in the state of Enugu is weak. The lack 

of extension visits indicates a gap in knowledge dissemination and technology transfer, which could be addressed to enhance 

productivity and reduce postharvest losses. 

Table 2 presents the results of the primary causes of post-harvest losses in cucumber production among the 

respondents. Before identifying the primary causes, the farmers' experience of postharvest losses indicates that all (100%) 

have experienced postharvest losses. Postharvest losses' major causes were pest and pathogens infestation (89%) and poor 

handling and storage (86%). Mechanical damage (76%), harvesting at pre-maturity (72%), and water loss (66%) were also 

identified as primary causes by a significant proportion of respondents. In comparison, only about 28% of respondents 

attributed the losses to ethylene sensitivity. Similarly, Anyoha et al. (2023), Elik et al. (2019), and Kitinoja et al. (2019a) 

highlighted proper handling and storage, pest and pathogen infestation, and untimely harvesting as significant causes of 

postharvest losses of different agricultural produce. Pest and disease infestation could occur during or after production.  

Cucumber insect pest’s because direct damage and could be vectors for various viral diseases. Thus, it is crucial to identify 

them before infestation to reduce yield losses. Most pathogens of vegetable crops like cucumber occur before harvest but 

continue to wreak havoc on the crop until harvest. Cucumbers are perishable and require special handling and storage 

attention. However, most small-scale farmers lack adequate storage and processing facilities and thus encounter significant 

losses after harvest due to their unavailability (Falola et al., 2023; Sugri et al., 2021). This study also identified mechanical 

damage to cucumbers as a significant cause of losses. This damage often manifests through external and internal mal-

handling of cell tissue structure. In a related study, Adewoyin et al. (2022) also agreed that mechanical damage is one of the 

major causes of postharvest loss in fruit. This suggests that careful handling and transportation are required to prevent 

physical damage to crops, and investing in appropriate transportation methods to reduce the risk of mechanical damage is 

imperative. Pre-maturity harvest was also identified as a primary cause of losses. This reason for pre-maturity harvest may 

include poor timing, lack of proper training, and inadequate extension services with the farmers. In some areas, farmers who 

encounter conflicts, sit-at-home protests, and theft often harvest produce before full maturity for fear of losing all produce. 

This contrasts with the findings of Falola et al. (2023), as untimely harvest was adjudged to have minimal impact on 

postharvest losses. The majority (66%) of respondents agreed that increased temperature and humidity contribute 

significantly to postharvest losses of cucumber and the impact of this factor on water loss and overall cucumber quality. 

This was also reported to be one of the causes of postharvest losses highlighted in a study by Al-Amin et al. (2021). When 

fruits are exposed to hot weather conditions and subsequently stored, they lose their water content, resulting in a loss of 

turgidity and subsequent shrinkage. A lower percentage (28%) of respondents identified ethylene sensitivity as a cause of 

losses. Ethylene accelerates the ripening process of cucumbers, and it is essential to avoid storing cucumbers with other 

crops that emit ethylene gas (Adewoyin et al., 2022). Most cucumber farmers are knowledgeable about this, and thus, it is 

unlikely that they would store cucumbers under such circumstances. Consequently, it has a limited effect on causing post-

harvest cucumber losses. 



Ukwuaba et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 35-45 

 

41 

 

Table 3 presents the secondary causes of postharvest losses in cucumber production. Most of these secondary 

causes are related to logistic or technical issues and are often beyond farmers' control. The poor road transportation network 

was the most significant secondary cause of postharvest losses (x̄ = 4.5). This indicates that farmers recognize the impact of 

inadequate road infrastructure on timely transportation to markets, which can lead to reduced market access. This is in 

agreement with the study by Sourav et al. (2024) and Sule (2019), which highlights the importance of adequate road 

networks (from areas of production to consumption) and the detrimental effect it has on the quality and quantity of crop 

output if not adequately addressed. Climate-related factors (x̄ = 4.0), such as temperature, rainfall, and humidity, were also 

significant causes of postharvest losses. This suggests that these climatic variables reduce the quality and shelf life of 

harvested cucumbers. This aligns with a study by Akanwa and Okoli (2021), which reports that climate change has resulted 

