Aflatoxin Country Assessment for Nigeria Abt Associates, Inc. November 5, 2012

Aflatoxin Country Assessment for Nigeria

Abt Associates, Inc.

November 5, 2012

Abt Associates | pg 2

Objectives of the Country Assessment in Nigeria

To characterize the risks and economic impacts of aflatoxin contamination…

…and to identify promising opportunities for control.


A Conceptual Framework for Aflatoxin Country Assessment

Identify Key Crops of Concern

High Production High Consumption High Value

Step

1

Determine Prevalence of Aflatoxin

Geographical area of Concern Percent Contamination Degree of Contamination

Step

2

Characterize Risks of Aflatoxin Contamination and Exposure

Uses of Crop Risks along Value Chain

Step

3

Estimate Economic Impacts

Agriculture and Food Security Trade

Step

4 Health

Identify Opportunities for Aflatoxin Control

Institutional, Legal and Regulatory Review Control Strategies in Agriculture Trade and Health

Step 5


Data Sources Nigeria 2010-2011 General Household Panel Survey

(part of LSMS-ISA)

Field Research in three locations from different agro-ecological zones – Mokwa, Niger, Lokoja Kogi, Ondo State

– Interviews in district capital

– Interviews in rural areas

Secondary Data


Aflatoxin PrevalenceGroundnuts

Region Sample Type B1 or Total Prevalencea

Mean Concentrationb

(ppb)

Range (ppb)

Citation Number

Humid Forestk Roasted Total - 23,290-61,240p - 8

Boiled Total - 30,740-54,830p - 8

Raw Total - 42,240-64,520p - 8

Derived Savannahm At market Total - 31.5q - 9

Peanut cake B1 - - 20-455 10

Southern Guinea Savannahn At market B1 100% 78h 74.03-

82.12 11

Nigeria Peanut cake B1 100%d - 2,820 (high) 12

Nigeria Peanut cake Total 100%o - 12

Nigeria At market B1 - 15.75r 7-24 9

Step2


Key Crops of Concern Maize: third largest in quantity and value, after yams and

cassava

Groundnuts: highest reported aflatoxin contamination

Among key cereals: maize has higher concentration of aflatoxins

Yams

Cassava

Groundnuts

(sh...

Rice, p

addyMaize

Millet

Sorghum

Cashew(sh

ell)0

5,000,00010,000,00015,000,00020,000,00025,000,00030,000,00035,000,00040,000,000

$0

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

$3,000,000

$4,000,000

$5,000,000

$6,000,000

$7,000,000

Production (MT)

Production (Int $1000)

Data Source: CountrySTAT, Y ear, 2010

Step1


Aflatoxin B1 Prevalence in Groundnuts


Aflatoxin B1 Prevalence in Maize


Region Sample Type B1 or Total Prevalencea Mean

Concentrationb (ppb)Range (ppb)

Citation Number

Maize

Humid Forest Pre-harvest B1 18% 22 3-130 1

Pre-harvest Total 18% 28 3-138 1

Stored maize Total - 45e 0-900 2

Derived Savannah Stored maize B1 64% 267.32f 0-1,722 3

Weaning foodc B1 - 2,433g - 4Southern Guinea Savannah Stored maize Total - 56e 0-617 2

Stored maize B1 72% 299.6f 0-1,874 3Northern Guinea Savannah Stored maize Total 0% 0h 0 2

Stored maize B1 20% 1.5f 0-8 3

Southern & Northern Guinea Savannah Freshly harvested Total 17%d 36i 1.1-480 5

Mid-altitude Stored maize Total - 83.8e 0-1,380 2

Sudan Savannah Stored maize Total - 75.6e 0-1,506 2

Nigeria Maize-based gruel Total 25% - 0.002-19.716 6

Nigeria Corn snacks Total - 55-233j 10-1,070 7


Characterization of Risks Risks of aflatoxin on country’s agriculture and food

security, trade and/or health sector determined by:

– (1) uses of contaminated crop (domestic human consumption, international trade, or feed;

– (2) levels of awareness about aflatoxins and aflatoxin control among farmers, traders, and consumers;

– (3) the application of tolerances and types of actions taken by regulators and buyers to mitigate the risk.

