Impacts of climate change on taro food loss and farmers’ food security in Tonga and Samoa

Abstract

Climate change is impacting Pacific Island food systems, reducing household food security, resilience and economic stability. This study examines climate change impacts on taro food loss in Upolu, Samoa, and Tongatapu, Tonga, focusing on postharvest handling and strategies to improve food security. It compares taro farmer climate change perceptions, postharvest handling and losses to highlight similarities and differences in taro farming practices in Samoa and Tonga. Data for this study were collected through farmer interviews and taro shelf-life analysis. Seventy farmers were surveyed, and eight were shadowed from harvest to sale. The study findings reveal that climate change factors including shifting rainfall patterns and extreme weather events exacerbate postharvest losses. Non-climatic factors such as labor shortages, poor handling, limited transportation, and poor storage practices are primary factors also contributing to the affordability and availability of taro. Farmers have adopted strategies such as the use of early warning systems, prompt harvesting and soil protection practices to mitigate climate change induced losses. By linking climate change, food security, and food loss along the taro value chain, the study enhances understanding of the postharvest handling procedures of taro in Samoa and Tonga and identifies strategies for policies that can provide support for infrastructure development for fostering sustainable, climate-resilient taro farming systems in the Pacific Islands.

Introduction

Climate change negatively impacts Pacific Island food systems, threatening household food security, climate resilience, and economic stability (Campbell, 2015). An increase in extreme weather events, such as flooding and cyclones, changing rainfall patterns and rising temperatures damage critical infrastructure, disrupt agricultural production, and reduce food availability (Barnett, 2011). These climatic stresses increase the risk of food loss at multiple stages of the food system, intensifying the existing vulnerabilities within food supply chains. The combination of these inefficiencies in food systems and climate-induced risks increases food insecurity in the region. This disproportionately affects low-income households and smallholder farmers, who are more exposed to climate change, increasing their socio-economic challenges and economic vulnerabilities (Farooq et al., 2022).

Food loss and waste crisis represent a complex and multifaceted global issue that has created far-reaching impacts on the global economy, social welfare, and environmental sustainability. According to findings by Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), approximately 13.8 percent of the total food produced globally, valued at around $400 billion per year, contributes to food loss between the farm and markets at point of sale, excluding the food waste stages, that primarily occurs at the retail and consumer levels (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2019). The economic impact of food loss and waste extends beyond the direct financial costs. For example, food loss and waste can lead to reduced food availability, which would lead to higher inputs in production and thus increased food prices, ultimately having indirect economic impacts on individuals and communities (Muth et al., 2019). Small-scale farmers and producers, particularly in the Pacific Islands, do not have the resources to prevent or address food loss and waste (Amato-Ali et al., 2025). This leads to decreased income and economic instability, which further exacerbate issues of poverty and inequality (Aryal et al., 2022; Kuiper and Cui, 2021).

Consequently, the issue of food loss has gained significant attention worldwide, with its incorporation into the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), under SDG 12.3 which aims at addressing the crisis by halving per capita global food waste and food loss by 2030 (Principato et al., 2018; Arora and Mishra 2022). Food loss and waste have serious consequences on the environment, the production, processing, and transportation of food that ultimately goes to waste generate significant amounts of greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) (Wang et al., 1997). Food loss and waste contribute to 6% of the global greenhouse gas emissions (Amicarelli et al., 2021).

Though contributing just 0.03% of GHGs, PICS suffer the most severe consequences of climate change (Kumar et al., 2020). In the Pacific, climate-related disasters such as droughts, flooding, and tropical cyclones amplify the impacts of food loss, which disrupt food systems and increase these postharvest losses. The unpredictability of these climate-driven stressors interferes with the development and natural growth of crops, causing pre-harvest losses on-farm often resulting in substantial yield declines (Amato-Ali et al., 2025).

Food loss and waste have a negative impact on trade and economic development. Pacific countries often rely heavily on agricultural exports, and food loss and waste undermine their economic potential (Mishra et al., 2010). Postharvest losses in Pacific Island Countries (PICS) occur at every stage of the value chain and often results in decreased food availability and increased food prices, which disproportionately affect low-income households of Pacific Island countries (Amato-Ali et al., 2025). This leads to the loss of income for smallholder Pacific farmers whom in some cases, are unable to sell their products due to a lack of infrastructure, market access, or storage facilities (Underhill et al., 2019). Food value chains play a critical role in determining the extent and severity of postharvest loss. Inefficient or poorly designed food value chains can exacerbate these losses by limiting access to proper storage, handling, and transportation infrastructure, thereby increasing the likelihood of spoilage and waste (Mesterházy et al., 2020; Underhill et al., 2017).

Taro serves as a staple and important commodity export crop in PICS. Taro exports are primarily from Fiji, Samoa, and Tonga, with smaller exports from other countries such as Vanuatu and Papua New Guinea (Dakaica and Wainiqolo, 2019). For many PICS, taro exports provide an important source of income and foreign exchange earnings. The export of taro is a significant contributor to the economies of these countries and is often an important source of income for smallholder farmers (Kambuou et al., 2007).

