Farmers’ practices on common beans production: a path towards food loss reduction and food security improvement in Costa Rica

Farmers’ practices on common beans production: a path towards food loss reduction and food security improvement in Costa Rica | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Case Report Farmers’ practices on common beans production: a path towards food loss reduction and food security improvement in Costa Rica Mercedes Montero-Vega, Laura Patricia Brenes Peralta, Maria Viñas, and 3 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6506290/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 4 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Food loss in common bean production is a significant issue that impacts productivity, sustainability, and food security. Despite its importance, dedicated research on the diagnosis of specific farming practices that contribute to these losses and their impact on smallholder bean farmers in the Latin American context is still limited. This study addresses this gap by examining the practices of 56 common bean farmers from a characteristic productive area in Costa Rica and conducting in-depth interviews with their farmers' association representatives, following part of the 4S FAO Methodology for food loss assessment. Our findings reveal that low levels of mechanisation and limited adoption of modern technologies are widespread, restricting productivity and exacerbating post-harvest losses. Furthermore, while some farmers invest minimally in cultivation, they persist in growing beans due to their dual role as a cash crop and a food security staple. Intercropping is a prevalent practice among these farmers, and storage challenges, such as heterogeneous humidity levels, often lead to postharvest losses and increased risk of mycotoxin contamination. These insights underscore the need for interventions to enhance access to mechanisation, promote the adoption of technologies, and provide incentives for improving productivity. Addressing these factors is crucial for reducing food loss and promoting sustainable food security in regions that rely heavily on common bean production. The proposed approach and methodology application could be useful for similar cases in the region, where diagnosis should be a first step for pertinent interventions. food loss productivity sustainable practices postharvest yield 1. Introduction Since the FAO's 2011 estimation of 1.3 billion tons of lost or wasted food annually, extensive research, as reviewed by Chauhan et al. ( 2021 ), has expanded our understanding of the causes and consequences of Food Loss and Waste (FLW). Pre-harvest losses, driven by factors such as weather-related damage, suboptimal agronomic practices, and pests or disease infestations, constitute a significant portion of overall food losses (Batziakas et al., 2020 ; El-Beltagi et al., 2023 ). However, post-harvest losses are of particular concern, as they involve food that has already consumed substantial natural and economic resources invested in their production, affecting, in addition, the availability and quality of food mass for further steps of the supply chain. Despite their significance, post-harvest losses are still neglected in awareness and sensitisation efforts (Ellis et al., 2020 ). Moreover, access to technologies that could help farmers reduce these losses remains limited, exacerbating the challenge of food loss reduction. While substantial research on food losses has been conducted in Africa, there is a relative lack of studies focused on Latin America and the Caribbean, in which losses account for the equivalent to satisfying the dietary requirements of 300 million people (FAO, 2016 ). The implications of food losses are multifaceted, affecting not only the economic well-being of farmers but also exacerbating food insecurity, soil degradation, and contamination in rural areas, where most of food production takes place. These losses contribute to the deterioration of the quality and efficiency of the productive system and its ecological interactions. Considering this, the FAO has issued an urgent call to action, based on target 12.3 of the Sustainable Development Goals to reduce food losses by 2030 as part of broader strategies to combat climate change (FAO, 2024 ). The common bean ( Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is a pulse that originated in Mesoamerica (Southeastern Mexico and Central America) (Bitocchi et al., 2012 ). Today, it is primarily consumed in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, where it is valued as a sustainable source of nutrition and food security (Uebersax et al., 2023 ), as well as for its nutritional profile (i.e. high levels of protein, essential amino acids, carbohydrates, vitamins, minerals, fibre, and antioxidants). Its nutraceutical properties result in the consideration of common beans as a valuable functional food (Carbas et al., 2020 ). It is well-documented that common beans suffer significant quantitative losses during pre- and post-harvest stages (Strecker et al., 2022 ). On the one hand, pre-harvest productivity hinges on soil, agroecological, seed quality, and climatic conditions. Utilizing high-quality seeds through certification programs is vital for minimizing losses, as they ensure high germination and vigour for seedling growth, enhancing adaptability and productivity (FAO, 2019; Borja-Bravo, 2018). On the other hand, post-harvest losses are particularly challenging for small-scale producers and derive from inadequate harvesting, drying, processing and storage methods for grains. The primary factors influencing losses in common beans relate to the quality and safety of the grains. Grain quality in legumes is determined by various biotic and abiotic factors that should be carefully evaluated during post-harvest management by established commercialization standards (Mengistu, 2022 ). Among these, the grain moisture content is the main physical property that directly affects grain metabolism and quality, making the drying process essential for proper storage stability. High moisture levels can cause physical damage and create ideal conditions for the proliferation of insects and fungi, further degrading grain quality (Kumar & Kalita, 2017 ). Also, bean quality is closely tied to maintaining appropriate moisture levels, as excessive moisture loss can result in overly hard beans after cooking (Perera et al., 2023 ; Chacón-Ordóñez et al., 2024 ). Therefore, ensuring proper moisture retention is essential not only in farms but in post-harvest management and grain storage (Mannaa & Kim, 2017 ). Additionally, organisms such as storage insects and fungus in grain batches pose a serious threat, leading to physical damage and contamination with mycotoxins, which compromise food safety (Neme & Mohammed, 2017 ). The consumption of mycotoxin-contaminated grains has been linked to toxic and carcinogenic effects in both humans and animals, making it necessary to immediately discard any contaminated grains (Gurikar et al., 2023 ). Given the well-documented association between mycotoxins and adverse health effects, as well as their significant role in post-harvest grain losses, there is an urgent need to develop and implement effective strategies to mitigate these toxins (Matumba et al., 2021 ). The common bean is a dietary staple in Costa Rica, with per capita consumption reaching 9.93 kilograms in 2020. However, reliance on imports has increased significantly and only 9.71% of the national consumption is domestically produced. This condition raises concerns about food security (Semanario Universidad, 2022 ) and its effects on the rural livelihoods of farmers, who are also at a higher risk of food insecurity than those in urban areas (FAO, 2023 ). Small-scale farmers in specific Costa Rican regions such as Pejibaye, Pérez Zeledón, Buenos Aires, Upala and La Cruz contribute significantly to domestic common bean production (SEPSA, 2023 ). In addition, common beans` yields in Costa Rica could be negatively affected due to climate change (Vargas et al., 2018 ), highlighting the urgent need for improved varieties, updating in crop management technologies and high-quality seeds to reduce pre-harvest losses. Given that 80% of the Costa Rican common beans production relies on small-scale farmers, consequently playing a key role in rural livelihoods and farmer´s income, it is relevant to address pre- and post-harvest losses for economic and food security reasons. However, there are limited studies that suggest how to approach food losses, starting with an assessment of the baseline. Therefore, this research proposes a first diagnostic step based on the Food Loss Analysis: Causes and Solutions – Case Studies in Small-scale Agricultural and Fisheries Subsectors (4S) Methodology, published by FAO ( 2014 ), with the final purpose of contributing to the pathway that could lead to pertinent interventions in food loss reduction. Although this methodology was proposed years ago and has proven helpful in small-scale contexts, to our knowledge, there are no documented investigations using this framework for common beans in Latin America, despite the crop's relevance. The examination of current practices and the state of common beans' pre and post-harvest losses could allow decision-makers (farmers, technicians, stakeholders) to understand which practices can lead to a reduction in common bean losses for small farmers, with parallel results in improving productivity, enhancing product quality and reducing the negative environmental impacts of food loss, hence positively impacting food security. The approach is tested in a case study consisting of a common bean farmer´s association in Costa Rica, which can be considered similar to other productive settings in the region. Implementing food loss monitoring and loss-reducing methodologies is essential for increasing grain production and income, especially in developing countries, such as this case study from Costa Rica, where early-stage losses are prevalent (Manandhar et al., 2018). 2. Methods To conduct a diagnostic analysis, we applied the FAO´s 4S Methodology (FAO, 2014 ), specifically following Steps 1 (Screening), 2 (Survey), and 4 (Synthesis) 1 . To enhance the application of the methodology, we applied these methods in a case study to especially test and adapt the survey step by adding food loss estimations based on the information provided by farmers, aiming at providing a more tailored approach for this and similar types of crops. The preliminary review ("Screening") identified key areas where significant losses could occur within the sector under study, along with their causes and characteristics, thus supporting the next steps. It included a non-systematic literature review, both in scientific articles, grey literature, and institutional repositories, as well as expert criteria after non-structured consultation with agronomists and the farmers' association (The Association). The elements of this review sought to depict the food supply chain, overall production and productivity statistics, and commonly mentioned bottlenecks, among other general aspects. Following this, a “Survey” took place with a selected group of farmers to characterise the case and gather detailed primary data and finally. Sections 2.2.1 to 2.2.5 summarize the questionnaire sections, adding in section 2.3 to suggest a first estimation on productivity and losses, derived from the obtained information and observations. Although FAO´s methodology introduces a “Sampling” method, our study proposes an assessment of productivity as an intermediate step instead of a full food loss sampling, due to possible limitations in resources to ideally conduct that method. Finally, in the “Synthesis” step of the methodology, we provide an analysis to discuss the results, link them to theory and consider possible implications in future food loss reduction opportunities. 2.1 Sample selection Farmers participating in this study were members of an organization that primarily produces maize and common beans, known as “The Association”. Using a confidence level of 90% and a margin of error of 10%, a sample size of 60 farmers was determined. These farmers were interviewed to complete the diagnostic analysis through structured surveys, allowing for a more accurate understanding of the issues related to food loss within this specific group. Information was collected from May through July 2024 and 56 complete interviews were obtained. 2.2 Questionnaire A descriptive questionnaire was developed after the non-systematic literature review from the “Screening” method, which provided areas of interest for deeper study with the sample group during the “Survey”. The questionnaire intended to include all steps of common bean production: from input acquisition to sales, both from the farmer and the Association perspective. The questions addressed various aspects, including inputs, seed selection, acquisition and management, farming systems, farmers` current practices, climate change impact, productivity, prices, and market dynamics. The questionnaire was structured as follows: 2.2.1 General Description This section gathers basic information about the respondents and their farms, including their location, size, and cultivated area. It also inquiries about land ownership, specifically whether the land is rented, owned, or borrowed. Other information related to labour and investments within their farms, especially in terms of storage areas. 2.2.2 Pre-Harvest This section focuses on practices related to seed use, such as the type of seed, the process of obtaining and storing it, and knowledge of its quality and origin. Key questions were about seed variety, germination rate, methods of obtaining seeds (purchased or own-produced), and storage practices. 2.2.3 Planting and Crop Maintenance This section explores planting and crop management practices, including land preparation, planting density, planting methods, and whether they rotate crops. It also looks at the use of inputs (fertilizers, pesticides, weed control, and irrigation) and the type of labour used. Key questions focused on land preparation, planting method, crop rotation, types of inputs applied, and use of labour. 2.2.4. Post-Harvest This section focuses on bean-handling activities after harvest, such as drying, cleaning, storage, and grain processing. It also addresses potential storage-related challenges, such as losses and the presence of mycotoxins. In this section, key questions included aspects related to drying and processing methods, storage systems, storage-related issues and volume of losses, and knowledge of quality regulations. 2.2.5 Marketing This final section of the questionnaire addresses the sale and commercialization of beans, including packaging, sales channels, membership in organized groups, prices received, and satisfaction with the price. Relevant questions in this final section included those related to sale and packaging methods, buyers, reasons for sale, membership in organized groups, and perception of prices. 2.3. Productivity and loss estimations Estimations consisted of the calculation of the number of seed sown by the farmers, accounting for the variations in land availability (Table 1 ). Considering their estimated yield according to information provided by the Association, calculations were also conducted (Eq. 1) to determine the expected volume of beans harvested and then compared to the reported harvest. \(\:ExpV=Seed*germination\:rate-\%losses\) (Eq. 1) Where: $$\:Exp:expected\:volume$$ $$\:Seed:volume\:of\:seed\:sown$$ $$\:germination\:rate:theoretical\:germination\:rate\:for\:the\:country\:and\:region$$ $$\:\%losses:expected\:percentaje\:along\:the\:harvest\:and\:processing\:phases$$ 2.4. Analysis The data collected from farmers were initially analysed based on their own estimates and supplemented with the interview conducted with The Association, which allowed for a deeper understanding of the practices, perceptions, and challenges farmers face in common bean production. These results were then compared with relevant bibliographic references, including optimal agroecological conditions for cultivation and recommended agronomic practices for common bean production and post-harvest handling. Upon completing this analysis, descriptive statistics of farmers and their current practices are presented; we estimated the theoretical economic losses, aligning with Step 4 (Synthesis) of the FAO's 4S Methodology, and finally analysed links between practices, their produce quality, and their potential increase in productivity. 