Step3


Uses of Maize and Groundnut

Production

Own Consumption Sale to Market

Market Loss Discarded grain Reduced prices Litigation

Human Health Impact Disease burden Reduced productivity

Market Loss Reduced milk productivity Livestock disease burden Reduced prices of products Discarded products.

Contaminated Livestock Products

Livestock Feed

Contaminated Products

Majority of maize is for direct human consumption.

2010/11: 78% human consumption, 17% feed and residual uses, small % set aside for re-planting (USDA/FAS).

Avg farming households report selling 41%, keeping 10 % for seed, 1% for feed, with the remaining 46% own consumption or storage (LSMS-ISA).

Groundnuts also ultimately bound for human consumption because the residual from peanut oil production is also consumed in the form of Kulikuli.


Characterization of Risks along the Value Chain

•Are Good Agricultural Practices known and used?

•What is the awareness level of farmers?

Agriculture

•Are there regulations on aflatoxins for commerce?

•Are the regulations enforced?

•Are traders aware about aflatoxins?

Trade• Are the consumers

aware about aflatoxins?

• Do feeding practices contribute to health risks?

Health

ForktoFarm


Agriculture –Risk of Contamination

Nationally representative data suggests low use of GAP, which promotes good cultural practices to prevent aflatoxin contamination and results in healthier crops with greater resistance

– Use of pesticides is low: only 6% for households growing maize and 2% of households growing groundnuts reported using pesticides

– Only10% of agricultural households use commercial seeds for maize and 2% use commercial seeds for groundnuts.

– Use of fertilizer is relatively higher (20%) for maize, but still very low.

– Only 2% of cultivated area under maize is irrigated, negligible for groundnuts

– Qualitative field research in three districts suggests that

• Drying of crops is typically done on the ground

• Storage units are rudimentary

• There are few means for moisture measurement and control


Agriculture –Risk of Contamination

Awareness among farmers about the causes and consequences of aflatoxins is low.

Agriculture extension systems do not have a set agenda for aflatoxin messaging.

Extension systems are also cash-strapped and over-extended, limiting their ability to incorporate aflatoxin control in their agenda.

Farmers do some basic sorting and drying to gain price premium for cleaner, drier and unspoiled grain but that does not guarantee against aflatoxin contamination.


Trade –Risk of Contamination in Market

Standards Organization of Nigeria (SON) has set standards for maximum aflatoxin (and mycotoxin) concentrations for maize, groundnuts, and products made out of groundnuts and maize.

– Standard for maize grit, aflatoxin B1, is 2ppb (NIS 718:2010);

– Standard for kulikuli (groundnut) cake total aflatoxin 4ppb, aflatoxin B less than 2ppb (NIS 594:2008);

– Standard for maize grain mycotoxin is 20ppb (no mention of aflatoxins, NIS 253:2003).

Nigeria’s National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) enforces these standards –but only for packaged goods and export-bound products

Ports Inspectorate Division monitors imports and exports of packaged and labeled food but inspections for unregulated or unpackaged food products are done only voluntarily

Establishment Inspectorate Division (EID) also offers another layer of scrutiny to packaged goods and inspects companies for their good hygiene practices and good manufacturing practices

Yet, there is no systematic mechanism for testing the food safety (or mycotoxins/aflatoxins) of unpackaged foods, which constitutes the majority food intake.


Health –Risk of Aflatoxin Exposure

Consumers’ level of aflatoxin knowledge is still very low in Nigeria and exacerbated by some harmful practices

Risk factors include consumption of kulikuli –groundnut cake as well as unhusked maize, bulk or semi-processed

Some farmers (outside of Lagos) reported believing that moldy maize may produce better Ogi (maize-based porridge)

Heavy reliance on maize-based porridges during a child’s weaning stage presents large risk in early life.