Postharvest losses in taro production are a major challenge for farmers and other actors in the value chain (Kaushal et al., 2015). Taro production in the Pacific is a mix between large commercial export farms that have more than 15,000 taro plants to small-scale and subsistence-based farms that have 5,000 to 15,000 taro plants in size, with most farms having limited access to markets and technology (Amato-Ali et al., 2025). There is a significant research gap regarding where food loss occurs most significantly in root crop value chains in PICS (Amato-Ali et al., 2025) with only a few studies systematically examined post-harvest losses in taro. This is coupled with the limited research on postharvest infrastructure needed to address these losses, particularly in these remote and rural regions. These losses of taro become a serious threat to the export value chain, where they are more noticeable in the taro as it is stored for longer periods (Kaushal et al., 2009). To address this gap, this paper investigates post-harvest handling practices and food loss in taro value chains in Samoa and Tonga. Specifically, it aims to firstly, identify key points of loss along the taro supply chain, secondly, examine farmers’ handling and storage practices, and finally assess how these practices interact with infrastructural and climatic constraints.

Food loss along the value chains of taro has been identified as a major challenge in Tonga and Samoa, with postharvest handling procedures playing a critical role in determining the quantity and quality of taro that reaches consumers, especially for export markets. Samoan and Tongan taro export varieties have gained increasing popularity in markets such as New Zealand and Australia (Watson, 2019). This growing demand underscores the importance of minimizing losses along the value chain.

This paper presents the impacts of climate change on the taro production system and its impacts on taro postharvest procedures in Tongan and Samoan farms, from harvest to market sale. It provides a comparative analysis of farmer climate change perceptions, postharvest practices and losses between the two locations, offering insights into the unique challenges and adaptation methods involved in taro farming in Samoa and Tonga. The study draws on interviews and surveys to capture farmer perspectives on food loss, its environmental and economic consequences, and the role of climate change in exacerbating these losses. Farmers highlight how extreme weather events prolonged droughts and shifting rainfall patterns disrupt harvesting, storage, and transportation, increasing losses. Addressing the impacts of climate change and reducing food loss and waste has positive environmental and social impacts in PICS. Benefits include reducing greenhouse gas emissions, conserving natural resources, and improving food security and nutrition. Furthermore, minimizing these losses will strengthen climate resilience by reducing dependence on imports and mitigating the risks posed by climate-related disruptions to local food systems, ultimately enhancing food availability.

Methodology

This study adopted a mixed-methods comparative case study approach that combined surveys, structured farmer shadowing, and a controlled shelf-life assessment. The surveys captured both quantitative and qualitative information on vendor-reported postharvest losses and climate-related factors. Shadowing of farmers provided direct observation of postharvest handling practices from harvest to market with the corm rot assessment offered an experimental measure of taro shelf life under market-relevant conditions.

Study sites

The study was conducted in two locations, Upolu island of Samoa and Tongatapu island of Tonga. These locations were chosen due to their significant taro production and consumption, with the crop being a staple food and key exporter in both countries. The study was conducted over a period of 2 months, from March to May 2023. A purposive sampling technique was used to select a representative sample of taro farmers from different regions in Apia and Nukualofa, who were willing to participate in the study. Sample sizes were determined pragmatically, balancing time, feasibility and logistical constraints with the need to capture variation across production and market contexts. In Tonga, 50 vendors and farmers were surveyed, distributed across the main districts of Tongatapu, including 15 respondents from Kolovai, 14 from Nukunuku, 8 from Lapaha, 4 from Lakepa, 3 from Vaini, 2 from and 5 from Tatakamotonga. In Samoa, 20 respondents were selected from the greater Apia region, specifically from Fugalei municipal market, Vaitele market, and Afega village market.

Survey of vendor postharvest loss

A semi structured survey was designed to assess climate change impacts on taro farming systems and resultant postharvest losses experienced by taro farmers in different municipal markets in Tongatapu, Tonga and Upolu, Samoa (Gillman et al., 2019). A total of Fifty (50) market vendors and farmers from the Talamahu market and roadside vendors were interviewed in Tonga (Figure 1). Twenty (20) Samoan market vendors and farmers from the Fugalei municipal market, Vaitele market and Afega village market were interviewed (Figure 2). These interviews were conducted to determine postharvest loss of taro per vendor using vendor recall, which is widely used in smallholder market studies. To reduce bias, recall periods were restricted to the most recent month, a timeframe vendors reported with confidence. The surveys were conducted informally in the local languages of Tongan and Gagana Samoa and were administered by trained interviewers, each fluent in the local language (Underhill et al., 2017).

Figure 1

Figure 2

The survey consisted of 21 questions and included a mix of multiple-choice and open-ended questions to capture both qualitative insights and quantitative results. The survey collected demographic information such as farmer gender, age, farm type and average weekly sales. Questions focused on climate change food loss drivers, climate change adaptation measures, postharvest loss estimation, taro shelf life and exposure. The surveys involved vendors recalling horticultural market losses specific to their own enterprise. The survey was designed to be completed within approximately 20 minutes to ensure minimal disruption to vendors’ operations. Data was collected using face-to-face interviews and using Kobo toolbox, an android-based software that is available for free and is designed for collecting research and humanitarian data (Underhill et al., 2019). All survey data was collected with open ended questions transcribed and uploaded to qualitative data analysis software NVivo applying codes and highlighting common themes between the survey questions.