3. Results and discussion 3.1. General description of the case Most of the common bean’s production in Costa Rica occurs in three socioeconomic regions: Brunca (in the southern part of the country where The Association is located), Chorotega (in the north-Pacific part) and Huetar Norte (in the northern plains of the country). The latest report from the CNP indicates that the majority of the area allocated to common bean production is located in the Brunca Region (total: 5,091 ha), followed by the Huetar Norte Region (total: 3,772 ha) and the Chorotega Region (total: 3,020 ha) (CNP, 2023 ). The case study consisted of 56 common bean farms with a mean size of 4.71 hectares (SD: 3.61). This is consistent with the fact that the majority (79.6%) of common bean farms in Costa Rica are owned by small-scale farmers with holdings of less than 5 hectares (Valerín-Román, 2019 ). Most of the farms are leased or owned (Table 1 ) and are located in Perez Zeledón, in the Brunca Region of Costa Rica, which is currently the country's most representative site for common bean farming. Table 1 Type of farm ownership Type Area cultivated (ha) Leased* 20 Leased and borrowed** 1 Leased and owner** 3 Borrowed 3 Owned 29 Total 56 *Two farms use 1/4 of the harvest as rent payment / ** They have more than one common bean farm Many farmers work alone or with the assistance of a family member. On average, 2.6 people work on the farm on a regular basis. However, an additional 2.9 workers are hired on average during planting and, particularly, harvest seasons. In addition, 91.07% (51) of the farmers utilize warehouses to store their agricultural inputs, ensuring optimal conditions for preservation and accessibility. In contrast, only 8.93% (4 farmers) rely on storing their inputs in a room within their homes. The farms' traits, such as ownership, labour practices and infrastructure, are relevant to characterise the case. For instance, using borrowed or leased land can reduce farmers' willingness to invest in soil quality treatments and technology, as they lack certainty about having access to the same land for the next harvest (Adesida et al., 2021 ) Consequently, nearly half of the farmers in this study may hesitate to invest in long-term improvements to enhance their farm’s productivity and quality. Additionally, when farmers borrow or lease land, they typically pay with their harvest; therefore, when quantifying productivity, farmers deduct a percentage of their harvest, as it is used as payment for the land. Labour may also affect some practices. Seasonal hiring helps manage labour-intensive tasks such as harvest, but limited labour may restrict other time-intensive activities, including pest monitoring, optimal planting density, and weeding, which can impact yield and quality. Additionally, inconsistent labour availability may affect post-harvest handling, which is crucial for maintaining common bean quality. Finally, when present in some farms, proper storage infrastructure may indicate an existing awareness of the benefits of proper storage in preserving the quality of inputs and avoiding potential losses or contamination. 3.2. Pre-harvest aspects Pre-harvest aspects impact food losses in crops like common beans, as they directly influence crop yield, quality, and the plant's resilience to post-harvest challenges. Some of the most important pre-harvest aspects influencing food losses were inquired about and assessed, including seed quality, agricultural practices (such as pest and disease control and weed management), and weather conditions. The most used bean varieties by the farmers of the study are Cabecar (red) and Nambí (black) beans (Table 2 ). Nambi is resistant to drought, and both have high productivity rates which is partly why farmers and The Association select them. The stability of the grain colour in the Cabécar variety under different management conditions, locations, planting seasons, and storage practices has led to greater acceptance among farmers and traders. In addition, the technical sheets used by The Association report productivity levels that vary between 1.2 kg/ha and 1.9 kg/ha for Cabécar and between 0.987 kg/ha (during drought) and 1.871 kg/ha for Nambí. Table 2 Number of farmers using each variety of common bean Variety Number Cabécar 8 Cabecar y Nambí 28 Cabecar, Nambí y Victoria 3 Cabécar, Nambí, Urán 1 Nambí 9 Nambí y Generalito 1 Panameño 1 Tequila 1 Tequila, Nambí y Brunca 1 Tequila y Cabécar 1 NR 2 Total 56 Using high-quality seeds from known sources (Table 3 ) is essential for optimum crop yield and quality. In this regard, The Association reports that farmers have encountered low-quality seeds, even when purchasing from formal institutions, such as the National Production Council (CNP), which supplies seeds to farmers. Findings suggest that seeds were mishandled before reaching The Association or the farmers, reducing confidence in seed quality from CNP. Nonetheless, most farmers (80%) continue to use certified seed. Table 3 Origin of purchased seeds Place name Number of farmers The Association 35 The Association and CNP* 1 CNP 3 Own seed 2 NR 15 Total 56 CNP: Consejo Nacional de Producción (National Production Council) The Association has implemented a seed quality program that supplies seeds to its farmers and conducts regular quality tests, though they are not certified for this purpose. As part of this seed quality program, farmers received training to produce better-quality seeds. Among the farmers, the majority (28) both purchase and produce their own seeds, while 14 farmers solely produce seeds, and another 14 exclusively purchase them. Most purchased seeds are sourced from The Association (Table 3 ). Additionally, most farmers store their seeds (71.14% or 40 farmers), and a significant majority use certified seeds (80% or 32 farmers). Most farmers (78.6%) are aware of the germination rate of the seeds they use, with the majority reporting rates above 90% (Table 4 ). However, 21.4% of farmers are unaware of their seeds' germination rates, which may contribute to unexpectedly low yields and product quality. By being informed about germination rates, farmers should consider a different source in a future cropping season if rates are low, thereby avoiding the delay of 2–3 months until harvest and realizing reduced yields. Table 4 Germination range of the seeds used by the common beans’ farmers Germination Range Number of farmers Percentage (%) Unknown 12 21,4 Less than 70% 2 3,57 Between 70% and 79% 1 1,79 Between 80% and 89% 6 10,71 More than 90%* 32 57,14 NR 3 5,36 Total 56 100% * 2 farmers: 95% germination, 3 farmers: 99% germination, 3 farmers: 100% germination. NR: No Response According to the obtained information, it was observed that The Association manages seeds and beans (stored as a final product for consumption) similarly. On the one hand, this could be positive as it provides special safety standards even for the seeds; however, it is important to consider that The Association mentioned that even when the moisture content is adequate for seeds, the moisture content is above 12%, surpassing the technical recommendation for beans destined for consumption, adding risks for the final product quality and shelf-life. In addition, the samples suggest. 3.3. Crop Management Regarding the agricultural practices explored in the survey, one farmer uses mechanized planting, 10 use a combination of manual and mechanized methods, and most of them (45 farmers, 80.46%) plant manually. This may lead to variability in planting depth and spacing, which may influence germination rates and plant growth, affecting the yields. All farmers apply agrochemicals for common bean production, adhering to technical recommendations as well as local and Association guidelines. However, over-reliance on manual labour may affect the consistency and timing of applications. Most farmers (47 farmers, 83.93%) do not use irrigation. Of the nine farmers (16.07%) who do, nearly all (8 farmers) rely on rainwater, while one farmer utilizes a private water source on their farm. Reliance on rain-fed farming makes common bean production and quality highly susceptible to weather conditions, such as drought or irregular rainfall, which can stress plants and lead to lower yields and inferior quality. This could be exacerbated by climate change challenges. In fact, 83.93% (47 farmers) report feeling its effects on common bean production, mainly drought (Table 5 ). Table 5 Effects of climate change according to the farmers' own perception Effects of climate change Number of farmers Drought 31 Drought and excess of water 12 Excess of water 2 Has not experienced it 8 NR 3 Total 56 Intercropping is another common cropping system (39 farmers), with maize and root/tuber crops (ñampí, tiquizque, ginger, squash, maize). Although sometimes associated with reduced yields compared to monoculture systems (Amani Machiani et al., 2019 ; Atuahene-Amankwa &. Michaels, 1997), has shown yield advantages under specific conditions. For instance, a 1:1 intercropping ratio of common bean with potato has been found to outperform the respective monocultures in yield. Moreover, this approach reduces nitrogen (N) inputs to the common bean crop by up to 50% without negatively affecting the soil's NPK (nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium) balance. The crops mentioned in the survey can enhance soil fertility, help in pest management, and improve resource use efficiency, also contributing to food security and income diversification. However, intercropping can also complicate management practices, such as spacing, weed control, and agrochemical application. Finally, although fundamental to farming, record-keeping remains a significant challenge in this agricultural sector. Most farmers (66%) mentioned that they do not maintain records. Among those who do, the records primarily cover the purchase, storage, and use of seeds. Only one farmer mentioned employing an accountant to manage all financial matters. 3.4. Post-harvest handling aspects and productivity Post-harvest practices play a crucial role in the production of common beans. They are essential for enhancing the quality and shelf life, reducing losses, and increasing market acceptance. 3.3.1. Harvest and post-harvest handling The Association plays a key role in maintaining quality by cleaning the beans and conducting biannual quality assessments (in each harvest season) that evaluate parameters such as moisture content, damage levels, and cooking time. A traceability system is maintained up to the packaging stage, allowing The Association to identify the originating farms in most cases. Although individual farmer assessments are not conducted, The Association groups farmers and performs quality evaluations in separate batches. Clustering similar farmers ensures that the analyses remain relevant and manageable, enabling The Association to address quality concerns directly with the farmers involved. While farmers typically harvest manually and then sun-dry the beans, this process becomes challenging during the rainy season harvest. Consequently, The Association often receives beans with high moisture content (> 16%), requiring additional drying and processing. This issue can lead to increased losses, as successive cycles of inadequate drying and storage in high-humidity conditions can result in lower-quality beans, including damaged, broken, and infested grains, as well as a higher risk of contamination with mycotoxins. High humidity during storage can create an ideal environment for fungal growth (Cabañas, 2014 ) with the potential for mycotoxin production, as well as increasing post-cooking hardness (Cabañas, 2014 ; Wainaina et al., 2023 ) and deteriorating the seed coat, which may make the beans more susceptible to insect infestations (Mng’ong’o, 2023 ) or physical damage, which in turn can facilitate the entry of microorganisms. Whether at harvest time or due to drying processes, exposure to high temperatures can also cause damage to the grain, thereby creating the need for close monitoring of this operation in the post-harvest phase, which is conducted on farms and by the Association. High temperatures increase the respiration rate (Cabañas, 2014 ) and induce physical and chemical transformations that affect the structural integrity and composition of the cell wall (Njoroge et al., 2014 ), potentially causing cooking issues (Wainaina et al., 2023 ), reducing consumer acceptability, and shortening shelf life. The presence of insects can decrease dry matter content, compromise nutritional quality, and contribute to a higher incidence of fungi and other microorganisms. Furthermore, damaged beans can attract these pests, making removing damaged beans before storage critical. Additionally, these damaged grains can increase respiration rate and, consequently, elevate storage temperature (Cabañas, 2014 ). 3.3.2. Storage and quality control The Association limits storage time to a maximum of six months. If the product is to exceed the storage period of three months within their facilities under ambient conditions, it is transferred to a cold storage facility at Cerro de la Muerte, a location in one of the mountainous areas of the country, where temperatures range from 15 to 16°C. In the past, they encountered handling challenges during storage that led to product losses. To reduce waste, they now sell lower-quality beans (e.g. damage and broken grains as defined by the applicable Technical Norm, Reglamento técnico: RTCR:384: Fríjol en Grano ) for alternative uses. Such practices would include added-value techniques, such as refried or pureed bean products, ensuring the product remains useful and minimizing waste. Nonetheless, it is important to consider that lower-quality beans may not be suitable for human consumption if contaminated with mycotoxins; therefore, they become unfit even for processed products. Mycotoxins are highly toxic substances classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as Group 1 human carcinogens. Additionally, they can cause allergies and organ toxicity. The severity of their effects depends on the level of exposure, as well as their mutagenic and teratogenic properties (R. Khan et al., 2024 ). These substances represent a significant safety concern that can exacerbate food losses and directly impact food security. To address this issue, The Association conducts mycotoxin analyses for total aflatoxins (the only regulated mycotoxin in the country) on the produce twice a year and they indicate that they have never had contaminated grains in the past. Given that grain quality is a crucial factor affecting losses in common bean production, we also assessed the farmers awareness of Costa Rican regulatory standards for these purposes (Table 6 ). Table 6 Number of farmers that know legal regulations in Costa Rica related to grains quality and mycotoxins for common bean Y/N Quality-related regulations Mycotoxins No 14 50 Yes 42 6 Even when knowing about quality standards, many farmers remain unaware of the country's legal regulations, particularly regarding mycotoxins. This lack of knowledge may affect their ability to manage grain quality effectively and to reduce potential losses associated with mycotoxin contamination. To mitigate these risks, it is essential for farmers and The Association to become properly aware of regulations and manage adequate handling and infrastructure for proper storage. Farmers should carefully consider harvest timing, ensure rapid drying of the beans, and store them under optimal conditions to maintain quality over extended periods (Neme and Mohammed 2017 ). 3.5. Market conditions Regarding the buying/selling mechanisms, most farmers use The Association as their source of inputs and their only buyer. Of the 56 surveyed farmers, 54 sell their produce to The Association, while only 2 indicate selling it to other parties. The average price currently paid to farmers is 40,190 colones per 46 kg quintal (78.16 dollars − 514 colones per dollar: exchange rate 16.10.23). The vast majority indicated that the price they receive is 40,000 colones , with some fluctuations between 35,000 and 43,000 colones . On average, the minimum price received is 36,000 and the maximum is 43,886. The level of satisfaction among farmers with these prices is 64.6% (3.23 out of 5 as the maximum on a 5-value scale). The Association sells the final product (packaged beans) to supermarkets and similar businesses, with which they must negotiate pricing. From 1990 to 2019, basic grains experienced a 66.5% contraction in the national market (Gollin, 2010 ). This decline has driven significant shifts in agricultural production within Costa Rica. Although beans are one of the main ingredients of the Costa Rican diet, the majority of beans consumed are imported due to the higher cost of domestic production compared to imported alternatives. Farmers, on average, receive approximately 869.59 colones per kilogram (1.69 dollars), while consumers pay around 1,875 colones (3.65 dollars) 2 . Consequently, the added value within the supply chain is concentrated in its later stages, with 45–50% of consumer price added to the farmer´s price. 