in warmer temperatures, contributing to heightened high-temperature levels, more prevalent pests, and increased disease 

occurrences. Financial constraint (x̄ =3.9) also significantly contributed to postharvest losses. This is in line with the study 

by Anyoha et al. (2023), which also showed that inadequate finance is a significant cause of postharvest loss. This suggests 

that financing is critical in preserving the shelf life of agricultural produce. Adequate financing increases their capacity to 

adopt improved postharvest management practices and invest in necessary infrastructure, innovations, and technologies to 

reduce postharvest losses. Market-related issues (x̄ =3.3), deficient demand for cucumber due to increased prices, were 

identified as one of the secondary causes of postharvest losses. This is in line with the findings by Aminu et al. (2020), 

which revealed that customer’s low demand was perceived as a highly severe cause of postharvest loss. In addition to 

pricing, other factors, such as poor quality, poor accessibility, and unfavorable market dynamics, were other market factors 

that could also influence postharvest losses negatively. Inadequate knowledge of postharvest management (x̄ =3.2) and 

inadequate storage facilities (x̄ =3.30) were also perceived by the producers as secondary causes of postharvest losses in 

Nigeria. These results align with those of Sugri et al. (2021), Adewoyin et al. (2022), and Falola et al. (2023). In contrast, 

insufficient market information (x̄ =3.0) and cucumber variety cultivated (x̄ =2.14) were identified as insignificant secondary 

causal agents of postharvest losses. This suggests that producers are beginning to close the gap in information regarding 

cucumber market information, opportunities, and varieties. The results are in contradiction to the findings of Egwuonwu 

(2020) and Falola et al. (2023).   

The result in Table 4 provides insights into the extent of post-harvest losses experienced by respondents in the 

study. The responses are categorised based on the level of losses experienced by the respondents. The Table reveals that 

most respondents (66%) reported post-harvest losses ranging between 1-20%, 40.5% lost 21-50%, and 27% lost over 50% 

of cucumbers after harvest. The high level of PHL could be linked to pests and diseases, poor handling, mechanical damage, 

and poor infrastructure to preserve the shelf life. This suggests that postharvest loss has negatively impacted the farmers’ 

income and welfare and contributed to food insecurity in the study area. This supports the conclusions drawn by Aysel et al.  

(2019), which indicated that fruit and vegetable loss could reach as high as 50% and signifies huge income loss to the 

farmers.  

Table 5 shows the drivers of postharvest loss of cucumber. The coefficient of determination (R2) value of 0.424 

implies that the independent variables explain about 42 % of the variability in the postharvest losses. The regression result 

showed that off-farm income, the quantity of cucumber produced, harvest time after maturity, household size, and market 

distance positively and significantly influenced postharvest losses. In contrast, cooperative membership negatively and 

significantly influenced postharvest losses. The coefficient of the household size, which was statistically significant at 1% 

(p<0.01) indicated that a high household size experienced higher levels of postharvest losses. This could result from resource 

competition, inefficient allocation of resources, and poor handling practices. For instance, household needs are higher in 

large households, and this may involve the diversion of resources, such as money needed to improve postharvest 

management, to other household needs. This contradicts the findings of Falola et al. (2023), who reported that the household 

size of the farmers negatively affected postharvest losses in onion production. Off-farm income was positive and significant 

at 5 % (p<0.05) indicating that off-farm income results in higher postharvest losses. This could result from diverting attention 

to off-farm activities, leading to less attention to effective postharvest management. The quantity of cucumber produced was 

positively significant at 5% (p<0.05). This implies that an increase in production leads to an increase in postharvest losses. 

Increased production is expected to lead to an increased output, which, if not managed effectively, would lead to significant 

postharvest losses. This agrees with the findings of Kulwijila (2021) and, lately, Aidoo et al. (2014), who found that post-

harvest losses increase as production increases. The result further shows that distance to market was significantly positive 

at 1% (p<0.001), suggesting that reducing market distance would significantly reduce postharvest losses. Cucumbers are 

highly perishable and susceptible to mechanical damage, especially during transportation. The inadequate access road to the 

farm settlements where cucumber is produced makes its translocation very challenging and causes unnecessary delays in 

the market. This could predispose the cucumbers to more significant losses. This aligns with the findings of Sani et al. 