Shadowing farmer postharvest handling techniques

A purposive sampling technique was used to select a representative sample for conducting a structured observational approach that involved shadowing taro farmers postharvest handling techniques from harvest to markets. A total of three Samoan farmers and five Tongan farmers were selected as sample size based on different transportation routes. Taro farmers for this exercise consisted mainly of export farmers and involved farmers who grew the Samoa 02 (Sam02) variety for Samoa and the Lauila variety for Tonga. Farmer observations were conducted over one market day per farmer with pre-defined checklist highlighting correct taro postharvest procedures (Underhill, 2017).

Taro farmers were shadowed for one full market cycle, starting from the point of harvest in the farm sending when taro was sold and displayed at the markets. Observations spanned from 6 to 8 h, depending on harvest and transport duration. Farmer postharvest handling techniques were recorded using the observational checklist, noting preparation such as cleaning and sorting of corms, the method of packaging and transportation duration and mode along with loading and unloading practices, the storage conditions and duration, and display practices at the markets. Researchers looked at categorizing postharvest handling practices to see how often taro was discarded at different points of the value chain. To validate the observations, structured interviews were conducted with the taro farmers after the shadowing to gather additional information on postharvest handling practices, including any challenges they faced during the postharvest handling process (Underhill et al., 2019). The interview survey consisted of questions of when taro was harvested, how it was stored and transported and the duration of time at each of these stages and average amount of taro taken home. Observational notes from the checklist were analysed and coded thematically using NVivo software to identify postharvest handling challenges, farmer and vendor behavior and food loss trends.

Assessing corm rot incidence in taro as a determinant of shelf life

Taro bundles consisting of 10 taro corms each were purchased directly from the three Samoan farmers and five Tongan farmers at market locations immediately after shadowing. This allowed for a consistent assessment of postharvest quality at the point of sale across different marketplaces. The aim of purchasing the corms was to evaluate corm rot incidence and determine the shelf life of two taro varieties: taro Sam02 from Samoa and Lauila from Tonga, over a seven-day period.

Each day from day 3 to day 7, two taro corms from each bundle were examined through systematic dissection. This involved careful observation for any visual evidence of corm rot, being defined as any discoloration of corm tissue pass 2 millimeters (mm) below the surface. Rot severity was quantified by measuring the depth and length of rot (mm) within each corm. The process was replicated across the eight farmers, providing independent observations for each of the two main taro varieties. Data collected was then recorded for analysis to determine differences in rot development between the varieties and assess factors contributing to shelf life in each context (Gollifer and Booth, 1973).

Data and statistical analysis

Kobo toolbox, an open-source data collection platform, was used to collect data on the incidence of corm rot in taro samples. The data collected were exported in CSV format and analysed using Microsoft Excel and NVivo software. Means and percentages were calculated in Excel along with variables such as reported losses and climate impacts compared between Samoa and Tonga. Data cleaning and preparation was conducted, which involved checking for data accuracy and correcting errors. Shadowing field notes and open-ended survey responses were coded using NVivo. Thematic coding involved first initial coding to identify recurring concepts related to postharvest practices, food loss drivers and climatic stressors followed by axial coding to group codes into higher level themes. Results of the data analysis were interpreted, and conclusions drawn based on the study objectives. The use of Kobo and NVivo allowed for efficient data collection and analysis, which enabled us to draw meaningful insights from the data collected. All research methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations under the university of the south pacific. The study was approved by the University of the South Pacific Research Ethics Committee. Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to data collection.

Results

The findings highlight key insights into the challenges faced by Tongan and Samoan taro farmers and vendors and the vulnerabilities faced in relation to the impacts of climate change on taro production systems and how this increases food loss in the postharvest phase. Through a combination of shelf-life tests, farmer shadowing and semi-structured surveys, the research identified key points along the taro value chain where losses are most likely to occur.

Factors contributing to postharvest losses

Survey responses from farmers in both Samoa and Tonga (Table 1) highlighted several key factors contributing to post-harvest losses of taro corms. Both countries identified climate change as the most pressing issue, with 100% of Farmers in Tonga and 85% in Samoa highlighting it as the most significant factor. For farmers in Samoa, poor handling practices with nine farmers (45%) was the next most significant factor, followed by poor storing conditions with 8 farmers (40%). Tongan farmers ranked unreliable access to labor with 39 farmers (78%) then poor storage conditions, poor handling practices and poor transportation conditions with 27 farmers each (54%). This indicates that Tongan farmers were constrained by systemic labor shortages and logistics issues while Samoan farmers faced on-farm practices such as handling and storage, many farmers in both countries pointed out that unsold produce also served as a primary contributor to food loss.

Climatic impacts on taro production

Tongan taro farmers highlighted that climate change impacts affecting them the most were frequent droughts with 50 farmers (100%), increased temperatures with 45 farmers (90%) and unpredictable rainfall with 23 farmers (46%). Compared to Samoa, where rainfall unpredictability was a more dominant concern (55% of Samoan farmers), Tongan farmers emphasized temperature stress and drought as the primary drivers of yield loss. This contrast reflects differences in local climate patterns, with Tonga experiencing more prolonged dry periods than Samoa. Many farmers reported declines in taro yield and quality due to shifting of temperatures. This varies the growing seasons. For example, when growing seasons are warmer than normal, taro matures faster, if the growing seasons are cooler than normal, it delays the maturity of taro. Seasonal variation and its impacts on rates and timing of maturity of taro makes it harder for farmers to plan when to sell their taro for the best price. This mismatch leads to more postharvest losses as prices were too low or demand was higher (Binge et al., 2023).