3.6. Common bean production yields and losses In the agricultural sector, productivity plays a crucial role, not only as a key driver of profitability but also as a cornerstone for ensuring the long-term sustainability of the production system (Gollin, 2010 ; Lankoski & Thiem, 2020 ). Higher productivity allows farmers to maximize resource use, increase yields, and remain competitive, while also promoting sustainable practices that safeguard the environment and ensure the viability of agricultural activities for future generations. Considering the data from official sources that indicate yields are higher in the Huetar Norte Region in which the average production was 1.2 t/ha in 2022–2023 compared to 0.7 t/ha in Brunca Region and 0.96 t/ha in Chorotega Region (CNP, 2023 ), and data obtained during the survey phase of the study, we estimated the yields (Table 7 ) to better understand productivity dynamics in bean production from our case study. Table 7 Estimation of yields Harvest Mean (min-max) Standard deviation Harvested area (ha) 3.46 (1–13) 2.70 Beans harvested (t) 2.54 (0.69–9.20) 2.13 Beans harvested (t/ha) 0.76 (0-1.75) 0.38 Worldwide, according to data from FAO, the average bean productivity is 1.5 t/ha, which means common bean farmers in Costa Rican have a very large gap for improvement. According to available data and the applied survey, three estimations of losses are presented ahead: Harvest losses: Farmers plant, on average, 38.62 kg/ha of beans (seeds); however, results indicate high fluctuations in this amount, accounting for 11.5 kg/ha to 112 kg/ha. Costa Rican technical recommendation from the Ministry of Agriculture indicated an average of 0.7 ton/ha. In this regard, farmers are losing 31.38 kg/ha (as an opportunity cost). The average yield is expected to be 0.9 ton/ha. Nonetheless, these results indicate the average yield is 0.76 ton/ha, meaning a potential 0.14 ton/ha is lost. Post-harvest losses: The Association estimates that rejection rates are around 25–30%; however, in the first harvest of the year (dry season), they could be much lower. Fluctuations between the dry and wet seasons regarding productivity and management can result in substantially different losses. During storage losses: common beans are a food characterized by their low moisture content, a robust seed coat that protects them from external factors, and a reduced respiration rate, which makes them a relatively stable product with a longer shelf life compared to other food groups, such as fruits and vegetables. However, this product can be affected by factors such as relative humidity, temperature, cleanliness, ventilation, and the presence of pests in storage areas (Cabañas, 2014 ). Proper management of these factors is crucial to ensuring greater stability and, consequently, a consistent supply of beans that are safe, nutritious, and of acceptable cooking quality (Wainaina et al., 2023 ). 3.7. Synthesis: analysis and possible approaches Food loss symptoms expressed as low-quality product, decreased yield and discarded mass are often due to a deeper-rooted cause. Therefore, the findings from the survey were analysed in light of the observed symptoms and real causes and reasons as suggested by FAO ( 2014 ), namely technological, organizational, infrastructural and capacity-type (skill) causes, and reasons related to investment, policy, and contextual aspects (underdevelopment, culture, gender). These set the base for possible approaches on three main critical areas, qualitatively identified during the development of the research, such as agricultural practices, storage and traceability, and economic aspects. 3.5.1. Agricultural practices: Technology plays a crucial role in the direction of agricultural practices towards overall sustainability, including the reduction of food losses(N. Khan et al., 2021 r et al., 2021; Santiteerakul et al., 2020 ). Observed limitations regarding seed quality selection, sowing density, cultural practices and final common beans output suggest that certain improvements in the productive technology applied by the farmers can result in increased productivity and decreases losses. Traceability and quality control are other aspects to observe, and improvement opportunities can become real since the Association already has quality analysis in practice. In this sense, closer traceability and record-keeping per farmer, as well as a standardization process for their current seed production area, can help them reduce risks or deviations from the close-to-ideal standards. 3.5.2. Storage conditions: Several causes are observed in this regard, especially those related to skills (knowledge in this case) and technology, since farmers are not fully aware of implications and regulations regarding mycotoxins and the drying process is still heterogeneous. In contrast, the fact that the farmers operate within a cooperative scheme (The Association) that has storage facilities of their own or access in a cooler location poses an opportunity within the organizational and infrastructural scopes. Considering the issues related to the quality, safety, and acceptability of beans for the final consumer concerning storage, it is essential to start with clean, fresh, dry, and properly selected beans to ensure that no damaged grains are present. It is highly recommended to control the internal moisture content of the beans, ideally between 13–14% (Cabañas, 2014 ); however, according to Technical Regulation RTCR 384:2004 on Dry Beans in Costa Rica, a maximum moisture content of 16% is allowed. Other key factors to control include temperature and relative humidity in storage. Cabañas ( 2014 ) suggests keeping temperatures below 20°C, with 15°C being ideal to reduce the respiration rate; however, temperatures below 10°C are also recommended (Mng'ong'o, 2023). The relative humidity should be maintained at or below 40% (Cabañas, 2014 ). Some storage alternatives in this regard, such as bulk storage in bags made from natural fibres (such as jute), can help absorb moisture, as these materials are porous, allow respiration, and manage temperature fluctuations (Cabañas, 2014 ). However, packaging must also ensure that the product is protected and isolated, preventing direct contact with contaminants or pests. Proper inventory rotation and labelling are essential to apply the first-in, first-out (FIFO) method. Finally, storage conditions must adhere to good manufacturing practices: the storage area should be dry, ventilated, clean, illuminated, and organized, with products stacked on pallets 15 cm above the floor, 50 cm from walls, and 1.5 m below the ceiling, allowing for air circulation, personnel movement, and preventing contact with surfaces that may be moist or contaminated. Active pest control must also be implemented, with fumigation using products recommended for the food industry, ideally before new batches enter, and continuous cleaning processes thereafter (Mng'ong'o, 2023). 3.5.3. Economic aspects: Farmers are often unaware of market dynamics. Their sole contact “out of the farm” is The Association and other farmers. Belonging to The Association is perceived as a way of security and status quo . When asking them why they sell their harvest to The Association a recurrent answer was “ because that`s the way it has always been ”. These farmers are considered price-takers and the market “dictates” the average price they will receive. In this regard, farmers are not expected to learn about market dynamics. However, the lack of governmental incentives was often mentioned when asked about other issues they commonly face. Currently, farmers face a punitive system: they get price discounts for low quality. However, farmers are loyal to The Association and better prices for better quality could have an impact on productivity and losses. In addition to each alternative, reasons behind detected causes, as well as potential socioenvironmental impacts, should be considered. For instance, drying machinery for storage is not considered in this case due to higher energy consumption (with environmental and economic implications) and a potential disruption from traditional sun-drying, which, with adequate skills, can be fit as well. In any of the proposed approaches, further analysis of the investment, the applicable legislation and as well as the conditions of the local context and farmer livelihoods shall be considered. In this regard, policy interventions are critical to trigger specific areas of attention, whether it represents the opening of financial aids but also the application of technical support and transference to farmers (individually or associated). 4. Conclusions The diagnostic assessment of common bean farmers highlights essential insights into their cultivation practices and challenges, suggesting that the application of the FAO’s 4S methodology is useful as a first assessment to introduce the discussion and interventions for food loss reduction. Following an approach that first screens the crop context and helps tailor the survey section is useful to obtain reliable and relevant information for further steps. Findings from this case study indicate that farmers generally rely on traditional and non-standardised methods, which contribute to productivity gaps and low levels of technological adoption. The Association’s productivity averages around 0,7 tons per hectare, substantially below the global average of 1,5 tons per hectare. Disparities in technical knowledge are also evident, particularly in post-harvest management. While The Association monitors key quality indicators, such as seed purity, mycotoxin levels, moisture content, and cooking quality, many farmers are unfamiliar with these technical standards, underscoring the need for enhanced training and support. A significant source of losses stems from inadequate moisture management, which most producers gauge by experience rather than through precise monitoring; only The Association actively measures grain moisture levels. Climate change adds further complications, with unpredictable patterns of excessive rainfall and drought emerging as primary concerns for farmers. Additionally, there is limited trust in seeds provided by the National Production Council (CNP), leading The Association to establish its own seed propagation program, creating a dependency-driven relationship with farmers. Raising awareness about the implications of losses is crucial for farmers, as it encourages them to recognize the long-term effects of these losses on their operations and the environment. When farmers understand the environmental and economic losses associated with food loss, they are more likely to take proactive steps to identify and improve the practices that contribute to these losses, ultimately leading to more sustainable and efficient production processes. While the quality and visible losses of common bean are evident, it is equally important to emphasize education on less apparent issues, such as the presence of mycotoxins. These toxic compounds, which can develop under poor storage conditions, represent a significant yet often overlooked health risk. Without increased awareness and the implementation of regular monitoring and studies, the potential dangers associated with mycotoxins may go unaddressed, undermining both food safety and public health efforts. Strengthening educational initiatives and promoting periodic evaluations are essential to mitigate these risks and ensure the quality of common bean production. Finally, common bean production in the Brunca region of Costa Rica is more than just a commercial activity, it is a vital livelihood and an integral part of farmers' lives. To support these farmers, the adoption of improved management practices is essential for reducing losses, enhancing economic well-being, and promoting better health outcomes. Furthermore, such advancements are critical for ensuring access to nutritious food and strengthening food security. Declarations All participants involved in this study provided informed consent to participate. The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the appropriate ethics committee of the University, which granted a waiver of written consent given the nature of the interviews and the low-risk profile of the research Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank all participants in the survey phase, experts, technical staff and the Board of Directors of The Association. Author contribution Conceptualization: [Mercedes Montero-Vega]; Methodology: [Mercedes Montero-Vega, Carolina Herrera-González, Laura Patricia Brenes-Peralta]; Formal analysis and investigation: [Mercedes Montero-Vega, Maria Vinas, Carolina Herrera-González, Laura Patricia Brenes-Peralta, Stefanny Campos-Boza]; Writing - original draft preparation: [Mercedes Montero-Vega, Maria Vinas, Carolina Herrera-González, Laura Patricia Brenes-Peralta, Andrés Antonio Monge Vargas, Stefanny Campos-Boza], Writing - review and editing: [Mercedes Montero-Vega, Maria Vinas, Laura Patricia Brenes-Peralta, Andrés Antonio Monge Vargas, Stefanny Campos-Boza]; Funding acquisition: [Mercedes Montero-Vega]; Supervision: [Mercedes Montero-Vega]. Funding sources Vicerrectoría de Investigación. Universidad de Costa Rica, Project C4316 References Adesida, I. E., Nkomoki, W., Bavorova, M., & Madaki, M. Y. (2021). Effects of Agricultural Programmes and Land Ownership on the Adoption of Sustainable Agricultural Practices in Nigeria. Sustainability , 13 (13), 7249. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137249 Amani Machiani, M., Rezaei-Chiyaneh, E., Javanmard, A., Maggi, F., & Morshedloo, M. R. (2019). Evaluation of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) seed yield and quali-quantitative production of the essential oils from fennel (Foeniculum vulgare Mill.) and dragonhead (Dracocephalum moldavica L.) in intercropping system under humic acid application. Journal of Cleaner Production , 235 , 112–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.241 Atuahene-Amankwa, G., &. Michaels, T. E. (1997). Genetic variances, heritabilities and genetic correlations of grain yield, harvest index and yield components for common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) in sole crop and in maize/bean intercrop. Can. J. Plant Sci. 177.93.26.7 Batziakas, K. G., Stanley, H., Batziakas, A. G., Brecht, J. K., Rivard, C. L., & Pliakoni, E. D. (2020). Reducing postharvest food losses in organic spinach with the implementation of high tunnel production systems. Agronomy for Sustainable Development , 40 (6), 42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-020-00648-x Bitocchi, E., Nanni, L., Bellucci, E., Rossi, M., Giardini, A., Zeuli, P. S., Logozzo, G., Stougaard, J., McClean, P., Attene, G., & Papa, R. (2012). Mesoamerican origin of the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is revealed by sequence data. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 109 (14), E788–E796. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1108973109 Cabañas. (2014). Postcosecha del grano de frijol. Prácticas alternativas para su manejo . chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.undp.org/sites/g/files/zskgke326/files/migration/cu/Postcosecha-del-grano-de-frijol.pdf Carbas, B., Machado, N., Oppolzer, D., Ferreira, L., Queiroz, M., Brites, C., Rosa, E. A., & Barros, A. I. (2020). Nutrients, Antinutrients, Phenolic Composition, and Antioxidant Activity of Common Bean Cultivars and their Potential for Food Applications. Antioxidants , 9 (2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox9020186 Chacón-Ordóñez, T., Campos-Boza, S., Gamboa-Moreno, P., Chaves-Barrantes, N. F., & Acosta-Montoya, Ó. (2024). Frijol ( Phaseolus vulgaris L.) endurecido y alternativas tecnológicas para su aprovechamiento en la industria alimentaria. Agronomía Mesoamericana , 35 ((Especial):59614), 20. https://doi.org/10.15517/am.2024.59614 Chauhan, C., Dhir, A., Akram, M. U., & Salo, J. (2021). Food loss and waste in food supply chains. A systematic literature review and framework development approach. Journal of Cleaner Production , 295 , 126438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126438 CNP. (2023). Análisis y Monitoreo de Mercado: Frijol Rojo y Negro (Boletín N o 01; p. 13). Consejo Nacional de Producción. El-Beltagi, H. S., Parmar, A., Chen, T., & El-Mogy, M. M. (2023). Editorial: Advances in pre- and postharvest applications to reduce qualitative and quantitative food loss and waste. Frontiers in Plant Science , 14 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1149358 Ellis, E., Kwofie, E. M., & Ngadi, M. (2020). Economic and nutritional implications of losses and contributing factors along the bean value chain. Journal of Stored Products Research , 87 , 101582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspr.2020.101582 Estado de la Nacion. (2020). Pograma Estado de la Nación Estado de la Nación 2020: / Programa Estado de la Nación, . Consejo Nacional de Rectores. – San José, C.R. : CONARE - PEN, 2020. 210 p : 28 cm (Informe Estado de la Nación ; 26-2020) ISBN 978-9930-540-68-8 impreso ISBN 978-9930-540-69-5 digital. FAO. (2014). Food Loss Analysis: Causes and Solutions Case studies in the Small-scale Agriculture and Fisheries Subsectors. Save Food: Global Initative on Food Loss and Waste Reduction , Strategic Objective 4, Output 2.2, Activity 1.2 , 32. FAO. (2016). Food Losses and Wastein Latin America and the Caribbean . chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/5569e764-205c-4165-9251-1cbc78f7e0fb/content#:~:text=It%20is%20estimated%20that%20the,achieve%20the%20Sustainable%20Development%20Goals.&text=FAO%20has%20been%20urging%20global,forces%20and%20setting%20common%20goals. FAO. (2023). Latin America and the Caribbean—Regional Overview of Food Security and Nutrition 2023 . https://openknowledge.fao.org/items/d5796653-42c5-4de3-915b-a4d58c1308c9 FAO. (2024). 12.3.1 Global food losses | SDG Indicators Data Portal . SDGIndicators. https://www.fao.org/sustainable-development-goals-data-portal/data/indicators/1231-global-food-losses/en Gollin, D. (2010). Chapter 73 Agricultural Productivity and Economic Growth. In Handbook of Agricultural Economics (Vol. 4, pp. 3825–3866). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0072(09)04073-0 Gurikar, C., Shivaprasad, D. P., Sabillón, L., Nanje Gowda, N. A., & Siliveru, K. (2023). Impact of mycotoxins and their metabolites associated with food grains. Grain & Oil Science and Technology , 6 (1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaost.2022.10.001 Khan, N., Ray, R. L., Sargani, G. R., Ihtisham, M., Khayyam, M., & Ismail, S. (2021). Current Progress and Future Prospects of Agriculture Technology: Gateway to Sustainable Agriculture. Sustainability , 13 (9), Article 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094883 Khan, R., Anwar, F., & Ghazali, F. M. (2024). A comprehensive review of mycotoxins: Toxicology, detection, and effective mitigation approaches. Heliyon , 10 (8). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e28361 Kör, B., Krawczyk, A., & Wakkee, I. (2021). Addressing food loss and waste prevention. British Food Journal , 124 (8), 2434–2460. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-05-2021-0571 Kumar, D., & Kalita, P. (2017). Reducing Postharvest Losses during Storage of Grain Crops to Strengthen Food Security in Developing Countries. Foods , 6 (1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods6010008 Lankoski, J., & Thiem, A. (2020). Linkages between agricultural policies, productivity and environmental sustainability. Ecological Economics , 178 , 106809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106809 Mannaa, M., & Kim, K. D. (2017). Influence of Temperature and Water Activity on Deleterious Fungi and Mycotoxin Production during Grain Storage. Mycobiology , 45 (4), 240–254. https://doi.org/10.5941/MYCO.2017.45.4.240 Matumba, L., Namaumbo, S., Ngoma, T., Meleke, N., De Boevre, M., Logrieco, A. F., & De Saeger, S. (2021). Five keys to prevention and control of mycotoxins in grains: A proposal. Global Food Security , 30 , 100562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2021.100562 Mengistu, H. K. (2022). Abiotic and Biotic Stress Factors Affecting Storage of Legumes in Tropics. In Legumes Research—Volume 1 . IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.99413 Mng’ong’o, M. (2023). Assessment of maize and beans storage insect pest in major grain markets, Morogoro-Tanzania. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences , 30 (1), 103491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2022.103491 Neme, K., & Mohammed, A. (2017). Mycotoxin occurrence in grains and the role of postharvest management as a mitigation strategies. A review. Food Control , 78 , 412–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2017.03.012 Njoroge, D. M., Kinyanjui, P. K., Makokha, A. O., Christiaens, S., Shpigelman, A., Sila, D. N., & Hendrickx, M. E. (2014). Extraction and characterization of pectic polysaccharides from easy- and hard-to-cook common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). Food Research International (Ottawa, Ont.) , 64 , 314–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2014.06.044 Perera, D., Devkota, L., Garnier, G., Panozzo, J., & Dhital, S. (2023). Hard-to-cook phenomenon in common legumes: Chemistry, mechanisms and utilisation. Food Chemistry , 415 , 135743. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2023.135743 Santiteerakul, S., Sopadang, A., Yaibuathet Tippayawong, K., & Tamvimol, K. (2020). The Role of Smart Technology in Sustainable Agriculture: A Case Study of Wangree Plant Factory. Sustainability , 12 (11), Article 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114640 Semanario Universidad. (2022, September 14). Costa Rica está entre los países más dependientes de la importación de granos básicos . https://semanariouniversidad.com/pais/costa-rica-esta-entre-los-paises-mas-dependientes-de-la-importacion-de-granos-basicos/ SEPSA. (2023). Boletín Estadístico Agropecuario. (Boletín Estadístico Agropecuario. Serie Cronológica 2019-2022; Edición N° 33). https://www.mag.go.cr/bibliotecavirtual/BEA-0033.pdf Strecker, K., Bitzer, V., & Kruijssen, F. (2022). Critical stages for post-harvest losses and nutrition outcomes in the value chains of bush beans and nightshade in Uganda. Food Security , 14 (2), 411–426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-021-01244-x Uebersax, M. A., Cichy, K. A., Gomez, F. E., Porch, T. G., Heitholt, J., Osorno, J. M., Kamfwa, K., Snapp, S. S., & Bales, S. (2023). Dry beans ( L.) as a vital component of sustainable agriculture and food security—A review. Legume Science , 5 (1), e155. https://doi.org/10.1002/leg3.155 Valerín-Román, J. E. (2019). Informe situacional granos básicos 2012-2019: Frijol-maiz (p. 116). Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería. https://www.mag.go.cr/bibliotecavirtual/E16-11088.pdf Vargas, A., Watler, W., Morales, M., & Vignola, R. (2018). Prácticas efectivas para la reducción de impactos por eventos climáticos en Costa Rica: Cultivo de frijol (p. 79). CATEI, MINAE, DCC. Adaptation Fund, Fundecooperación. https://www.mag.go.cr/bibliotecavirtual/F01-8160.pdf Wainaina, I., Wafula, E., Kyomugasho, C., Sila, D., & Hendrickx, M. (2023). Application of state diagrams to understand the nature and kinetics of (bio)chemical reactions in dry common bean seeds: A scientific guide to establish suitable postharvest storage conditions. Food Research International , 173 , 113418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2023.113418 Footnotes 3. Step 3 (sampling) was not considered since our research was based on a direct survey to farmers and their reported losses and not on in-site loss quantification. Beans are usually sold to consumers in 800gram bags, with an average price of 1500 colones. Therefore, the estimation of a kilogram of beans was calculated. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 19 May, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 10 May, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 10 May, 2025 First submitted to journal 22 Apr, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6506290","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Case Report","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":446490979,"identity":"6c36cc95-af6d-4aac-b1c5-89a526127cdb","order_by":0,"name":"Mercedes Montero-Vega","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Costa Rica","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mercedes","middleName":"","lastName":"Montero-Vega","suffix":""},{"id":446490982,"identity":"63d1c081-259a-4b45-87d7-1d89dec0d8c7","order_by":1,"name":"Laura Patricia Brenes Peralta","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Costa Rica Institute of Technology","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Laura","middleName":"Patricia Brenes","lastName":"Peralta","suffix":""},{"id":446490984,"identity":"8c45c3b7-cdd8-4072-9a78-207ab9d29573","order_by":2,"name":"Maria Viñas","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Costa Rica","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Maria","middleName":"","lastName":"Viñas","suffix":""},{"id":446490985,"identity":"5b91f7f9-363e-403f-b2df-5cb37cae83f7","order_by":3,"name":"Stefanny Campos-Boza","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Costa Rica","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Stefanny","middleName":"","lastName":"Campos-Boza","suffix":""},{"id":446490987,"identity":"56db42f6-a563-4005-aeb2-cb4fd70147aa","order_by":4,"name":"Carolina Herrera","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"National Technical University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Carolina","middleName":"","lastName":"Herrera","suffix":""},{"id":446490989,"identity":"40b75dcd-e05c-4c54-ab24-2327ef222215","order_by":5,"name":"Andres Monge","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Costa Rica","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Andres","middleName":"","lastName":"Monge","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-04-22 16:53:18","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6506290/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6506290/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":81349648,"identity":"c1d1ef3c-4b7e-4001-b3fb-e6b513b1174b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-25 06:04:12","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":986423,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6506290/v1/03445821-d1ad-44da-9533-66539e8d12b2.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Farmers’ practices on common beans production: a path towards food loss reduction and food security improvement in Costa Rica","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eSince the FAO's 2011 estimation of 1.3\u0026nbsp;billion tons of lost or wasted food annually, extensive research, as reviewed by Chauhan et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), has expanded our understanding of the causes and consequences of Food Loss and Waste (FLW). Pre-harvest losses, driven by factors such as weather-related damage, suboptimal agronomic practices, and pests or disease infestations, constitute a significant portion of overall food losses (Batziakas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; El-Beltagi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). However, post-harvest losses are of particular concern, as they involve food that has already consumed substantial natural and economic resources invested in their production, affecting, in addition, the availability and quality of food mass for further steps of the supply chain. Despite their significance, post-harvest losses are still neglected in awareness and sensitisation efforts (Ellis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, access to technologies that could help farmers reduce these losses remains limited, exacerbating the challenge of food loss reduction.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile substantial research on food losses has been conducted in Africa, there is a relative lack of studies focused on Latin America and the Caribbean, in which losses account for the equivalent to satisfying the dietary requirements of 300\u0026nbsp;million people (FAO, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). The implications of food losses are multifaceted, affecting not only the economic well-being of farmers but also exacerbating food insecurity, soil degradation, and contamination in rural areas, where most of food production takes place. These losses contribute to the deterioration of the quality and efficiency of the productive system and its ecological interactions. Considering this, the FAO has issued an urgent call to action, based on target 12.3 of the Sustainable Development Goals to reduce food losses by 2030 as part of broader strategies to combat climate change (FAO, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe common bean (\u003cem\u003ePhaseolus vulgaris\u003c/em\u003e L.) is a pulse that originated in Mesoamerica (Southeastern Mexico and Central America) (Bitocchi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Today, it is primarily consumed in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, where it is valued as a sustainable source of nutrition and food security (Uebersax et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), as well as for its nutritional profile (i.e. high levels of protein, essential amino acids, carbohydrates, vitamins, minerals, fibre, and antioxidants). Its nutraceutical properties result in the consideration of common beans as a valuable functional food (Carbas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt is well-documented that common beans suffer significant quantitative losses during pre- and post-harvest stages (Strecker et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). On the one hand, pre-harvest productivity hinges on soil, agroecological, seed quality, and climatic conditions. Utilizing high-quality seeds through certification programs is vital for minimizing losses, as they ensure high germination and vigour for seedling growth, enhancing adaptability and productivity (FAO, 2019; Borja-Bravo, 2018). On the other hand, post-harvest losses are particularly challenging for small-scale producers and derive from inadequate harvesting, drying, processing and storage methods for grains.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe primary factors influencing losses in common beans relate to the quality and safety of the grains. Grain quality in legumes is determined by various biotic and abiotic factors that should be carefully evaluated during post-harvest management by established commercialization standards (Mengistu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Among these, the grain moisture content is the main physical property that directly affects grain metabolism and quality, making the drying process essential for proper storage stability. High moisture levels can cause physical damage and create ideal conditions for the proliferation of insects and fungi, further degrading grain quality (Kumar \u0026amp; Kalita, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Also, bean quality is closely tied to maintaining appropriate moisture levels, as excessive moisture loss can result in overly hard beans after cooking (Perera et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Chac\u0026oacute;n-Ord\u0026oacute;\u0026ntilde;ez et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, ensuring proper moisture retention is essential not only in farms but in post-harvest management and grain storage (Mannaa \u0026amp; Kim, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdditionally, organisms such as storage insects and fungus in grain batches pose a serious threat, leading to physical damage and contamination with mycotoxins, which compromise food safety (Neme \u0026amp; Mohammed, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). The consumption of mycotoxin-contaminated grains has been linked to toxic and carcinogenic effects in both humans and animals, making it necessary to immediately discard any contaminated grains (Gurikar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Given the well-documented association between mycotoxins and adverse health effects, as well as their significant role in post-harvest grain losses, there is an urgent need to develop and implement effective strategies to mitigate these toxins (Matumba et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe common bean is a dietary staple in Costa Rica, with per capita consumption reaching 9.93 kilograms in 2020. However, reliance on imports has increased significantly and only 9.71% of the national consumption is domestically produced. This condition raises concerns about food security (Semanario Universidad, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) and its effects on the rural livelihoods of farmers, who are also at a higher risk of food insecurity than those in urban areas (FAO, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Small-scale farmers in specific Costa Rican regions such as Pejibaye, P\u0026eacute;rez Zeled\u0026oacute;n, Buenos Aires, Upala and La Cruz contribute significantly to domestic common bean production (SEPSA, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). In addition, common beans` yields in Costa Rica could be negatively affected due to climate change (Vargas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), highlighting the urgent need for improved varieties, updating in crop management technologies and high-quality seeds to reduce pre-harvest losses.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGiven that 80% of the Costa Rican common beans production relies on small-scale farmers, consequently playing a key role in rural livelihoods and farmer\u0026acute;s income, it is relevant to address pre- and post-harvest losses for economic and food security reasons. However, there are limited studies that suggest how to approach food losses, starting with an assessment of the baseline. Therefore, this research proposes a first diagnostic step based on the \u003cem\u003eFood Loss Analysis: Causes and Solutions \u0026ndash; Case Studies in Small-scale Agricultural and Fisheries Subsectors\u003c/em\u003e (4S) Methodology, published by FAO (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e), with the final purpose of contributing to the pathway that could lead to pertinent interventions in food loss reduction. Although this methodology was proposed years ago and has proven helpful in small-scale contexts, to our knowledge, there are no documented investigations using this framework for common beans in Latin America, despite the crop's relevance. The examination of current practices and the state of common beans' pre and post-harvest losses could allow decision-makers (farmers, technicians, stakeholders) to understand which practices can lead to a reduction in common bean losses for small farmers, with parallel results in improving productivity, enhancing product quality and reducing the negative environmental impacts of food loss, hence positively impacting food security. The approach is tested in a case study consisting of a common bean farmer\u0026acute;s association in Costa Rica, which can be considered similar to other productive settings in the region. Implementing food loss monitoring and loss-reducing methodologies is essential for increasing grain production and income, especially in developing countries, such as this case study from Costa Rica, where early-stage losses are prevalent (Manandhar et al., 2018).