(2023), who stated that congestion and build-up of heat during transportation could worsen as a result of poor road networks 

and long distances travelled, thereby leading to mechanical damage like bruising and softening. Cooperative membership 

was negatively significant at 5% (p<0.05). This implies that membership of cooperatives reduces postharvest losses. This 

could result from benefits from membership, such as access to credit, improved information on postharvest management 

practices, and pooled resources to collectively invest in infrastructures targeted at reducing postharvest losses. The harvest 

time after maturity was positively significant at 1% (p<0.01>), thus implying that the longer the harvest after maturity, the 

greater the postharvest losses. Cucumbers not harvested long after maturity could be more vulnerable to infestations by 

pests and pathogens. Since cucumber is best consumed fresh, delayed harvesting after maturity would lead to over-ripening, 



Ukwuaba et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 35-45 

 

42 

 

loss of taste, loss of nutrients, and generally, reduced quality.  As a result, the crop becomes more fragile and may quickly 

lose its morphological value during postharvest handlings.  

The findings presented in Table 6 highlight the multifaceted strategies adopted by the producers to mitigate 

postharvest losses. The result indicates that all respondents (100%) have good knowledge of the imports of cucumbers 

harvested at the right stage of maturity. Supporting this, Adeola (2020) identified delay in harvesting as one of the causes of 

post-harvest losses. Harvesting cucumber at the optimal stage leads to maximum quality, taste, and nutritional value while 

extending its shelf life. This practice aligns with the principle that timely harvest reduces post-harvest losses. Proper 

postharvest handling and transportation techniques were adopted by 98% of the respondents to minimize physical damage 

and bruising, prevent spoilage, and extend its marketable life. In line with these techniques, Elik et al. (2019) emphasized 

the need for proper postharvest handling due to its vulnerability to mechanical damage, especially during transportation. 

The result also showed that 63% of respondents used appropriate and suitable storage facilities to mitigate postharvest 

losses. Storage facilities with controlled temperature and humidity conditions help slow down the deterioration process of 

cucumbers, thereby preventing spoilage and preserving their market value. This finding is supported by Ibrahim et al. (2022), 

who reported modern storage facilities as an effective strategy to reduce post-harvest losses. This also agrees with the study 

that adequate transportation would reduce congestion and heat build-up that could facilitate spoiling, which is also essential 

in the postharvest process. This study identified that 98% of respondents recognized the importance of pest and disease 

management practices as an effective strategy for reducing postharvest losses. This means that appropriate prevention and 

control measures can significantly reduce spoilage. This aligns with Urugo et al. (2024) that farmers adopted a 

diversification strategy to cope with the challenges of postharvest losses on perishable crops. Sixty-seven percent of the 

respondents also adopted a market diversification strategy to mitigate postharvest losses. This is in line with the study by 

Aminu et al. (2020), which reported diversification as the most employed mitigation strategy for dealing with postharvest 

issues. Diversifying the market outlets allows farmers to spread their risk and ensure that even if one market experiences 

oversupply or unfavorable conditions, others may still provide an avenue for selling cucumbers at a reasonable price. 

However, traversing different markets may have severe cost implications. Capacity building in the form of training on 

postharvest management was adopted by 29% of respondents. According to Sule (2019), training programs in post-harvest 

loss management are essential and significant elements in efforts to combat food insecurity by reducing postharvest losses. 

However, adopting this strategy by a smaller group suggests a potential gap in the extension agents' knowledge 

dissemination and outreach efforts. Value-addition and transformation of farm produce can reduce waste and extend the 

shelf-life of the produce, leading to higher economic returns for farmers. This would, however, involve financial investment 

in processing and packaging infrastructures, which may not be available for small-scale farmers. To this effect, only about 

27% of the farmers adopted this strategy. This shows that very few respondents see this as a viable strategy or that other 

challenges, such as lack of access roads to other markets, further constrain the strategy. Contract farming was adopted as a 

coping strategy by 24% of respondents. Contract farming arrangements provide a degree of market predictability, which 

may contribute to reduced losses by ensuring a market for the produce before harvest. The reason for the adoption by a few 

respondents could be that not all farmers have access to such arrangements or may prefer more independent strategies. Also, 