Several household post-harvest and meal preparation processes (hulling, sorting, threshing, culling) can be promoted that reduce contamination levels in maize, groundnut and other susceptible crops.


Trade –Risk of Contamination in Market

Awareness about aflatoxins is also low among both sellers and buyers No evidence of testing for aflatoxins in domestic maize and groundnuts markets Interviews with kulikuli sellers at the oja obamarket in Akure (Ondo State)

indicated that visibly moldy groundnuts are usually rejected, but even the rejects may be sold by suppliers to others at a lower cost.

At grain stores in Mokwa (Niger state), and Iddo (market in Lagos) some maize sellers indicated that if moldy maize was discovered in a bag destined for sale, the maize would be washed, sundried and re-bagged and returned to sale.

Aflatoxin control in the Nigerian animal and fish feed market is working much better. Even though there are no regulations on aflatoxin in this sector, the commercial feed formulators are generally vigilant about aflatoxin levels in feed.

Since there is no mandate for withdrawal and destruction of contaminated commodities, grain deliveries rejected by large commercial operations will likely be sold by a trader to smaller feed manufacturers that do not test for aflatoxin.


Key Risk and Expected Impact of Aflatoxin Contamination in Nigeria

Greatest risk and impact on:

Health

Low awareness among farmers,

traders and consumers.

Majority of maize and groundnuts is

consumed domestically

Low enforcement of existing regulations on aflatoxins/mycotoxins


Economic Impact-Agriculture and Food Security

Little or no aflatoxin control by farmers, yet absence of price premium for aflatoxin-free maize, or penalty for contaminated maize, means there are no actual market losses to producers or traders of primary commodities destined for direct human consumption.

On the other hand, suppliers of susceptible commodities--maize, groundnuts, cottonseed--used in animal or fish feed may suffer absolute or partial rejections as well as price penalties.

Step4


Economic Impact-Agriculture and Food Security (continued)

All pillars of food security are affected yet not perceived as such

• Availability -- Aflatoxin-free maize and groundnuts is impacted by this challenge but not recognized by consumers or food markets.

• Access – Farmers generally do not yet incur loss in farm revenue because of aflatoxin-contamination in their grain. Use of aflatoxin control will imply increased production costs, that may be tempered by premiums on aflatoxin-free crop

• Utilization – The largest impact of contamination is on human consumption of unsafe and possibly less nutritious products that arises due to lack of aflatoxin control and lack of awareness

• Stability – Since aflatoxins are dependent on climactic conditions, stability in the other three pillars will vary with prevalence

Step4


Food Security: Utilization

Maize; 9% Groundnuts; 1%

Rice; 16%

Sorghum; 10%

Millet; 7%

Cassava; 14%

Yam; 7%Other roots and tuber; 1%

Other nuts/seeds/pulses; 8%

Oil and fats; 14%

Other; 13%

Share of Maize and Groundnuts in Calorie Intake of Nigerian Households

Data Source: LSMS-ISA, 2010-2011


Calorie Intake by zones.

Exhibit 6 2: Calorie Intake Share of Foods by Key Zones in Nigeria‑

Zone Maize Ground nuts Rice Sorghum Millet Cassava Yam Oil and fats

Milk and milk products Other

North Central 10% 1% 13% 10% 3% 16% 16% 13% 1% 18%

North East 18% 4% 11% 19% 13% 2% 2% 11% 1% 19%

North West 16% 1% 15% 21% 17% 1% 2% 13% 1% 14%

South East 1% 1% 23% 0% 0% 23% 5% 18% 2% 28%

South South 0% 1% 11% 0% 0% 38% 8% 15% 1% 26%

South West 1% 0% 22% 0% 0% 19% 13% 16% 1% 28%

National 9% 1% 16% 10% 7% 14% 7% 14% 1% 21%

Data Source: LSMS-ISA Nigeria, 2010-2011


Trade Impact Domestic Trade

– Some degree of price differentiation for quality from NGN 20-40 for drier maize free of insect attack and chaff, NGN 5 – NGN 25 for unspoiled good quality groundnuts.