Farmers particularly on the west of Nukualofa in Tonga highlighted how the porousness of soil led to increasing drought risk while the east side of Nukualofa highlighted how the high clay soil profile makes the taro farms more prone to waterlogging due to frequent rain. Farmer shadowing observations confirmed the negative effects of weather variability on taro lauila variety, as soggy lauila corms obtained did not have a long shelf life as opposed to dry harvested ones. The combination of increased temperatures along with long periods of droughts (Matsa, 2019), intensifies physical stress on taro, resulting in lower quality and yield.

Taro farmers in Samoa highlighted that increased temperatures along with heavy, prolonged and unpredictable rainfall due to climate change have impact their taro production more. This makes it hard to plan the right time to harvest and take taro to the market. Excessively wet Sam02 taro corms increase post harvest losses. As illustrated in Figure 3, rot incidence progressed steadily from Day 3 to Day 7, with Sam02 corms deteriorating faster and nearly twice the rot depth of Tongan Lauila corms by Day 7. When taro corms in Samoa were exposed to postharvest conditions of improper handling and drops showed faster corm rot development compared to taro carefully harvested, with bruises appearing with 4 days (Figure 3). This directly reduced the marketability and limited shelf life to just 7 days. Climate-related stress weakens taro during the growing season, while unpredictable weather during and after harvest further reduces its shelf life and marketability (Binge et al., 2023).

Figure 3

Apart from on farm impacts of climate change on taro production, 13% of farmers surveyed answered that market access disruptions caused by cyclones, floods and droughts increased the proportion of unsold taro up to 20%. For market and roadside vendors in Tonga and Samoa, taro is normally transported to sell on Friday and Saturdays, with some farmers selling as early as Thursday when harvest volumes are high. Farmers indicated that taro has a short shelf life of 2 to 3 days before it must be sold, with some reporting that their taro lasts up to 4 to 5 days. This ultimately leaves farmers with very short windows to sell their taro, highlighting the need for storage infrastructure and infrastructure that process taro corms into value-added products. Converting taro into processed food products provides another avenue for using corms nearing the end of their shelf life and corms with rot areas removed (Chandra, 2019) reducing food loss and food waste and creating additional market opportunities. Developing value chains that integrate storage and processing is especially important under climate variability, which causes irregular harvest volumes and affects taro shelf life.

Non-climatic causes of postharvest losses

Apart from climatic induced losses above, Figure 4 provides visual evidence of key non-climatic factors driving postharvest losses in both Samoa and Tonga. Farmers were seen dropping and handling corms roughly and storing them improperly during harvest and transport practices (Figure 4A shows careless tossing of corms on-farm). Farmers typically harvest taro early in the morning either before 7 a.m. or between 7 and 10 a.m. to avoid the heat of the sun. During harvesting, corms were often left exposed to the sun (Figure 4B) on the ground alongside the taro rows or if available, stored in sacks. In most cases, these corms were stored in direct sunlight or unshaded locations, exposing taro to excessive heat. This practice increases the chance of the crop spoiling (Nicastro and Carillo, 2021). Many farmers stored taro in either large tarps or sacks before transport, with the number of corms per sack depending on the size of the corm. Figure 4C highlights poor transportation practices with corms overfilled into sacks and exposed to jolting during long journeys on rough roads. Farmers in Tonga frequently stored taro straight onto transport or out in the fields for up to a maximum of 6 h, before heading to the markets, further contributing to postharvest degradation. Figure 4D points out corms being exposed to direct sunlight at the Fugalei market. It is also noted that poor transportation conditions contribute to these losses, as taro was often transported over long distances on rough roads, before they reached the market. These handling practices result in the bruising of taro, which quickened the development of corm rot (Coursey et al., 2019).

Figure 4

These challenges underscore the need for improved and better postharvest handling infrastructure, such as proper storage houses to help reduce food loss (Hansen et al., 2017). At the markets, both Tongan and Samoan taro farmers highlighted that taro was commonly sold under shade, but a notable portion of corms were still exposed to direct sunlight, further reducing its shelf life. The selling of taro directly on the ground as opposed to on tables is still a common practice in Tonga and Samoa. This leaves the produce more vulnerable to damage and contamination (Parmar et al., 2017), which can affect the postharvest quality and shelf-life of taro.

Farmers pointed out the increasing challenge of having to deal with unreliable access to labor, which has made efficient and timely harvest difficult, especially harvests ahead of rainfall. “Muscle drain” which is the unavailability of laborers is becoming increasingly problematic in farms in Tonga and Samoa, as farmhands leave and are opting for better opportunities overseas through programs like the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility (PALM) and New Zealand labor schemes (Maguire and Falcous, 2010). This has created a labor shortage, and farmers struggle to finding laborers or matching the new pay demands by laborers who stay behind on the islands have. This results in many farmers managing their farms on their own, leading to farm practices such as proper soil management, disease and pest control and timely weeding being overlooked, and farmers health at risk from overworking and exhaustion.

