Explore
Flagship studies, sector briefs, and recurring reports, by topic.
Long-form data narratives that walk through an argument.
Recurring advisor series, from weekly reads to annual reviews.
The daily policy prescription, generated each morning.
Seven sector deep-dives: banking, trade, energy, agriculture, and more.
Ask the corpus: answers grounded in published work, with citations.
Grounding verified
~30% loss across rice + perishables; cold-chain absent
Bangladesh loses roughly 30 percent of its harvest across rice and perishables after the crop leaves the field, and cold-chain capacity is effectively absent. That is the core finding in the curated assessment, and it reframes the food-security problem. The country spends heavily to raise yields at the farm gate, then forfeits close to a third of that production to spoilage, rough handling, poor drying, inadequate storage, and the lack of refrigerated transport for perishables. Every tonne lost after harvest is a tonne that was already irrigated, fertilized, and labored over, so the loss is far more expensive than the same tonne never grown.
This matters now because post-harvest loss is a structural, regime-level problem, not a one-season shock. The cheapest additional food supply available to Bangladesh is not a marginal yield increase; it is the food already produced and currently wasted. Recovering even part of the roughly 30 percent loss would expand effective supply without a single new acre, while raising the income farmers actually realize. The absence of cold-chain is the single most binding gap on the perishables side, where the loss converts directly into farmer income destroyed and consumer prices inflated.
Start with the survey (Action 1): without a stage-specific baseline, spending risks landing in the wrong place, and the roughly 30 percent headline cannot be managed. In parallel, move on drying and on-farm storage (Action 2), the lowest-cost, fastest-payback intervention and the one extension already has the reach to deliver. The survey unlocks Action 3 by identifying exactly which clusters justify cold-chain investment, so capital is committed only where perishable volume and loss are highest. Actions 4 and 5 (food-stock alignment and the national target) are set up in year one and reported on from year two onward.
Cold-chain is capital intensive and energy dependent; fiscal space is the binding constraint, which is why the design leans on co-operative and private operation with public funds limited to de-risking, not owning, the assets. Coordination is the second constraint: responsibility spans MoA, the Ministry of Food, the Rural Development and Co-operatives Division, and the extension and research bodies, so without a single accountable owner the programme fragments. Politically, post-harvest loss lacks the visibility of a yield announcement, so sustaining funding requires a hard, published loss number that ministers can be held to.
Roughly 30 percent of Bangladesh's rice and perishables are lost after harvest while cold-chain remains absent, making recovered food the cheapest supply the country can add. The Ministry of Agriculture should measure the loss precisely, fix low-cost drying and storage first, and build cold-chain only where the survey proves it pays.
The figures and responsible bodies cited in this prescription are drawn from the platform's own data and the GovTwin registry listed below.
Drafted by an Opus writer grounded in the facts above. Where the prescription cites a figure, it is drawn from those facts. The diagnosis derives from the BDPolicyLab crisis taxonomy; the responsible body and budget from the GovTwin registry. Recommended actions are the think tank's policy judgment.