– Farmers incur some cost for basic sorting to respond to this price differentiation.

– However, the differentiation is not because of aflatoxin or mycotoxins

– Field research found no domestic testing and awareness of aflatoxins/mycotoxins for direct human consumption

Therefore, given the current conditions, there is negligible, if any, domestic market impact of aflatoxin contamination.


Trade Impact in Groundnuts

Groundnut export since mid 1970s has been negligible

Decline in historical share of world exports as result of oil price shock and focus away from agriculture, plus aphid infestation

EU harmonization of aflatoxin standards was in 1998. Nigeria’s groundnut exports had declined significantly well before that

19611964

19671970

19731976

19791982

19851988

19911994

19972000

20032006

20090%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

3,500,000

4,000,000

4,500,000

Historical Nigerian Groundnut Production and Export Share

Groundnut Production in Nigeria (Metric Tons)Nigeria's Share in World Groundnut ExportsShare of Exports in Nigerian Groundnut Production

Nigeria can gain from investing in improving groundnut production to compete in the international trade market as it has done through a 3-year collaboration with ICRISAT. However, aflatoxins are not the only reason Nigeria has not entered this market so far.


Trade Impact in Maize

Historically maize exports have been low.

Maize exports have often been banned--as they are now-- because of this crop’s importance for food security.

19611964

19671970

19731976

19791982

19851988

19911994

19972000

20032006

20090.00%

0.10%

0.20%

0.30%

0.40%

0.50%

0.60%

0

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

7,000,000

8,000,000

Maize Exports as Share of Total Production in Nigeria

Share of Exports in Nigerian Maize ProductionMaize Production (Metric Tons)

Constraints other than aflatoxin contamination is limiting export of maize from Nigeria.


Health Impact Health is arguably the largest area of impact of

aflatoxin contamination in Nigeria

Conclusive evidence of health impact of aflatoxin is established for liver cancer – this is quantified and monetized in the country assessment.

Impact on stunting is still inconclusive, with only one article establishing the relationship between aflatoxin contamination and stunting


Estimating Health Impact

Aflatoxin Contamination

(ng/g)

Consumption(gram/day)

Body Weight(kg)

Exposure to Aflatoxins

(ng/kg-bw/day)

Shares of HBV

positive population

Liver Cancer Cases

(number/year)

Exposure to Aflatoxins

(ng/kg-bw/day)

Population(2010

projected) Share of HBV

positive population

Cancer Potency for HBV Positive

(0.3 per 100,000)

Cancer Potency for HBV Negative

(0.01 per 100,000)

Sum of:

Population Risk (Cancers/year/

100,000


Health Impact

Region HCC Casesa DALY VSL (low) VSL (high) (cancers/ year) (in millions)b

North Central 3,698 48,161 $181 $1,513North East 3,075 39,987 $151 $1,258North West 221 2,864 $11 $90South East 258 3,375 $13 $105South South 163 2,115 $8 $67South West 346 4,462 $17 $142National 7,761 100,965 $380 $3,174

7,761 out of estimated 10,130 liver cancer cases in 2010 can be attributed to aflatoxins.