89% of the respondents adopted the practice of sorting and grading cucumbers. This ensures that the best quality is not 

mixed up with spoilt products, helps separate cucumbers based on quality, size, and appearance, and reduces the likelihood 

of spoilage. This aligns with Kitinoja et al.'s (2019b) findings, which also identified sorting and grading as a veritable 

strategy to mitigate post-harvest loss. Similarly, 96% adopted regular inspections and monitoring of harvested cucumbers 

to ensure prompt identification of potential issues, enabling corrective actions to be taken before losses escalate. Also, most 

(96%) farmers adopted timely marketing and distribution as a crucial strategy. Similarly, Yusuf (2020) identified the 

importance of adequate market access and transportation to ensure effective and timely marketing to significantly reduce 

the risk of over-ripening, spoilage, and quality deterioration. 

 

CONCLUSIONS 
The cucumber farmers in Enugu state, Nigeria, are losing a large chunk of their potential revenue due to high postharvest 

losses. This study thus evaluates the causes of post-harvest losses among cucumber farmers and the factors contributing to 

these losses. Findings from this study revealed that post-harvest losses could result from primary and secondary causes such 

as pest and disease infestation, mechanical damages, poor road networks, and unfavorable climate conditions. This suggests 

that while farmers could control most primary factors through mitigation strategies adopted, most secondary factors are 

beyond the farmer’s control. Household size, off-farm income, quantity of cucumber produced, cooperative membership, 

harvest time after maturity, and market distance were the significant factors influencing postharvest losses in cucumber 

production. To significantly reduce the adverse effect on their income, the farmers employed diverse coping strategies such 

as timely harvesting and marketing, improved handling and suitable transportation means, suitable storage facilities, and 

proper pest and disease management to manage and mitigate the impact of postharvest losses on their livelihood.  

Based on these findings, farmers are encouraged to form and join cooperatives to easily access the benefits that 

could accrue from membership, such as access to information, training, and acquisition of technologies that enhance 

postharvest management of farm produce. The government must allocate funds to improve road transportation systems and 

networks connecting farming areas to markets to reduce the distance to market and improve market access. This would 

facilitate the movement of fresh crop produce from rural production areas to numerous areas of consumption. Finally, 

farmers are encouraged to ensure that farm produce is harvested at maturity. This is especially important for perishable 

crops like cucumber, which may overripe and lose quality as they mature. 



Ukwuaba et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 35-45 

 

43 

 

Overall, the study has identified the extent of post-harvest losses among small-scale farmers and the factors that 

drive these losses. This information would facilitate the enactment of policies that would curb this menace affecting farmers’ 

income and food security. The study is not without limitations as challenges were encountered in collecting data from 

various cucumber farmers around the state. However, this was overcome by mobilizing enumerators to facilitate data 

collection, especially in rural areas. Due to budget constraints, the study could only cover a limited geographic concentration, 

further studies can adopt a larger concentration from different geographic regions across the country. Additionally, further 

studies could also consider analyzing the disaggregated postharvest losses among male and female cucumber farmers given 

the relatively lower access to resources by females which could lead to higher losses. 
 

 

Author contributions: Conceptualization, I.C.U. and O.M.N.; Methodology, I.C.U, O.M.N. and A.C.I., Data Collection, O.M.N., I.C.U. and I.A.C.; 

Formal Analysis, I.A.C., E.E.O., O.M.N., I.C.U. and I.C.U.,  Investigation, I.A.C., E.E.O., O.M.N., I.C.U. and I.C.U.; Resources, I.A.C., E.E.O., O.M.N., 

I.C.U. and I.C.U.; Data curation, I.A.C., E.E.O., O.M.N., I.C.U. and I.C.U.; Writing – Original Draft Preparation, I.A.C., E.E.O., O.M.N., I.C.U. and 

I.C.U.; Writing – Review & Editing, I.A.C., E.E.O., O.M.N., I.C.U. and I.C.U,  Visualization, I.C.U. and I.A.C.; Supervision, I.C.U. and E.E.O.; Project 

Administration, I.A.C., E.E.O., O.M.N., I.C.U. and I.C.U. Authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. 