The effects of these postharvest losses have wider consequences past that of impacting the individual farmer, threatening economic stability and food security in Tonga and Samoa. Reduced taro yield and quality restrict market opportunities, especially for export markets that demand high grade corms to meet international standards. Farmers struggle to obtain fair prices for corms that are damaged or of lower quality, further adding to their financial strain. These findings directly address the study’s objectives by showing how farmer-reported drivers, observed handling practices, and experimentally measured shelf-life outcomes explain the scale of food loss. This adds to the already compounded postharvest losses that aggravate food insecurity in PICS, highlighting the need for better postharvest handling practices, storage infrastructure, and strengthened market systems. Together, these results highlight the urgent need for improved postharvest handling practices, investment in transport and storage infrastructure, and stronger market systems to reduce losses and enhance climate resilience in Pacific Island taro systems.

Discussion

Postharvest loss and managing unsold taro

Farmers revealed that crop damage and immaturity during harvests served as a key contributing factor to taro food loss. Quality concerns, particularly related to the size of corms, damage deterioration from the rain (55% of Samoan farmers) and pest damage (50% of Samoan farmers), were frequently cited as reasons for taro being left in the field for Samoan farmers. Forty-five percentage of Samoan farmers reported that up to 5% of total taro was not sold for these reasons, salvaging whatever remaining portion to be used for household consumption and the rest as animal feed. Farmers also mention that soil conditions at time of harvest greatly influence the extent of produce damage, with damage increasing with both extremes of dry and wet soil conditions. In Tonga, farmers emphasized that timing the harvests especially before rainfall was essential. Seventy-eight percentage of Tongan farmers reported labor shortages delaying harvests, timing became particularly critical. Harvesting in wet conditions not only leads to soggy, easily damaged corms but also increases the likelihood of rot, resulting in an automatic loss of at least 5% of total taro for 26% of Tongan farmers. This highlights the cruciality of prompt harvesting, as harvesting corms in unpredictable rainfall patterns accelerate corm rot, reducing their marketability and increasing postharvest loss (Derera, 2018).

These soggy corms are not suitable for fresh markets local or export markets. In such cases, processing exporters become the only avenue for farmers. All Tongan farmers surveyed mentioned that poor quality corms earn farmers as little as $1 USD if accepted by these exporters for the year 2023, while normal quality taro corm would normally fetch $2–$2.50 USD at the local market and more if exported overseas. This results in compounded losses for the farmer, firstly from the significant drop in taro price and secondly from the rejection of damaged taro. These losses highlight missed market opportunities for farmers, further affecting their livelihoods and incomes.

Communal sharing of unsold taro

Farmers (40% of total Samoan and 66% of total Tongan farmers) also indicated that at least 5% of their harvested taro remained unsold and was taken home. These figures are based on farmer recall and provide an indicative range of market-level waste, i.e., food lost at the retail level. In Tonga and Samoa, culture plays an important role, in how unsold taro is managed. Rather than discarding unsold produce, farmers either donated this taro to the church, to those in need and/or shared with extended family. This served as an additional way for farmers to uphold and strengthen their traditional obligations to the community, while reducing the amount of taro that ends up in dumps. Farmers in PICs have traditionally held key roles of not only producing food, but foster customary obligations to support family and community feasts (Gena, 2021). This practice enhances climate resilience by buffering communities against shocks, maintaining household food security while also masking economic losses since farmers still forgo potential income.

Coping mechanisms, postharvest practices, and climate resilience

To mitigate these challenges, particularly under increasingly variable climatic conditions, taro farmers adopted several coping mechanisms. Most common strategies highlighted by farmers were soil protection (66%), prompt harvesting (76%), using early warning systems (59%) and protected drying (69%). Farmers noted using early warning systems and seasonal forecasts to anticipate extreme weather events, particularly with rainfall before harvesting and for identifying long dry seasons. Farmers highlighted the usefulness of these systems in maximising taro yield and reducing susceptibility of their corms to pests and diseases. In addition, these extreme weather systems have enabled farmers to make informed decisions and utilise practices such as deciding when to hire farm equipment to reduce exposure to unpredictable weather, although the increased cost remains a barrier for many smallholder farmers. Early warning systems have become crucial in climate adaptation for farmers in PICS. Their ability to trigger proactive measures not only helps safeguard crops during times of adverse weather such as drought (Funk and Verdin, 2010) but directly contributes to reducing food loss and enhancing climate resilience.

Soil protection practices carried out by farmers included intercropping taro with other crops, mounding and mulching. Farmers pointed out that intercropping has helped them in terms of nutrient management of soils, mounding helped soil drainage and mulching with providing nutrients back. Prompt harvesting and planting was key to maximising taro yield, as farmers highlighted that they were able to anticipate heavy rains or dry spells by relying on weather forecasts, allowing them to adjust their schedules to avoid losses. Farmers also highlighted the need to keep planting materials kept away for contingencies against natural hazards like cyclones and floods, farmers also mention that planting extra rows of taro every planting cycle provides them with extras that provides them with a buffer. Intercropping allows for the enhancement of soil health and optimisation of land use (Thokchom et al., 2016) with timely harvest ensuring that crops are collected before adverse weather or over-ripening can cause damage (Katundu et al., 2010). These integrated practices not only reduce vulnerability to climate-induced yield variability but also enhance the adaptive capacity and long-term sustainability of taro-based farming systems.