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003eTo conduct a diagnostic analysis, we applied the FAO\u0026acute;s 4S Methodology (FAO, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e), specifically following Steps 1 (Screening), 2 (Survey), and 4 (Synthesis)\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003ca class=\"FNLink\" href=\"#Fn1\" id=\"#FNLinkFn1\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. To enhance the application of the methodology, we applied these methods in a case study to especially test and adapt the survey step by adding food loss estimations based on the information provided by farmers, aiming at providing a more tailored approach for this and similar types of crops.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe preliminary review (\u0026quot;Screening\u0026quot;) identified key areas where significant losses could occur within the sector under study, along with their causes and characteristics, thus supporting the next steps. It included a non-systematic literature review, both in scientific articles, grey literature, and institutional repositories, as well as expert criteria after non-structured consultation with agronomists and the farmers\u0026apos; association (The Association). The elements of this review sought to depict the food supply chain, overall production and productivity statistics, and commonly mentioned bottlenecks, among other general aspects. Following this, a \u0026ldquo;Survey\u0026rdquo; took place with a selected group of farmers to characterise the case and gather detailed primary data and finally. Sections \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2.2.1\u003c/span\u003e to \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2.2.5\u003c/span\u003e summarize the questionnaire sections, adding in section \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2.3\u003c/span\u003e to suggest a first estimation on productivity and losses, derived from the obtained information and observations. Although FAO\u0026acute;s methodology introduces a \u0026ldquo;Sampling\u0026rdquo; method, our study proposes an assessment of productivity as an intermediate step instead of a full food loss sampling, due to possible limitations in resources to ideally conduct that method. Finally, in the \u0026ldquo;Synthesis\u0026rdquo; step of the methodology, we provide an analysis to discuss the results, link them to theory and consider possible implications in future food loss reduction opportunities.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.1 Sample selection\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers participating in this study were members of an organization that primarily produces maize and common beans, known as \u0026ldquo;The Association\u0026rdquo;. Using a confidence level of 90% and a margin of error of 10%, a sample size of 60 farmers was determined. These farmers were interviewed to complete the diagnostic analysis through structured surveys, allowing for a more accurate understanding of the issues related to food loss within this specific group. Information was collected from May through July 2024 and 56 complete interviews were obtained.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.2 Questionnaire\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eA descriptive questionnaire was developed after the non-systematic literature review from the \u0026ldquo;Screening\u0026rdquo; method, which provided areas of interest for deeper study with the sample group during the \u0026ldquo;Survey\u0026rdquo;. The questionnaire intended to include all steps of common bean production: from input acquisition to sales, both from the farmer and the Association perspective. The questions addressed various aspects, including inputs, seed selection, acquisition and management, farming systems, farmers` current practices, climate change impact, productivity, prices, and market dynamics. The questionnaire was structured as follows:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.2.1 General Description\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThis section gathers basic information about the respondents and their farms, including their location, size, and cultivated area. It also inquiries about land ownership, specifically whether the land is rented, owned, or borrowed. Other information related to labour and investments within their farms, especially in terms of storage areas.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.2.2 Pre-Harvest\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThis section focuses on practices related to seed use, such as the type of seed, the process of obtaining and storing it, and knowledge of its quality and origin. Key questions were about seed variety, germination rate, methods of obtaining seeds (purchased or own-produced), and storage practices.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.2.3 Planting and Crop Maintenance\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThis section explores planting and crop management practices, including land preparation, planting density, planting methods, and whether they rotate crops. It also looks at the use of inputs (fertilizers, pesticides, weed control, and irrigation) and the type of labour used. Key questions focused on land preparation, planting method, crop rotation, types of inputs applied, and use of labour.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.2.4. Post-Harvest\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThis section focuses on bean-handling activities after harvest, such as drying, cleaning, storage, and grain processing. It also addresses potential storage-related challenges, such as losses and the presence of mycotoxins. In this section, key questions included aspects related to drying and processing methods, storage systems, storage-related issues and volume of losses, and knowledge of quality regulations.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.2.5 Marketing\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThis final section of the questionnaire addresses the sale and commercialization of beans, including packaging, sales channels, membership in organized groups, prices received, and satisfaction with the price.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRelevant questions in this final section included those related to sale and packaging methods, buyers, reasons for sale, membership in organized groups, and perception of prices.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.3. Productivity and loss estimations\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEstimations consisted of the calculation of the number of seed sown by the farmers, accounting for the variations in land availability (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Considering their estimated yield according to information provided by the Association, calculations were also conducted (Eq. 1) to determine the expected volume of beans harvested and then compared to the reported harvest.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Taba\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:ExpV=Seed*germination\\:rate-\\%losses\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Eq.\u0026nbsp;1)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003ctfoot\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\"\u003eWhere:\u003cbr\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cdiv name=\"EquationSource\"\u003e$$\\:Exp:expected\\:volume$$\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cdiv name=\"EquationSource\"\u003e$$\\:Seed:volume\\:of\\:seed\\:sown$$\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cdiv name=\"EquationSource\"\u003e$$\\:germination\\:rate:theoretical\\:germination\\:rate\\:for\\:the\\:country\\:and\\:region$$\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cdiv name=\"EquationSource\"\u003e$$\\:\\%losses:expected\\:percentaje\\:along\\:the\\:harvest\\:and\\:processing\\:phases$$\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tfoot\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.4. Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe data collected from farmers were initially analysed based on their own estimates and supplemented with the interview conducted with The Association, which allowed for a deeper understanding of the practices, perceptions, and challenges farmers face in common bean production. These results were then compared with relevant bibliographic references, including optimal agroecological conditions for cultivation and recommended agronomic practices for common bean production and post-harvest handling. Upon completing this analysis, descriptive statistics of farmers and their current practices are presented; we estimated the theoretical economic losses, aligning with Step 4 (Synthesis) of the FAO\u0026apos;s 4S Methodology, and finally analysed links between practices, their produce quality, and their potential increase in productivity.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results and discussion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.1. General description of the case\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMost of the common bean\u0026rsquo;s production in Costa Rica occurs in three socioeconomic regions: Brunca (in the southern part of the country where The Association is located), Chorotega (in the north-Pacific part) and Huetar Norte (in the northern plains of the country). The latest report from the CNP indicates that the majority of the area allocated to common bean production is located in the Brunca Region (total: 5,091 ha), followed by the Huetar Norte Region (total: 3,772 ha) and the Chorotega Region (total: 3,020 ha) (CNP, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe case study consisted of 56 common bean farms with a mean size of 4.71 hectares (SD: 3.61). This is consistent with the fact that the majority (79.6%) of common bean farms in Costa Rica are owned by small-scale farmers with holdings of less than 5 hectares (Valer\u0026iacute;n-Rom\u0026aacute;n, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Most of the farms are leased or owned (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) and are located in Perez Zeled\u0026oacute;n, in the Brunca Region of Costa Rica, which is currently the country\u0026apos;s most representative site for common bean farming.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eType of farm ownership\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eType\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eArea cultivated (ha)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLeased*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLeased and borrowed**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLeased and owner**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBorrowed\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOwned\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e56\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003ctfoot\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\"\u003e*Two farms use 1/4 of the harvest as rent payment / ** They have more than one common bean farm\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tfoot\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMany farmers work alone or with the assistance of a family member. On average, 2.6 people work on the farm on a regular basis. However, an additional 2.9 workers are hired on average during planting and, particularly, harvest seasons. In addition, 91.07% (51) of the farmers utilize warehouses to store their agricultural inputs, ensuring optimal conditions for preservation and accessibility. In contrast, only 8.93% (4 farmers) rely on storing their inputs in a room within their homes.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe farms\u0026apos; traits, such as ownership, labour practices and infrastructure, are relevant to characterise the case. For instance, using borrowed or leased land can reduce farmers\u0026apos; willingness to invest in soil quality treatments and technology, as they lack certainty about having access to the same land for the next harvest (Adesida et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) Consequently, nearly half of the farmers in this study may hesitate to invest in long-term improvements to enhance their farm\u0026rsquo;s productivity and quality. Additionally, when farmers borrow or lease land, they typically pay with their harvest; therefore, when quantifying productivity, farmers deduct a percentage of their harvest, as it is used as payment for the land. Labour may also affect some practices. Seasonal hiring helps manage labour-intensive tasks such as harvest, but limited labour may restrict other time-intensive activities, including pest monitoring, optimal planting density, and weeding, which can impact yield and quality. Additionally, inconsistent labour availability may affect post-harvest handling, which is crucial for maintaining common bean quality. Finally, when present in some farms, proper storage infrastructure may indicate an existing awareness of the benefits of proper storage in preserving the quality of inputs and avoiding potential losses or contamination.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.2. Pre-harvest aspects\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePre-harvest aspects impact food losses in crops like common beans, as they directly influence crop yield, quality, and the plant\u0026apos;s resilience to post-harvest challenges. Some of the most important pre-harvest aspects influencing food losses were inquired about and assessed, including seed quality, agricultural practices (such as pest and disease control and weed management), and weather conditions.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe most used bean varieties by the farmers of the study are Cabecar (red) and Namb\u0026iacute; (black) beans (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). Nambi is resistant to drought, and both have high productivity rates which is partly why farmers and The Association select them. The stability of the grain colour in the Cab\u0026eacute;car variety under different management conditions, locations, planting seasons, and storage practices has led to greater acceptance among farmers and traders. In addition, the technical sheets used by The Association report productivity levels that vary between 1.2 kg/ha and 1.9 kg/ha for Cab\u0026eacute;car and between 0.987 kg/ha (during drought) and 1.871 kg/ha for Namb\u0026iacute;.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNumber of farmers using each variety of common bean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariety\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNumber\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCab\u0026eacute;car\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCabecar y Namb\u0026iacute;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCabecar, Namb\u0026iacute; y Victoria\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCab\u0026eacute;car, Namb\u0026iacute;, Ur\u0026aacute;n\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNamb\u0026iacute;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNamb\u0026iacute; y Generalito\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePaname\u0026ntilde;o\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTequila\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTequila, Namb\u0026iacute; y Brunca\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTequila y Cab\u0026eacute;car\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNR\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e56\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUsing high-quality seeds from known sources (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) is essential for optimum crop yield and quality. In this regard, The Association reports that farmers have encountered low-quality seeds, even when purchasing from formal institutions, such as the National Production Council (CNP), which supplies seeds to farmers. Findings suggest that seeds were mishandled before reaching The Association or the farmers, reducing confidence in seed quality from CNP. Nonetheless, most farmers (80%) continue to use certified seed.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrigin of purchased seeds\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePlace name\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNumber of farmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe Association\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe Association and CNP*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCNP\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOwn seed\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNR\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e56\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCNP: Consejo Nacional de Producci\u0026oacute;n (National Production Council)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe Association has implemented a seed quality program that supplies seeds to its farmers and conducts regular quality tests, though they are not certified for this purpose. As part of this seed quality program, farmers received training to produce better-quality seeds. Among the farmers, the majority (28) both purchase and produce their own seeds, while 14 farmers solely produce seeds, and another 14 exclusively purchase them. Most purchased seeds are sourced from The Association (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, most farmers store their seeds (71.14% or 40 farmers), and a significant majority use certified seeds (80% or 32 farmers).