Institutional Review Board Statement: Ethical review and approval were waived for this study because the research does not deal with vulnerable 

groups or sensitive issues. 

Funding: The authors received no direct funding for this research. 

Acknowledgments: Not Applicable 

Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study. 

Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly 

available due to restrictions 

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest 

 

REFERENCES 

Abdullah, F., Rabbi, F., Ahamad, R., Ali, S., Chandio, A. A., Ahmad, W., Ilyas, A., & Din, I. U. (2019). Determinants of 

commercialization and its impact on the welfare of smallholder rice farmers by using Heckman’s two-stage 

approach. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences, 18(2), 224–233. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2017.06.001   

Achoja, F. O., & Obadaya, O. (2019). Backyard orchard ownership: implications for rural poverty alleviation and food 

security management In Nigeria. KSU J. Agric. Nat. 22(2), 456-464. 

https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.546913   

Adeola, E. H. (2020). A Post-Harvest Management Practices among Rice Farmers in Imo State Nigeria. European Journal 

of Biology and Biotechnology, 1(4), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejbio.2020.1.4.32 

Adeoye, I., & Balogun, O. (2016). Profitability and efficiency of cucumber production among smallholder farmers in Oyo 

state, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, Belgrade, 61, 387-398. https://doi.org/10.2298/JAS1604387A  

 Adepoju, A. O. (2014). Postharvest losses and welfare of tomato farmers in Ogbomosho, Osun state, Nigeria. Journal of 

stored product and postharvest research, 5(2), 8–13.  https://doi.org/10.5897/JSPPR2014.0160. 

Adewoyin, O., Ibidapo, A., Babatola, L., Fayose, F., Ekeocha, A., & Apata, T. (2022). Indigenous and Improved Post-

harvest Handling Methods and Processing of Fruits. Intech Open. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.102668 

Aidoo, R., Danfoku, R. A., & Mensah, J. O. (2014). Determinants of postharvest losses in tomato production in the Offinso 

North District of Ghana. Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics, 6(8), 338-344. 

https://doi.org/10.5897/JDAE2013.0545   

Akaagerger, N. B., Ngongiah, I. K., Tyovenda, A. A., Mbinkong, S. R., Songwe, K. B., & Chetgho, R. K. (2023). Postharvest 

shelf-life extension of Cucumber (Cucumis sativus) and Irish potato (Solanum tuberosum) using X-rays in Benue 

State, Nigeria. Algerian Journal of Engineering and Technology, 8(1), 36-42.  

Akanwa, A. O., & Okoli, U. B. (2021). Climatic Risks on Fruit Quality, Health, and Livelihoods: A Nigerian Case of Rural 

Women in Fruit Farming Business. Sustainable Intensification for Agroecosystem Services and Management, 657-

709. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-3207-5_18  

Akhtar, P., Ahmad, I., Jameela, A., Ashfaque, M., & Begum, Z. (2020). Energising effectiveness of cucumber (Khayarain) 

for health. A review article. Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research, 7(11), 906–917. 

http://www.jetir.org/papers/JETIR2011118.pdf   

Al-Amin, J. A., Suleiman, A. I., & Collins, E. E. (2021). Accelerating postharvest food loss reduction in Nigeria through 

developing a pilot-scale vacuum cooling and storage System. Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare, 

11(20), 13-31. https://doi.org/10.7176/JBAH/11-20-03  

Aminu, F. O., Balogun, E. O. S., & Ojo, O. O. (2020). Analysis of post-harvest losses in orange in Lagos metropolitan 

markets, Nigeria. Nigerian Journal of Horticultural Science, 25(1), 143-151. 