Farmers have mentioned making improvements at different stages of the value chain have increased their efficiency by a big margin. According to the surveys, strategies involved the upgrading of storage facilities and improving transportation infrastructure. Farmers have mentioned the building of storage sheds to dry out taro after harvesting, to packaging in sacks and in some cases, when possible, the use of plastic crates. Amato-Ali et al. (2025) highlights that improving storage infrastructure, handling practices, and transportation is critical for reducing postharvest losses in Pacific root crop value chains. The storage of planting material was highlighted key by farmers, maintaining them for the next growing season, ensuring their continued supply (Mekonnen, 2023). Additionally, while some farmers have access to closed lorries for transport, many rely on open lorries, which further exposes taro to the elements. The use of crates or bags for transport and storage varies, with crates and lorries often cleaned in intervals ranging from weekly to monthly, leaving room for contamination risks. These handling and transportation issues align with the corm rot findings found from farmer shadowing, with transportation vehicles and sacks left uncleaned for most farmers. These practices align with strategies identified in Amato-Ali et al. (2025) as effective for mitigating spoilage, contamination, and damage during transport and storage. This highlights the need for better handling and more frequent sanitation to reduce the risk of post-harvest losses (Underhill, 2017).

To avoid certain stages of the value chain, farmers have cleverly come up with selling taro on online internet platforms. By posting their produce online on harvest days, most farmers bypass the stage of transportation to the market and time spent selling at the markets, this method has not only saved farmers a lot of money but ensured that there is nearly no loss occurred when harvesting for sale. While promising, this strategy is currently limited to farmers with digital literacy, access to reliable internet and supportive social networks. Online selling illustrates the potential for scalable, low-loss marketing innovations, which could be applied to other crops if training and infrastructural barriers are addressed. Farmers have had to resort to working on their own farms, involving immediate and extended family members. This has been positive to farmers who have large families, as COVID 19 had forced members to be confined to their home. This naturally caused farmers to integrate farm work in their families, which has generally benefited them in the long run, with labor issues resulting from the rise in cost of living to the muscle drain being currently experienced in the Pacific islands (Maguire and Falcous, 2010).

Limitations to the study

While this study offers valuable insights into climate adaptation strategies postharvest practices and coping mechanisms employed by taro farmers in Samoa and Tonga, several limitations should be acknowledged. First, the research relied on the relatively small number of participating farmers, which limits the generalizability of the findings across all PICS. Although the study captured a diverse range of farmer perceptions, practices and experiences, the sample cannot fully represent the diversity of environmental, cultural and socio-economic contexts, including potential differences by gender, age, or household characteristics, that shape taro production and postharvest handling across the Pacific region. As a result, the patterns of food loss, coping strategies, and climate resilience practices documented in this research may differ considerably in other Pacific contexts. Larger sample sizes based off regions, combined with explicit attention to social dimensions such as gender and socioeconomic status, would allow studies in the future to refine and validate these findings.

Second, the study concentrated primarily on postharvest practices and adaptation practices at the farm level and within the early stages of the taro value chain, i.e., from harvest to local market, point of sale. While the research identified key drivers of food loss and adaptation strategies by farmers, it did not extend to explore distribution and export pathways at the export-level or look at consumer-end food waste in depth. As a result, the systemic nature of food loss, especially in relation to policy frameworks, and trade logistics and infrastructure, remains underexplored in this analysis.

Lastly, although the study highlights the important role of climate resilience and the use of adaptive practices to climatic events, through practices such as soil protection, early warning systems and adaptive scheduling of harvests, it did not include a formal assessment of the long-term effectiveness of these practices. Understanding how these practices perform in the face of worsening climate variability under future climate scenarios, would require longer-term monitoring beyond the scope of this study. These limitations point to the need for further research involving larger and more diverse farmer populations, extended temporal datasets, and deeper analysis of market dynamics and institutional support systems. Addressing these gaps would strengthen understanding of the interconnected challenges of food loss and climate resilience in Pacific Island farming systems.

Conclusion

This study fills a critical gap in understanding the intersection of climate variability and postharvest taro losses in PICs, providing comparative evidence from Tonga and Samoa. By mapping points along the taro value chain where food loss occurs, and assessing farmer perceptions and postharvest handling practices, this research links climate impacts to tangible food loss outcomes. The study clearly highlights the need for postharvest interventions that improves the climate resilience of taro farming systems, at the same time reducing food loss in Samoa and Tonga. The research identified a combination of challenges driving postharvest losses that include climate change impacts, unreliable access to labor, poor storage, rough handling, and inadequate transportation infrastructure. These vulnerabilities place significant pressure on smallholder farmers, especially in the face of increasing climate variability. Despite these challenges, farmers have shown adaptive capacity by adopting a range of coping mechanisms to manage losses such as intercropping, mulching, prompt harvesting, and the use of weather forecasting systems have helped mitigate some of the adverse effects of climate change. These coping mechanisms have played a vital role in buffering against the short-term impacts of extreme weather events and reducing the risk of food loss.