Monetized impact ranges from 0.2% to 1.6% of GDP (in 2010 Nigeria GDP was $197 billion)


Sensitivity Analysis of Impacts

Exhibit 6 14: Estimated HCC Cases Attributable to Aflatoxin Contamination in Nigeria for ‑Ranges of Aflatoxin Prevalence Levels and Ranges of Food Intake Levels

AFB1 Level (ppb)Levels of Food Intake by Person Weighing 60kg

(g/person(60kg)/day)1241 10 50 100 150 200 400

1 115 9 46 93 139 185 3712 230 19 93 185 278 371 7425 576 46 232 464 695 927 1,854

10 1,152 93 464 927 1,391 1,854 3,70920 2,305 185 927 1,854 2,781 3,709 7,417

100 11,524 927 4,636 9,271 13,907 18,543 37,085

Notes:1. Estimated Intake of Maize and Groundnuts in Nigeria (g/person(60kg)/day)

Estimated the impact with varying food intake, and varying contamination.Even at 20 ppb the current consumption levels of maize implies that 2,305 out of 10,130 liver cancer cases (more than 20%) can be attributed to aflatoxins.

In another sensitivity analysis, we estimate that if HBV prevalence is reduced to zero, the total number of liver cancer cases attributed to aflatoxins would reduce 3-fold


Opportunities for Aflatoxin Control in Africa

Institutional, Policy and Regulatory Environment Set clear division of roles and responsibilities for greater regulatory

efficiencies.

Set coordinated, risk-based surveillance strategy to communicate and isolate food system threats.

Regulate raw commodities destined for domestic consumption.

Set withdrawal procedures for contaminated samples and explore alternative uses.

Disseminate codes and standards regulating food commodities, processes, and enterprises.

Strengthen institutional mandate for cross-ministerial collaboration in shifting production and consumer demand for food quality.

Step5



Scale ppps to increase access to agricultural inputs and practices, e.g. scaling up targeted input voucher programs for the poorest farmers.

Use mobile phone and banking technologies to design business models for that serve the poor.

Use bio-controls such as the IITA-developed Aflasafe approach or natural fungicides to reduce aflatoxin levels in soil and among treated crops, even after poor storage.

Introduce post-harvest techniques (e.g. drying above ground, solar driers to reduce adverse conditions that favor growth

Introduce improved storage methods (e.g. hermetic storage toarrest development of the responsible Aspergillus species)

Use national data on agric stressors to target market-based solutions to address threats.

Use global aflatoxin research agenda to inform and complement domestic research, and vice versa

Agriculture



Raise awareness of tolerances and SPS practices in foreign markets of interest, and improve the compliance of growers, shippers, exporters to assure compliance

Spearhead harmonized SPS policies within West Africa that tend to reduce the mycotoxin problem (both aflatoxins and fumonisins) while facilitating cross border trade

Explore alternative uses for contaminated crops that make sense for Nigeria, and adjust official standards accordingly

Use economic incentives (carrots and sticks) to shift behaviors in the supply chain while expanding farmer access to best aflatoxin control solutions

Encourage improved storage systems at all levels to reduce deterioration and loss:

– Warehouse receipts programs

– Commodities exchange board and marketing boards (if revived) to improve quality, condition, and safety of agrifood products destined for human consumption

Trade



Joint campaigns between the Ministries of Health and Agriculture to raise consumer demand for GAP and safer food

Increase awareness of food safety and nutrition in the first 1,000 days

Encourage dietary diversity of non-susceptible plant and animal products

Use behavioral change communication to promote safe household and infant food preparation and feeding practices

Upgrade the food safety control system (e.g. policies and standards for mycotoxins/aflatoxins based on average daily intake, surveillance and testing methods, withdrawal/compensation procedures, penalties for infringements

Stay abreast of global research on aflatoxin and health/nutrition linkages and explore avenues for further research Nigeria

Increase universal access to the HBV vaccine.

Health


Conclusion Aflatoxins are carcinogens w/other health effects

Contamination can interfere with trade & commerce

Believed to impact all of Africa, including Nigeria

Cost of inaction is high, especially in human health

Range of solutions is broad, but resources scarce

Prioritization and customization is needed

Mitigation should be multi-sectoral and coordinated

Documents

Aflatoxin Country Assessment for Nigeria Abt Associates, Inc. November 5, 2012