Anyoha, N. P. O., Udemba, C., Ogbonnaya, A., & Okoroma, E. (2023). Causes of Cassava Post-Harvest Losses among 

Farmers in Imo State, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Extension, 27(2), 73-79. https://doi.org/10.4314/jae.v27i2.7  

Asadu, A. N., Ozioko, R. I., & Dimelu, M. U. (2018). Climate change information source and indigenous adaptation 

strategies of cucumber farmers in Enugu State, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Extension, 22(2), 136-146. 

https://doi.org/10.4314/jae.v22i2.12  

Aysel, E., Yanik, D. K., Istanbullu, Y., Guzelsoy, N. A., Yavuz, A., & Gogus, F. (2019). Strategies to Reduce Post-Harvest 

Losses for Fruits and Vegetables. International Journal of Scientific and Technological Research, 5(3), 29-39,  

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2017.06.001
https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.546913
https://doi.org/10.24018/ejbio.2020.1.4.32
https://doi.org/10.2298/JAS1604387A
https://doi.org/10.5897/JSPPR2014.0160
https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.102668
https://doi.org/10.5897/JDAE2013.0545
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-3207-5_18
http://www.jetir.org/papers/JETIR2011118.pdf
https://doi.org/10.7176/JBAH/11-20-03
https://doi.org/10.4314/jae.v27i2.7
https://doi.org/10.4314/jae.v22i2.12


Ukwuaba et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 35-45 

 

44 

 

Balana, B. B., Aghadi, N. C., & Ogunniyi, A. I. (2022). Improving livelihoods through postharvest loss management: 

evidence from Nigeria," Food Security: The Science, Sociology, and Economics of Food Production and Access 

to Food, Springer; The International Society for Plant Pathology, 14(1), 249-265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-

021-01196-2 

Chakraborty, S., & Rayalu, S. (2021). Health beneficial effects of cucumber. In book: Studies on Cucumber (Cucumis 

sativus L.). https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.960533   

Chikez, H., Maier, D., Olafsson, S., & Sonka, S. (2023). Identifying the critical drivers of mango, tomato, and maize 

postharvest losses (PHL) in low-income countries and predicting their impact. Agriculture, 13(10), 1912. 

https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13101912 

Egwuonwu, H. A. (2020). Factors Influencing Post-harvest Losses among Vegetable Farmers in Mbaitoli Local Government 

Area in Imo State. Asian Journal of Agricultural and Horticultural Research, 7(1), 22-28. 

https://doi.org/10.9734/AJAHR/2020/v7i130086   

Elik, A., Yanik, D. K., Istanbullu, Y., Guzelsoy, N. A., Yavuz, A., & Gogus, F. (2019). Strategies to reduce post-harvest 

losses for fruits and vegetables. International Journal of Scientific and Technological Research, 5(3), 29-39.  

Falola, A., Mukaila, R., Uddin-II, R. O., Ajewole, C. O., & Gbadebo, W. (2023). Postharvest losses in onion: Causes and 

determinants. KSÜ J. Agri Nat, 26(2), 346-354. https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.1091225 

FAO. (2019). The state of food and agriculture 2019: Moving forward on food loss and waste reduction. Food and 

Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.  

Hodges, R. J., Buzby, J. C., & Bennett, B. (2011). Postharvest losses and waste in developed and less developed countries: 

Opportunities to improve resource use. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 149, 37–45. 

https://doi.org/10.1017/s0021859610000936 

Ibrahim, H. I., Ibrahim, H. Y., Adeola, S. S., & Ojoko, E. A. (2022). Postharvest loss and food security: A case study of 

major food crops in Katsina State, Nigeria. FUDMA Journal of Agriculture and Agricultural Technology, 8(1), 

393-403. 

Ishangulyyev, R., Kim, S., & Lee, S. H. (2019). Understanding Food Loss and Waste-Why Are We Losing and Wasting 

Food? Foods, 8(8), 297. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods8080297  

Kikulwe, E. M., Okurut, S., Ajambo, S., Nowakunda, K., Stoian, D., & Naziri, D. (2018). Postharvest losses and their 

determinants: A challenge to creating a sustainable cooking Banana value chain in Uganda. Sustainability, 10(7), 

2381. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072381  

Kitinoja, L., Dandago, M. A., & Abdullahi, N. (2019a). Post-harvest loss assessment of maize (Zea mays) along its value 

chain in Nigeria. Journal of Stored Products and Post-harvest Research, 10(1), 13-19. 