Addressing these challenges requires training programs to enhance farmers’ knowledge of the best taro postharvest practices. This training should focus on careful corm handling, proper harvest timing and grading, and low-cost storage techniques. However, improving individual farm practices alone is not sufficient. A more comprehensive approach that enhances climate resilience in taro systems is required to integrate farmer training on improved on-farm and off-farm storage infrastructure, best postharvest handling practices, better sanitation and handling facilities, and reliable transportation solutions. Investment in ventilated storage sheds, packing trays and grading/washing stations was frequently suggested by farmers as priority needs. Local agricultural extension services, supported by regional development partners (e.g., FAO, SPC) and national ministries of agriculture are best placed to coordinate these efforts. Exploring value-added processing options offers a practical solution to further reduce surplus losses, create new markets, and increases farmers’ earnings. While a few farmers mentioned experimenting with direct-to-consumer and digital platforms, our data did not capture economic impact or scale of these strategies. Strengthening market systems, that especially allow farmers to bypass vulnerable stages of the supply chain, such as digital platforms and direct-to-consumer models, will enhance both resilience and profitability. Therefore, we suggest that future research explore the feasibility of digital platforms in Pacific Island contexts to determine whether these innovations can meaningfully enhance profitability for taro farmers.

Policies aimed at providing technical and financial support for infrastructure development, climate-informed extension serviced, improving access to labor and strengthening market systems are essential, all while building long-term adaptive capacity. Ultimately, securing food security for Pacific Island taro farming communities will depend on the combination of climate-smart adaptation strategies, improved postharvest practices and most importantly institutional support. Integrating these solutions with improved postharvest practices and collective approaches are key to fostering climate-resilient and sustainable taro farming systems in the Pacific Islands, securing the region’s food security for the future. Future research should build on these findings by examining food loss beyond the farm gate, including market-level spoilage and consumer-end waste, to capture the full picture of the taro value chain.

References

• 1

  Amato-AliC.-Y.IeseV.MekalaG.HidalgoD.Sakiti-WaqaH. (2025). Food loss in Pacific Island countries: a scoping review of the literature. Front. Sustain. Food Syst.8:1520335. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2024.1520335

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 2

  AmicarelliV.LagioiaG.BuxC. (2021). Global warming potential of food waste through the life cycle assessment: an analytical review. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev.91:106677. doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2021.106677

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 3

  AroraN. K.MishraI. (2022). Current scenario and future directions for sustainable development goal 2: a roadmap to zero hunger. Environ. Sustain.5, 129–133. doi: 10.1007/s42398-022-00235-8,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 4

  AryalJ. P.ManchandaN.SonobeT. (2022). “Expectations for household food security in the coming decades: a global scenario” in Future foods (ed.) BhatR., (Elsevier), 107–131. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-323-91001-9.00002-5

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 5

  BarnettJ. (2011). Dangerous climate change in the Pacific Islands: food production and food security. Reg. Environ. Chang.11, 229–237. doi: 10.1007/s10113-010-0160-2

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 6

  BingeB.JalangoD.TesfayeL. (2023). Post-harvest losses management through climate smart innovations: a collaborative approach among value chain actors. Rome, Italy: AICCRA.

  • Google Scholar

• 7

  CampbellJ. R. (2015). Development, global change and traditional food security in Pacific Island countries. Reg. Environ. Chang.15, 1313–1324. doi: 10.1007/s10113-014-0697-6

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 8

  ChandraS. (2019). “Handling, storage, and processing of root crops in Fiji” in Small-scale processing and storage of tropical root crops (ed.) PlucknettD. L., (Boca Raton, Florida, USA: CRC Press), 53–63.

  • Google Scholar

• 9

  CourseyD.JacksonG.de la PenaR.AdenugaA.ChandraS.ChingP.et al. (2019). “Working group report: handling and storage” in Small-scale processing and storage of tropical root crops (ed.) PlucknettD. L., (Boca Raton, Florida, USA: CRC Press), 15–25.

  • Google Scholar

• 10

  DakaicaI.WainiqoloJ. (2019). Developing cleaner export pathways for Pacific agricultural commodities-final report. Sydney, Australia: ACIAR.

  • Google Scholar

• 11

  DereraN. (2018). “The effects of preharvest rain” in Preharvest field sprouting in cereals. ed. DereraN. (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press), 1–14.

  • Google Scholar

• 12

  FarooqM. S.UzairM.RazaA.HabibM.XuY.YousufM.et al. (2022). Uncovering the research gaps to alleviate the negative impacts of climate change on food security: a review. Front. Plant Sci.13:927535. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2022.927535,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 13

  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2019). The state of food and agriculture 2019: moving forward on food loss and waste reduction. Rome, Italy: FAO.

  • Google Scholar

• 14

  FunkC.VerdinJ. P. (2010). “Real-time decision support systems: the famine early warning system network” in Satellite rainfall applications for surface hydrology. eds. GebremichaelM.HossainF. (Dordrecht: Springer), 295–320.

  • Google Scholar

• 15

  GenaR. (2021). Examining the success and constraints of women fresh produce resellers at the Lae urban food market in Morobe Province, Papua new Guinea M. Phil thesis. Papua New Guinea: Papua new Guinea University of Technology.