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMost farmers (78.6%) are aware of the germination rate of the seeds they use, with the majority reporting rates above 90% (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). However, 21.4% of farmers are unaware of their seeds\u0026apos; germination rates, which may contribute to unexpectedly low yields and product quality. By being informed about germination rates, farmers should consider a different source in a future cropping season if rates are low, thereby avoiding the delay of 2\u0026ndash;3 months until harvest and realizing reduced yields.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGermination range of the seeds used by the common beans\u0026rsquo; farmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGermination Range\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNumber of farmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercentage (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnknown\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21,4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLess than 70%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3,57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBetween 70% and 79%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1,79\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBetween 80% and 89%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10,71\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMore than 90%*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e57,14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNR\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5,36\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e56\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e100%\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003ctfoot\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\"\u003e* 2 farmers: 95% germination, 3 farmers: 99% germination, 3 farmers: 100% germination. NR: No Response\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tfoot\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAccording to the obtained information, it was observed that The Association manages seeds and beans (stored as a final product for consumption) similarly. On the one hand, this could be positive as it provides special safety standards even for the seeds; however, it is important to consider that The Association mentioned that even when the moisture content is adequate for seeds, the moisture content is above 12%, surpassing the technical recommendation for beans destined for consumption, adding risks for the final product quality and shelf-life. In addition, the samples suggest.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.3. Crop Management\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRegarding the agricultural practices explored in the survey, one farmer uses mechanized planting, 10 use a combination of manual and mechanized methods, and most of them (45 farmers, 80.46%) plant manually. This may lead to variability in planting depth and spacing, which may influence germination rates and plant growth, affecting the yields. All farmers apply agrochemicals for common bean production, adhering to technical recommendations as well as local and Association guidelines. However, over-reliance on manual labour may affect the consistency and timing of applications.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMost farmers (47 farmers, 83.93%) do not use irrigation. Of the nine farmers (16.07%) who do, nearly all (8 farmers) rely on rainwater, while one farmer utilizes a private water source on their farm. Reliance on rain-fed farming makes common bean production and quality highly susceptible to weather conditions, such as drought or irregular rainfall, which can stress plants and lead to lower yields and inferior quality. This could be exacerbated by climate change challenges. In fact, 83.93% (47 farmers) report feeling its effects on common bean production, mainly drought (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEffects of climate change according to the farmers\u0026apos; own perception\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEffects of climate change\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNumber of farmers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDrought\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDrought and excess of water\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExcess of water\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHas not experienced it\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNR\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e56\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIntercropping is another common cropping system (39 farmers), with maize and root/tuber crops (\u0026ntilde;amp\u0026iacute;, tiquizque, ginger, squash, maize). Although sometimes associated with reduced yields compared to monoculture systems (Amani Machiani et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Atuahene-Amankwa \u0026amp;. Michaels, 1997), has shown yield advantages under specific conditions. For instance, a 1:1 intercropping ratio of common bean with potato has been found to outperform the respective monocultures in yield. Moreover, this approach reduces nitrogen (N) inputs to the common bean crop by up to 50% without negatively affecting the soil\u0026apos;s NPK (nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium) balance. The crops mentioned in the survey can enhance soil fertility, help in pest management, and improve resource use efficiency, also contributing to food security and income diversification. However, intercropping can also complicate management practices, such as spacing, weed control, and agrochemical application.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFinally, although fundamental to farming, record-keeping remains a significant challenge in this agricultural sector. Most farmers (66%) mentioned that they do not maintain records. Among those who do, the records primarily cover the purchase, storage, and use of seeds. Only one farmer mentioned employing an accountant to manage all financial matters.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.4. Post-harvest handling aspects and productivity\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePost-harvest practices play a crucial role in the production of common beans. They are essential for enhancing the quality and shelf life, reducing losses, and increasing market acceptance.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.3.1. Harvest and post-harvest handling\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe Association plays a key role in maintaining quality by cleaning the beans and conducting biannual quality assessments (in each harvest season) that evaluate parameters such as moisture content, damage levels, and cooking time. A traceability system is maintained up to the packaging stage, allowing The Association to identify the originating farms in most cases. Although individual farmer assessments are not conducted, The Association groups farmers and performs quality evaluations in separate batches. Clustering similar farmers ensures that the analyses remain relevant and manageable, enabling The Association to address quality concerns directly with the farmers involved.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWhile farmers typically harvest manually and then sun-dry the beans, this process becomes challenging during the rainy season harvest. Consequently, The Association often receives beans with high moisture content (\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;16%), requiring additional drying and processing. This issue can lead to increased losses, as successive cycles of inadequate drying and storage in high-humidity conditions can result in lower-quality beans, including damaged, broken, and infested grains, as well as a higher risk of contamination with mycotoxins. High humidity during storage can create an ideal environment for fungal growth (Caba\u0026ntilde;as, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e) with the potential for mycotoxin production, as well as increasing post-cooking hardness (Caba\u0026ntilde;as, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Wainaina et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) and deteriorating the seed coat, which may make the beans more susceptible to insect infestations (Mng\u0026rsquo;ong\u0026rsquo;o, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) or physical damage, which in turn can facilitate the entry of microorganisms.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWhether at harvest time or due to drying processes, exposure to high temperatures can also cause damage to the grain, thereby creating the need for close monitoring of this operation in the post-harvest phase, which is conducted on farms and by the Association. High temperatures increase the respiration rate (Caba\u0026ntilde;as, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e) and induce physical and chemical transformations that affect the structural integrity and composition of the cell wall (Njoroge et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e), potentially causing cooking issues (Wainaina et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), reducing consumer acceptability, and shortening shelf life. The presence of insects can decrease dry matter content, compromise nutritional quality, and contribute to a higher incidence of fungi and other microorganisms. Furthermore, damaged beans can attract these pests, making removing damaged beans before storage critical. Additionally, these damaged grains can increase respiration rate and, consequently, elevate storage temperature (Caba\u0026ntilde;as, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.3.2. Storage and quality control\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe Association limits storage time to a maximum of six months. If the product is to exceed the storage period of three months within their facilities under ambient conditions, it is transferred to a cold storage facility at Cerro de la Muerte, a location in one of the mountainous areas of the country, where temperatures range from 15 to 16\u0026deg;C. In the past, they encountered handling challenges during storage that led to product losses. To reduce waste, they now sell lower-quality beans (e.g. damage and broken grains as defined by the applicable Technical Norm, \u003cem\u003eReglamento t\u0026eacute;cnico: RTCR:384: Fr\u0026iacute;jol en Grano\u003c/em\u003e) for alternative uses. Such practices would include added-value techniques, such as refried or pureed bean products, ensuring the product remains useful and minimizing waste.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNonetheless, it is important to consider that lower-quality beans may not be suitable for human consumption if contaminated with mycotoxins; therefore, they become unfit even for processed products. Mycotoxins are highly toxic substances classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as Group 1 human carcinogens. Additionally, they can cause allergies and organ toxicity. The severity of their effects depends on the level of exposure, as well as their mutagenic and teratogenic properties (R. Khan et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). These substances represent a significant safety concern that can exacerbate food losses and directly impact food security. To address this issue, The Association conducts mycotoxin analyses for total aflatoxins (the only regulated mycotoxin in the country) on the produce twice a year and they indicate that they have never had contaminated grains in the past.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGiven that grain quality is a crucial factor affecting losses in common bean production, we also assessed the farmers awareness of Costa Rican regulatory standards for these purposes (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab6\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 6\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNumber of farmers that know legal regulations in Costa Rica related to grains quality and mycotoxins for common bean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eY/N\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eQuality-related regulations\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMycotoxins\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e42\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEven when knowing about quality standards, many farmers remain unaware of the country\u0026apos;s legal regulations, particularly regarding mycotoxins. This lack of knowledge may affect their ability to manage grain quality effectively and to reduce potential losses associated with mycotoxin contamination. To mitigate these risks, it is essential for farmers and The Association to become properly aware of regulations and manage adequate handling and infrastructure for proper storage. Farmers should carefully consider harvest timing, ensure rapid drying of the beans, and store them under optimal conditions to maintain quality over extended periods (Neme and Mohammed \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.5. Market conditions\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRegarding the buying/selling mechanisms, most farmers use The Association as their source of inputs and their only buyer. Of the 56 surveyed farmers, 54 sell their produce to The Association, while only 2 indicate selling it to other parties. The average price currently paid to farmers is 40,190 \u003cem\u003ecolones\u003c/em\u003e per 46 kg quintal (78.16 dollars \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;514 \u003cem\u003ecolones\u003c/em\u003e per dollar: exchange rate 16.10.23). The vast majority indicated that the price they receive is 40,000 \u003cem\u003ecolones\u003c/em\u003e, with some fluctuations between 35,000 and 43,000 \u003cem\u003ecolones\u003c/em\u003e. On average, the minimum price received is 36,000 and the maximum is 43,886. The level of satisfaction among farmers with these prices is 64.6% (3.23 out of 5 as the maximum on a 5-value scale). The Association sells the final product (packaged beans) to supermarkets and similar businesses, with which they must negotiate pricing.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrom 1990 to 2019, basic grains experienced a 66.5% contraction in the national market (Gollin, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). This decline has driven significant shifts in agricultural production within Costa Rica. Although beans are one of the main ingredients of the Costa Rican diet, the majority of beans consumed are imported due to the higher cost of domestic production compared to imported alternatives. Farmers, on average, receive approximately 869.59 \u003cem\u003ecolones\u003c/em\u003e per kilogram (1.69 dollars), while consumers pay around 1,875 \u003cem\u003ecolones\u003c/em\u003e (3.65 dollars)\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e. Consequently, the added value within the supply chain is concentrated in its later stages, with 45\u0026ndash;50% of consumer price added to the farmer\u0026acute;s price.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.6. Common bean production yields and losses\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn the agricultural sector, productivity plays a crucial role, not only as a key driver of profitability but also as a cornerstone for ensuring the long-term sustainability of the production system (Gollin, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Lankoski \u0026amp; Thiem, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Higher productivity allows farmers to maximize resource use, increase yields, and remain competitive, while also promoting sustainable practices that safeguard the environment and ensure the viability of agricultural activities for future generations.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConsidering the data from official sources that indicate yields are higher in the Huetar Norte Region in which the average production was 1.2 t/ha in 2022\u0026ndash;2023 compared to 0.7 t/ha in Brunca Region and 0.96 t/ha in Chorotega Region (CNP, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), and data obtained during the survey phase of the study, we estimated the yields (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e) to better understand productivity dynamics in bean production from our case study.