https://doi.org/10.5897/JSPPR2018.0275  

Kitinoja, L., Odeyemi, O., Dubey, N., Musanase, S., & Gill, G. (2019b). Commodity system assessment studies on the post-

harvest handling and marketing of tomatoes in Nigeria, Rwanda and Maharashtra, India. Journal of Horticulture 

and Post-harvest Research, 2, 1-14. https://.doi.org/10.22077/jhpr.2019.2060.1040 

Kulwijila, M. (2021). Socio-economic determinants of post-harvest losses in the grape value chain in Dodoma Municipality 

and Chamwino District, Tanzania. African Journal of Economic Review, 9(2), 288-305. 

https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.315802  

Mlambo, S., Mvumi, B. M., Stathers, T. E., Mubayiwa, M., & Nyabako, T. (2017). Field efficacy of hermetic and other 

maize grain storage options under smallholder farm management. Crop Protection, 98, 198–210. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CROPRO2017. 04.001 

National Population Commission. (2006). Population Figures of Enugu State’s L.G.A, Enugu State; www.npc.org.ng 

(Accessed on 20 February 2018). 

Obanubi, M., Okoruwa, A., Morris, S., Nordhagen, S., Djimeu, W. E., & Yalch, T. (2021). Business opportunities to reduce 

post-harvest loss of nutritious foods: Modelling the return on investment of field-ready technologies in Nigeria. 

Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN). Working Paper #16. Geneva, Switzerland, 

https://doi.org/10.36072/wp.16 

Ogundele, F. (2022). Post-Harvest Losses and Food Security in Nigeria: An Empirical Review. African Journal of 

Agriculture and Food Science, 5(3), 77-89, https://doi.org/10.52589/AJAFS-C0442Z7J  

Okadonye, E. O., Idyorough, A. E., Lawrence, I. A. (2022). The Effects of Postharvest Losses of Rice on the Income of 

Rice Farmers in Makurdi Local Government Area of Benue State Nigeria. In book: Current Perspectives in 

Agriculture and Food Science, 1, 94–110. https://doi.org/10.9734/bpi/cpafs/v1/5004A  

Okafor, B. N., & Yaduma, J. J. (2021). Soil and Agronomic Management for Cucumber Production in Nigeria. In book: 

Studies on Cucumber (Cucumis sativus L. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96087  

Okwuokenye, G. F., & Petu-Ibikunle, A. M. (2021). Assessment of adoption of agrochemicals by cucumber farmers in 

selected local government areas in Kaduna State, Nigeria. ADAN Journal of Agriculture, 2(1), 59-69. 

https://doi.org/10.36108/adanja/1202.20.0160  

Onuwa, G. C., Alamanjo, C., & Wuyep, G. (2023). Analysis of profitability and cucumber productivity among smallholder 

farmers. Food and Agri Economics Review, 3(2), 40-43. https://doi.org/10.26480/faer.02.2023.40.43  

Ozioko, R. I., Enwelu, I. A., Ukwuani, R. A., & Chiemela, V. N. (2019). Post-Harvest Losses among Tomato Farmers in 

Nsukka and Udi Local Government Areas of Enugu State, Nigeria. Proceedings of the 24 th Annual Conference of 

the Agricultural Extension Society of Nigeria, 7-10 April, Abuja. https://dx.doi.org/10.4314/jae.v24i1.33S  

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-021-01196-2
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-021-01196-2
https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.960533
https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13101912
https://doi.org/10.9734/AJAHR/2020/v7i130086
https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.1091225
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0021859610000936
https://doi.org/10.3390/foods8080297
https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072381
https://doi.org/10.5897/JSPPR2018.0275
https://.doi.org/10.22077/jhpr.2019.2060.1040
https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.315802
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CROPRO2017.%2004.001
http://www.npc.org.ng/
https://doi.org/10.36072/wp.16
https://doi.org/10.52589/AJAFS-C0442Z7J
https://doi.org/10.9734/bpi/cpafs/v1/5004A
https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96087
https://doi.org/10.36108/adanja/1202.20.0160
https://doi.org/10.26480/faer.02.2023.40.43
https://dx.doi.org/10.4314/jae.v24i1.33S