  • Google Scholar

• 16

  GillmanA.CampbellD. C.SpangE. S. (2019). Does on-farm food loss prevent waste? Insights from California produce growers. Resour. Conserv. Recycling150:104408. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104408

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 17

  GolliferD.BoothR. (1973). Storage losses of taro corms in the British Solomon Islands protectorate. Ann. Appl. Biol.73, 349–356. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-7348.1973.tb00943.x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 18

  HansenH.DurkeeL.FulwiderW. M.DiazC.ChristiansenA. N.HansenC. P.et al. (2017). Factors influencing choice of post-harvest handling strategies for a horticulture and cash crop in Kibugu, Kenya. Copenhagen, Denmark: University of Copenhagen.

  • Google Scholar

• 19

  KambuouR.GwabuC.TaylorM. (2007). The contribution of crop-plant genetic diversity to economic development and sustainable rural livelihoods in the Pacific region. Pac. Econ. Bull.22, 152–157.

  • Google Scholar

• 20

  KatunduM.HendriksS.BowerJ.SiwelaM. (2010). Can sequential harvesting help small holder organic farmers meet consumer expectations for organic potatoes?Food Qual. Prefer.21, 379–384. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2009.09.003

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 21

  KaushalM.GuptaM.SharmaK.KumarM. (2009). Postharvest management and value addition of taro (Colocasia esculenta): a review. Prog. Hortic.41, 124–135.

  • Google Scholar

• 22

  KaushalP.KumarV.SharmaH. (2015). Utilization of taro (Colocasia esculenta): a review. J. Food Sci. Technol.52, 27–40. doi: 10.1007/s13197-013-0933-y

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 23

  KuiperM.CuiH. D. (2021). Using food loss reduction to reach food security and environmental objectives–a search for promising leverage points. Food Policy98:101915. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.101915

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 24

  KumarL.JayasingheS.GopalakrishnanT.NunnP. D. (2020). “Climate change and the Pacific Islands” in Climate change and impacts in the Pacific. ed. KumarL. (Switzerland: Springer International Publishing), 1–31.

  • Google Scholar

• 25

  MaguireJ.FalcousM. (2010). Sport and migration: Borders, boundaries and crossings. Abington, UK: Routledge doi: 10.4324/9780203877319.

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 26

  MatsaM. (2019). “Climate change and Tonga community development: thinking from the periphery” in Human and environmental security in the era of global risks: perspectives from Africa, Asia and the Pacific Islands (eds.) BehnassiM.GuptaH.PollmannO. (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 317–339.

  • Google Scholar

• 27

  MekonnenB. (2023). Effect of different storage methods on growth, seed quality and corm yield of taro (Colocasia esculenta L.(Schott.)) in southwestern Ethiopia. Ethiop. J. Agric. Sci.33, 74–89.

  • Google Scholar

• 28

  MesterházyÁ.OláhJ.PoppJ. (2020). Losses in the grain supply chain: causes and solutions. Sustainability12:2342. doi: 10.3390/su12062342

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 29

  MishraV.SharmaS.SmythR. (2010). Is economic development in the Pacific Island countries export led or import led?Pac. Econ. Bull.25, 46–63.

  • Google Scholar

• 30

  MuthC.BlomJ.SmithS.JohnellK.Gonzalez-GonzalezA. I.NguyenT. S.et al. (2019). Evidence supporting the best clinical management of patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy: a systematic guideline review and expert consensus. J. Intern. Med.285, 272–288. doi: 10.1111/joim.12842

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 31

  NicastroR.CarilloP. (2021). Food loss and waste prevention strategies from farm to fork. Sustainability13:5443. doi: 10.3390/su13105443

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 32

  ParmarA.HenselO.SturmB. (2017). Post-harvest handling practices and associated food losses and limitations in the sweetpotato value chain of southern Ethiopia. NJAS Wageningen J. Life Sci.80, 65–74. doi: 10.1016/j.njas.2016.12.002

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 33

  PrincipatoL.PratesiC. A.SecondiL. (2018). Towards zero waste: an exploratory study on restaurant managers. Int. J. Hosp. Manag.74, 130–137. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.02.022

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 34

  ThokchomM.SinghK. J.ThirumdasuR. K.DeviA. B. (2016). Effect of intercropping on yield attributes and yield of taro (Colocasia esculenta Schott.) under the sloppy foot hills of Manipur. J. Root Crops42, 179–182.

  • Google Scholar

• 35

  UnderhillS. J. (2017). Better postharvest handling for Samoan smallholder farmers: a practical guide. Sippy Downs, QLD: University of the Sunshine Coast.

  • Google Scholar

• 36

  UnderhillS. J. R.JoshuaL.ZhouY. (2019). A preliminary assessment of horticultural postharvest market loss in the Solomon Islands. Horticulturae5:5. doi: 10.3390/horticulturae5010005

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 37

  UnderhillS. J.ZhouY.SherzadS.Singh-PetersonL.TagoaiS. M. (2017). Horticultural postharvest loss in municipal fruit and vegetable markets in Samoa. Food Secur.9, 1373–1383. doi: 10.1007/s12571-017-0734-7

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 38

  WangY.-S.OdleW. S.IIIEleazerW. E.BarlazM. A. (1997). Methane potential of food waste and anaerobic toxicity of leachate produced during food waste decomposition. Waste Manag. Res.15, 149–167. doi: 10.1006/wmre.1996.0073

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 39

  WatsonJ. (2019). “Importing root crops from the South Pacific Islands for New Zealand markets” in Small-scale processing and storage of tropical root crops. ed. PlucknettD. L. (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press), 151–165.

  • Google Scholar