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab7\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 7\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEstimation of yields\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHarvest\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean (min-max)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandard deviation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHarvested area (ha)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.46 (1\u0026ndash;13)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBeans harvested (t)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.54 (0.69\u0026ndash;9.20)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBeans harvested (t/ha)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.76 (0-1.75)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.38\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWorldwide, according to data from FAO, the average bean productivity is 1.5 t/ha, which means common bean farmers in Costa Rican have a very large gap for improvement. According to available data and the applied survey, three estimations of losses are presented ahead:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cul\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHarvest losses: Farmers plant, on average, 38.62 kg/ha of beans (seeds); however, results indicate high fluctuations in this amount, accounting for 11.5 kg/ha to 112 kg/ha. Costa Rican technical recommendation from the Ministry of Agriculture indicated an average of 0.7 ton/ha. In this regard, farmers are losing \u003cstrong\u003e31.38 kg/ha (as an opportunity cost).\u003c/strong\u003e The average yield is expected to be 0.9 ton/ha. Nonetheless, these results indicate the average yield is 0.76 ton/ha, meaning a potential 0.14 ton/ha is lost.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePost-harvest losses: The Association estimates that rejection rates are around 25\u0026ndash;30%; however, in the first harvest of the year (dry season), they could be much lower. Fluctuations between the dry and wet seasons regarding productivity and management can result in substantially different losses.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDuring storage losses: common beans are a food characterized by their low moisture content, a robust seed coat that protects them from external factors, and a reduced respiration rate, which makes them a relatively stable product with a longer shelf life compared to other food groups, such as fruits and vegetables. However, this product can be affected by factors such as relative humidity, temperature, cleanliness, ventilation, and the presence of pests in storage areas (Caba\u0026ntilde;as, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Proper management of these factors is crucial to ensuring greater stability and, consequently, a consistent supply of beans that are safe, nutritious, and of acceptable cooking quality (Wainaina et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/li\u003e\n \u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec21\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.7. Synthesis: analysis and possible approaches\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFood loss symptoms expressed as low-quality product, decreased yield and discarded mass are often due to a deeper-rooted cause. Therefore, the findings from the survey were analysed in light of the observed symptoms and real causes and reasons as suggested by FAO (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e), namely technological, organizational, infrastructural and capacity-type (skill) causes, and reasons related to investment, policy, and contextual aspects (underdevelopment, culture, gender). These set the base for possible approaches on three main critical areas, qualitatively identified during the development of the research, such as agricultural practices, storage and traceability, and economic aspects.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec22\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.5.1. Agricultural practices:\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTechnology plays a crucial role in the direction of agricultural practices towards overall sustainability, including the reduction of food losses(N. Khan et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003er et al., 2021; Santiteerakul et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Observed limitations regarding seed quality selection, sowing density, cultural practices and final common beans output suggest that certain improvements in the productive technology applied by the farmers can result in increased productivity and decreases losses.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTraceability and quality control are other aspects to observe, and improvement opportunities can become real since the Association already has quality analysis in practice. In this sense, closer traceability and record-keeping per farmer, as well as a standardization process for their current seed production area, can help them reduce risks or deviations from the close-to-ideal standards.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec23\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.5.2. Storage conditions:\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSeveral causes are observed in this regard, especially those related to skills (knowledge in this case) and technology, since farmers are not fully aware of implications and regulations regarding mycotoxins and the drying process is still heterogeneous. In contrast, the fact that the farmers operate within a cooperative scheme (The Association) that has storage facilities of their own or access in a cooler location poses an opportunity within the organizational and infrastructural scopes.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConsidering the issues related to the quality, safety, and acceptability of beans for the final consumer concerning storage, it is essential to start with clean, fresh, dry, and properly selected beans to ensure that no damaged grains are present. It is highly recommended to control the internal moisture content of the beans, ideally between 13\u0026ndash;14% (Caba\u0026ntilde;as, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e); however, according to Technical Regulation RTCR 384:2004 on Dry Beans in Costa Rica, a maximum moisture content of 16% is allowed. Other key factors to control include temperature and relative humidity in storage. Caba\u0026ntilde;as (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e) suggests keeping temperatures below 20\u0026deg;C, with 15\u0026deg;C being ideal to reduce the respiration rate; however, temperatures below 10\u0026deg;C are also recommended (Mng\u0026apos;ong\u0026apos;o, 2023). The relative humidity should be maintained at or below 40% (Caba\u0026ntilde;as, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSome storage alternatives in this regard, such as bulk storage in bags made from natural fibres (such as jute), can help absorb moisture, as these materials are porous, allow respiration, and manage temperature fluctuations (Caba\u0026ntilde;as, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). However, packaging must also ensure that the product is protected and isolated, preventing direct contact with contaminants or pests. Proper inventory rotation and labelling are essential to apply the first-in, first-out (FIFO) method. Finally, storage conditions must adhere to good manufacturing practices: the storage area should be dry, ventilated, clean, illuminated, and organized, with products stacked on pallets 15 cm above the floor, 50 cm from walls, and 1.5 m below the ceiling, allowing for air circulation, personnel movement, and preventing contact with surfaces that may be moist or contaminated. Active pest control must also be implemented, with fumigation using products recommended for the food industry, ideally before new batches enter, and continuous cleaning processes thereafter (Mng\u0026apos;ong\u0026apos;o, 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec24\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.5.3. Economic aspects:\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers are often unaware of market dynamics. Their sole contact \u0026ldquo;out of the farm\u0026rdquo; is The Association and other farmers. Belonging to The Association is perceived as a way of security and \u003cem\u003estatus quo\u003c/em\u003e. When asking them why they sell their harvest to The Association a recurrent answer was \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ebecause that`s the way it has always been\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;. These farmers are considered price-takers and the market \u0026ldquo;dictates\u0026rdquo; the average price they will receive. In this regard, farmers are not expected to learn about market dynamics. However, the lack of governmental incentives was often mentioned when asked about other issues they commonly face. Currently, farmers face a punitive system: they get price discounts for low quality. However, farmers are loyal to The Association and better prices for better quality could have an impact on productivity and losses.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn addition to each alternative, reasons behind detected causes, as well as potential socioenvironmental impacts, should be considered. For instance, drying machinery for storage is not considered in this case due to higher energy consumption (with environmental and economic implications) and a potential disruption from traditional sun-drying, which, with adequate skills, can be fit as well. In any of the proposed approaches, further analysis of the investment, the applicable legislation and as well as the conditions of the local context and farmer livelihoods shall be considered. In this regard, policy interventions are critical to trigger specific areas of attention, whether it represents the opening of financial aids but also the application of technical support and transference to farmers (individually or associated).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe diagnostic assessment of common bean farmers highlights essential insights into their cultivation practices and challenges, suggesting that the application of the FAO\u0026rsquo;s 4S methodology is useful as a first assessment to introduce the discussion and interventions for food loss reduction. Following an approach that first screens the crop context and helps tailor the survey section is useful to obtain reliable and relevant information for further steps.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFindings from this case study indicate that farmers generally rely on traditional and non-standardised methods, which contribute to productivity gaps and low levels of technological adoption. The Association\u0026rsquo;s productivity averages around 0,7 tons per hectare, substantially below the global average of 1,5 tons per hectare. Disparities in technical knowledge are also evident, particularly in post-harvest management. While The Association monitors key quality indicators, such as seed purity, mycotoxin levels, moisture content, and cooking quality, many farmers are unfamiliar with these technical standards, underscoring the need for enhanced training and support.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA significant source of losses stems from inadequate moisture management, which most producers gauge by experience rather than through precise monitoring; only The Association actively measures grain moisture levels. Climate change adds further complications, with unpredictable patterns of excessive rainfall and drought emerging as primary concerns for farmers. Additionally, there is limited trust in seeds provided by the National Production Council (CNP), leading The Association to establish its own seed propagation program, creating a dependency-driven relationship with farmers.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRaising awareness about the implications of losses is crucial for farmers, as it encourages them to recognize the long-term effects of these losses on their operations and the environment. When farmers understand the environmental and economic losses associated with food loss, they are more likely to take proactive steps to identify and improve the practices that contribute to these losses, ultimately leading to more sustainable and efficient production processes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile the quality and visible losses of common bean are evident, it is equally important to emphasize education on less apparent issues, such as the presence of mycotoxins. These toxic compounds, which can develop under poor storage conditions, represent a significant yet often overlooked health risk. Without increased awareness and the implementation of regular monitoring and studies, the potential dangers associated with mycotoxins may go unaddressed, undermining both food safety and public health efforts. Strengthening educational initiatives and promoting periodic evaluations are essential to mitigate these risks and ensure the quality of common bean production.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, common bean production in the Brunca region of Costa Rica is more than just a commercial activity, it is a vital livelihood and an integral part of farmers' lives. To support these farmers, the adoption of improved management practices is essential for reducing losses, enhancing economic well-being, and promoting better health outcomes. Furthermore, such advancements are critical for ensuring access to nutritious food and strengthening food security.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u0026nbsp;All participants involved in this study provided informed consent to participate. The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the appropriate ethics committee of the University, which granted a waiver of written consent given the nature of the interviews and the low-risk profile of the research\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors would like to thank all participants in the survey phase, experts, technical staff and the Board of Directors of The Association.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor contribution\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConceptualization: [Mercedes Montero-Vega]; Methodology: [Mercedes Montero-Vega, Carolina Herrera-Gonz\u0026aacute;lez, Laura Patricia Brenes-Peralta]; Formal analysis and investigation: [Mercedes Montero-Vega, Maria Vinas, Carolina Herrera-Gonz\u0026aacute;lez, Laura Patricia Brenes-Peralta, Stefanny Campos-Boza]; Writing - original draft preparation: [Mercedes Montero-Vega, Maria Vinas, Carolina Herrera-Gonz\u0026aacute;lez, Laura Patricia Brenes-Peralta, Andr\u0026eacute;s Antonio Monge Vargas, Stefanny Campos-Boza], Writing - review and editing: [Mercedes Montero-Vega, Maria Vinas, Laura Patricia Brenes-Peralta, Andr\u0026eacute;s Antonio Monge Vargas, Stefanny Campos-Boza]; Funding acquisition: [Mercedes Montero-Vega]; Supervision: [Mercedes Montero-Vega].\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding sources\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVicerrector\u0026iacute;a de Investigaci\u0026oacute;n. Universidad de Costa Rica, Project C4316\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAdesida, I. E., Nkomoki, W., Bavorova, M., \u0026amp; Madaki, M. Y. (2021). Effects of Agricultural Programmes and Land Ownership on the Adoption of Sustainable Agricultural Practices in Nigeria. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e(13), 7249. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137249\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAmani Machiani, M., Rezaei-Chiyaneh, E., Javanmard, A., Maggi, F., \u0026amp; Morshedloo, M. R. (2019). Evaluation of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) seed yield and quali-quantitative production of the essential oils from fennel (Foeniculum vulgare Mill.) and dragonhead (Dracocephalum moldavica L.) in intercropping system under humic acid application. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Cleaner Production\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e235\u003c/em\u003e, 112\u0026ndash;122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.241\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAtuahene-Amankwa, G., \u0026amp;. Michaels, T. E. (1997). Genetic variances, heritabilities and genetic correlations of grain yield, harvest index and yield components for common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) in sole crop and in maize/bean intercrop. \u003cem\u003eCan. J. Plant Sci.\u003c/em\u003e 177.93.26.7\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBatziakas, K. G., Stanley, H., Batziakas, A. G., Brecht, J. K., Rivard, C. L., \u0026amp; Pliakoni, E. D. (2020). Reducing postharvest food losses in organic spinach with the implementation of high tunnel production systems. \u003cem\u003eAgronomy for Sustainable Development\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e40\u003c/em\u003e(6), 42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-020-00648-x\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBitocchi, E., Nanni, L., Bellucci, E., Rossi, M., Giardini, A., Zeuli, P. S., Logozzo, G., Stougaard, J., McClean, P., Attene, G., \u0026amp; Papa, R. (2012). Mesoamerican origin of the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is revealed by sequence data. \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e109\u003c/em\u003e(14), E788\u0026ndash;E796. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1108973109\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCaba\u0026ntilde;as. (2014). \u003cem\u003ePostcosecha del grano de frijol. Pr\u0026aacute;cticas alternativas para su manejo\u003c/em\u003e. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.undp.org/sites/g/files/zskgke326/files/migration/cu/Postcosecha-del-grano-de-frijol.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCarbas, B., Machado, N., Oppolzer, D., Ferreira, L., Queiroz, M., Brites, C., Rosa, E. A., \u0026amp; Barros, A. I. (2020). Nutrients, Antinutrients, Phenolic Composition, and Antioxidant Activity of Common Bean Cultivars and their Potential for Food Applications.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAntioxidants\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox9020186\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eChac\u0026oacute;n-Ord\u0026oacute;\u0026ntilde;ez, T., Campos-Boza, S., Gamboa-Moreno, P., Chaves-Barrantes, N. F., \u0026amp; Acosta-Montoya, \u0026Oacute;. (2024). Frijol (\u003cem\u003ePhaseolus vulgaris\u003c/em\u003e L.) endurecido y alternativas tecnol\u0026oacute;gicas para su aprovechamiento en la industria alimentaria.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAgronom\u0026iacute;a Mesoamericana\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e35\u003c/em\u003e((Especial):59614), 20. https://doi.org/10.15517/am.2024.59614\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eChauhan, C., Dhir, A., Akram, M. U., \u0026amp; Salo, J. (2021). Food loss and waste in food supply chains. A systematic literature review and framework development approach. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Cleaner Production\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e295\u003c/em\u003e, 126438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126438\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCNP. (2023). \u003cem\u003eAn\u0026aacute;lisis y Monitoreo de Mercado: Frijol Rojo y Negro\u003c/em\u003e (Bolet\u0026iacute;n N\u003csup\u003eo\u003c/sup\u003e01; p. 13). Consejo Nacional de Producci\u0026oacute;n.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eEl-Beltagi, H. S., Parmar, A., Chen, T., \u0026amp; El-Mogy, M. M. (2023). Editorial: Advances in pre- and postharvest applications to reduce qualitative and quantitative food loss and waste. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Plant Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1149358\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eEllis, E., Kwofie, E. M., \u0026amp; Ngadi, M. (2020). Economic and nutritional implications of losses and contributing factors along the bean value chain. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Stored Products Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e87\u003c/em\u003e, 101582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspr.2020.101582\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eEstado de la Nacion. (2020). \u003cem\u003ePograma Estado de la Naci\u0026oacute;n Estado de la Naci\u0026oacute;n 2020: / Programa Estado de la Naci\u0026oacute;n,\u003c/em\u003e. Consejo Nacional de Rectores. \u0026ndash; San Jos\u0026eacute;, C.R.\u0026nbsp;: CONARE - PEN, 2020. 210 p\u0026nbsp;: 28 cm (Informe Estado de la Naci\u0026oacute;n\u0026nbsp;; 26-2020) ISBN 978-9930-540-68-8 impreso ISBN 978-9930-540-69-5 digital.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFAO. (2014). Food Loss Analysis: Causes and Solutions Case studies in the Small-scale Agriculture and Fisheries Subsectors. \u003cem\u003eSave Food: Global Initative on Food Loss and Waste Reduction\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eStrategic Objective 4, Output 2.2, Activity 1.2\u003c/em\u003e, 32.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFAO. (2016). \u003cem\u003eFood Losses and Wastein Latin America and the Caribbean\u003c/em\u003e. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/5569e764-205c-4165-9251-1cbc78f7e0fb/content#:~:text=It%20is%20estimated%20that%20the,achieve%20the%20Sustainable%20Development%20Goals.\u0026amp;text=FAO%20has%20been%20urging%20global,forces%20and%20setting%20common%20goals.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFAO. (2023). \u003cem\u003eLatin America and the Caribbean\u0026mdash;Regional Overview of Food Security and Nutrition 2023\u003c/em\u003e. https://openknowledge.fao.org/items/d5796653-42c5-4de3-915b-a4d58c1308c9\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFAO. (2024). \u003cem\u003e12.3.1 Global food losses | SDG Indicators Data Portal\u003c/em\u003e. SDGIndicators. https://www.fao.org/sustainable-development-goals-data-portal/data/indicators/1231-global-food-losses/en\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGollin, D. (2010). Chapter 73 Agricultural Productivity and Economic Growth. In \u003cem\u003eHandbook of Agricultural Economics\u003c/em\u003e (Vol. 4, pp. 3825\u0026ndash;3866). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0072(09)04073-0\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGurikar, C., Shivaprasad, D. P., Sabill\u0026oacute;n, L., Nanje Gowda, N. A., \u0026amp; Siliveru, K. (2023). Impact of mycotoxins and their metabolites associated with food grains. \u003cem\u003eGrain \u0026amp; Oil Science and Technology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1\u0026ndash;9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaost.2022.10.001\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKhan, N., Ray, R. L., Sargani, G. R., Ihtisham, M., Khayyam, M., \u0026amp; Ismail, S. (2021). Current Progress and Future Prospects of Agriculture Technology: Gateway to Sustainable Agriculture. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e(9), Article 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094883\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKhan, R., Anwar, F., \u0026amp; Ghazali, F. M. (2024). A comprehensive review of mycotoxins: Toxicology, detection, and effective mitigation approaches. \u003cem\u003eHeliyon\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(8). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e28361\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eK\u0026ouml;r, B., Krawczyk, A., \u0026amp; Wakkee, I. (2021). Addressing food loss and waste prevention. \u003cem\u003eBritish Food Journal\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e124\u003c/em\u003e(8), 2434\u0026ndash;2460. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-05-2021-0571\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKumar, D., \u0026amp; Kalita, P. (2017). Reducing Postharvest Losses during Storage of Grain Crops to Strengthen Food Security in Developing Countries. \u003cem\u003eFoods\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods6010008\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLankoski, J., \u0026amp; Thiem, A. (2020). Linkages between agricultural policies, productivity and environmental sustainability. \u003cem\u003eEcological Economics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e178\u003c/em\u003e, 106809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106809\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMannaa, M., \u0026amp; Kim, K. D. (2017). Influence of Temperature and Water Activity on Deleterious Fungi and Mycotoxin Production during Grain Storage. \u003cem\u003eMycobiology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e45\u003c/em\u003e(4), 240\u0026ndash;254. https://doi.org/10.5941/MYCO.2017.45.4.240\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMatumba, L., Namaumbo, S., Ngoma, T., Meleke, N., De Boevre, M., Logrieco, A. F., \u0026amp; De Saeger, S. (2021). Five keys to prevention and control of mycotoxins in grains: A proposal. \u003cem\u003eGlobal Food Security\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e30\u003c/em\u003e, 100562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2021.100562\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMengistu, H. K. (2022). Abiotic and Biotic Stress Factors Affecting Storage of Legumes in Tropics. In \u003cem\u003eLegumes Research\u0026mdash;Volume 1\u003c/em\u003e. IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.99413\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMng\u0026rsquo;ong\u0026rsquo;o, M. (2023). Assessment of maize and beans storage insect pest in major grain markets, Morogoro-Tanzania. \u003cem\u003eSaudi Journal of Biological Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e30\u003c/em\u003e(1), 103491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2022.103491\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eNeme, K., \u0026amp; Mohammed, A. (2017). Mycotoxin occurrence in grains and the role of postharvest management as a mitigation strategies. A review. \u003cem\u003eFood Control\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e78\u003c/em\u003e, 412\u0026ndash;425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2017.03.012\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eNjoroge, D. M., Kinyanjui, P. K., Makokha, A. O., Christiaens, S., Shpigelman, A., Sila, D. N., \u0026amp; Hendrickx, M. E. (2014). Extraction and characterization of pectic polysaccharides from easy- and hard-to-cook common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). \u003cem\u003eFood Research International (Ottawa, Ont.)\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e64\u003c/em\u003e, 314\u0026ndash;322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2014.06.044\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePerera, D., Devkota, L., Garnier, G., Panozzo, J., \u0026amp; Dhital, S. (2023). Hard-to-cook phenomenon in common legumes: Chemistry, mechanisms and utilisation. \u003cem\u003eFood Chemistry\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e415\u003c/em\u003e, 135743. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2023.135743\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSantiteerakul, S., Sopadang, A., Yaibuathet Tippayawong, K., \u0026amp; Tamvimol, K. (2020). The Role of Smart Technology in Sustainable Agriculture: A Case Study of Wangree Plant Factory.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(11), Article 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114640\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSemanario Universidad. (2022, September 14). \u003cem\u003eCosta Rica est\u0026aacute; entre los pa\u0026iacute;ses m\u0026aacute;s dependientes de la importaci\u0026oacute;n de granos b\u0026aacute;sicos\u003c/em\u003e. https://semanariouniversidad.com/pais/costa-rica-esta-entre-los-paises-mas-dependientes-de-la-importacion-de-granos-basicos/\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSEPSA. (2023). \u003cem\u003eBolet\u0026iacute;n Estad\u0026iacute;stico Agropecuario.\u003c/em\u003e (Bolet\u0026iacute;n Estad\u0026iacute;stico Agropecuario. Serie Cronol\u0026oacute;gica 2019-2022; Edici\u0026oacute;n N\u0026deg; 33). https://www.mag.go.cr/bibliotecavirtual/BEA-0033.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eStrecker, K., Bitzer, V., \u0026amp; Kruijssen, F. (2022). Critical stages for post-harvest losses and nutrition outcomes in the value chains of bush beans and nightshade in Uganda. \u003cem\u003eFood Security\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e(2), 411\u0026ndash;426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-021-01244-x\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eUebersax, M. A., Cichy, K. A., Gomez, F. E., Porch, T. G., Heitholt, J., Osorno, J. M., Kamfwa, K., Snapp, S. S., \u0026amp; Bales, S. (2023). Dry beans ( L.) as a vital component of sustainable agriculture and food security\u0026mdash;A review. \u003cem\u003eLegume Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e(1), e155. https://doi.org/10.1002/leg3.155\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eValer\u0026iacute;n-Rom\u0026aacute;n, J. E. (2019). \u003cem\u003eInforme situacional granos b\u0026aacute;sicos 2012-2019: Frijol-maiz\u003c/em\u003e (p. 116). Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganader\u0026iacute;a. https://www.mag.go.cr/bibliotecavirtual/E16-11088.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eVargas, A., Watler, W., Morales, M., \u0026amp; Vignola, R. (2018). \u003cem\u003ePr\u0026aacute;cticas efectivas para la reducci\u0026oacute;n de impactos por eventos clim\u0026aacute;ticos en Costa Rica: Cultivo de frijol\u003c/em\u003e (p. 79). CATEI, MINAE, DCC. Adaptation Fund, Fundecooperaci\u0026oacute;n. https://www.mag.go.cr/bibliotecavirtual/F01-8160.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWainaina, I., Wafula, E., Kyomugasho, C., Sila, D., \u0026amp; Hendrickx, M. (2023). Application of state diagrams to understand the nature and kinetics of (bio)chemical reactions in dry common bean seeds: A scientific guide to establish suitable postharvest storage conditions. \u003cem\u003eFood Research International\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e173\u003c/em\u003e, 113418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2023.113418\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Footnotes","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e 3. Step 3 (sampling) was not considered since our research was based on a direct survey to farmers and their reported losses and not on in-site loss quantification.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Beans are usually sold to consumers in 800gram bags, with an average price of 1500 colones. Therefore, the estimation of a kilogram of beans was calculated.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":false,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-food","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"discoverfood","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Food](https://www.springer.com/44187)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Discover Food","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"food loss, productivity, sustainable practices, postharvest, yield","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6506290/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6506290/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eFood loss in common bean production is a significant issue that impacts productivity, sustainability, and food security. Despite its importance, dedicated research on the diagnosis of specific farming practices that contribute to these losses and their impact on smallholder bean farmers in the Latin American context is still limited. This study addresses this gap by examining the practices of 56 common bean farmers from a characteristic productive area in Costa Rica and conducting in-depth interviews with their farmers' association representatives, following part of the 4S FAO Methodology for food loss assessment. Our findings reveal that low levels of mechanisation and limited adoption of modern technologies are widespread, restricting productivity and exacerbating post-harvest losses. Furthermore, while some farmers invest minimally in cultivation, they persist in growing beans due to their dual role as a cash crop and a food security staple. Intercropping is a prevalent practice among these farmers, and storage challenges, such as heterogeneous humidity levels, often lead to postharvest losses and increased risk of mycotoxin contamination. These insights underscore the need for interventions to enhance access to mechanisation, promote the adoption of technologies, and provide incentives for improving productivity. Addressing these factors is crucial for reducing food loss and promoting sustainable food security in regions that rely heavily on common bean production. The proposed approach and methodology application could be useful for similar cases in the region, where diagnosis should be a first step for pertinent interventions.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Farmers’ practices on common beans production: a path towards food loss reduction and food security improvement in Costa Rica","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-04-25 05:32:02","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6506290/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2025-05-19T14:53:29+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-05-10T12:46:27+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-05-10T12:42:57+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Discover Food","date":"2025-04-22T16:47:37+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-food","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"discoverfood","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Food](https://www.springer.com/44187)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Discover Food","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"4f60756d-61a6-4dcd-8396-9a14c0e73449","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 25th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-12-26T07:08:49+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-04-25 05:32:02","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6506290","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6506290","identity":"rs-6506290","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}