Ukwuaba et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 35-45 

 

45 

 

Porciello, J., Tufan, H. A., Njuki, J., Winters, P., Mabaya, E., & Coffman, R. (2020). Averting hunger in sub-Saharan Africa 

requires data and synthesis. Nature, 584(7819), 37-40. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-02281-w 

Sani, M. H., Kadau, R., Sani, R. M., & Danwanka, H. A. (2023). Analysis of Socio-Economic Characteristics and Post-

Harvest Loss Storage Facilities Used by Vegetable Crops Value Chain Actors in Adamawa State, Nigeria. Nigerian 

Journal of Agriculture and Agricultural Technology, 3(1), 210-229. https://doi.org/10.59331/njaat.v3i1.471  

Sheahan, M., & Barrett, C. B. (2017). Review: Food loss and waste in sub-Saharan Africa. Food Policy, 70, 1–12. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2017.03.012  

Shee, A., Mayanja, S., Simba, E., Stathers, T., Bechoff, A., & Bennett, B. (2019). Determinants of postharvest losses along 

smallholder producers’ maize and sweet potato value chains: An ordered Probit analysis. Food Security, 11, 1101–

1120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-019-00949-4 

Sourav, D., Subhasis, B., & Sabyasachi, B. (2024). Managing postharvest losses of vegetables and fruits: A methodological 

review.  Recent Advances in Food, Nutrition & Agriculture 15(2), 138–162. 

https://doi.org/10.2174/012772574X280698231221203313  

Sugri, I., Abubakari, M., Owusu, R. K., & Bidzakin, J. K. (2021). Postharvest losses and mitigating technologies: evidence 

from Upper East Region of Ghana. Sustainable futures, 3, 100048 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2021.100048  

Sule, B. A. (2019). Curbing post-harvest losses: The plight of onion farmers in Nigeria. Feed the future innovation lab for 

food security policy research briefs 303594, Michigan state university, department of agricultural, food, and 

resource economics, feed the future innovation lab for food security (FSP). 

https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.303594  

Tuama, A. A., & Mohammed, A. A. (2019). Phytochemical screening and in vitro antibacterial and anticancer activities of 

the aqueous extract of Cucumis sativus. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences, 26(3), 600-604. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2018.07.012  

Ukwuaba, I. C., & Ileka, C. M. (2024). Determinants of the Extent of Use of Climate-Smart Agricultural Practices by Farm      

Households in Southeast Nigeria. European Modern Studies Journal, 8(2) 43-56.  

https://doi.org/1010.59573/emsj.8(2).2024.5 

Ukwuaba, I. C., Agbo, F. U., & Adeosun, K. P. (2018). Socio-economic and institutional determinants of watermelon 

marketing in Enugu State Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Extension, 22(3), 161-173. 

https://doi.org/10.4314/jae.v22i3.16 

Urugo, M. M., Yohannis, E., Teka, T. A., Gemede, H. F., Tola, Y. B., Forsido, S. F., Tessema, A., Suraj, M., & Abdu, J. 

(2024). Addressing post-harvest losses through agro-processing for sustainable development in Ethiopia. Journal 

of Agriculture and Food Research, 18, 101316, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2024.101316  

Yusuf, I. E. (2020). The impact of road transport on tomato production and marketing in Nigeria. Journal of Nigeria 

Transport History, 1(2), 1-18.  

 

 
Publisher’s Note: ACSE stays neutral about jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. 

 

 

© 2024 by the authors. Licensee ACSE, USA. This open-access article is distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 

(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0). 

American International Journal of Agricultural Studies (P-ISSN 2641-4155 E-ISSN 2641-418X) by ACSE is licensed under a Creative Commons 

Attribution 4.0 International License. 

https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-02281-w
https://doi.org/10.59331/njaat.v3i1.471
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2017.03.012
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-019-00949-4
https://doi.org/10.2174/012772574X280698231221203313
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2021.100048
https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.303594
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2018.07.012
https://doi.org/1010.59573/emsj.8(2).2024.5
https://doi.org/10.4314/jae.v22i3.16
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2024.101316
http://ssbfnet.com/ojs/index.php/ijrbs
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

