OPINION | Post-harvest zone is where agritech and climate tech intersect

Over time, decentralised, farm-level storage infrastructure has shown that preserving produce does more than prevent spoilage. It can significantly reduce agriculture's environmental footprint. Arya.ag has helped avoid over 210,320 metric tonnes of post-harvest losses in a single year. Preventing this loss has averted 233,603 tCO₂e (tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent)  in greenhouse gas emissions, conserved 91.4 billion litres of freshwater, and eliminated the need for 16,826 tonnes of fertiliser.

During the past decade, Indian agriculture has seen important technological advances, especially in input delivery and price discovery. While these have had measurable benefits, the increasing unpredictability of weather and harvest patterns is shifting the conversation. Farmers now need systems that allow them to hold on to their produce, access working capital without being forced to sell immediately, and make strategic decisions within unstable markets.

Irregular rainfall and changing seasons now influence every step of the farming cycle. Traditional protections like insurance and subsidies are often not enough. What is required is a stronger structure that supports better decisions even after harvest. When storage infrastructure helps avoid waste, improves access to credit, and gives farmers more flexibility in the market, it strengthens both livelihoods and environmental stability.

These interventions are not categorically different from climate technologies. They are climate solutions embedded within agricultural systems.

Intersection of two technologies

In this environment, the separation between agricultural technology and climate strategy becomes less relevant. Infrastructure that reduces grain loss also limits emissions. Services that provide credit through stored grain reduce the urgency to sell during price dips. These connections reflect how climate and agritech are no longer distinct categories but parts of a shared framework for building resilience.

India continues to lose between six and seven percent of its grain production after harvest each year. While this is often measured in financial terms, the environmental cost is equally important. Each tonne of wasted grain carries with it the fertiliser, irrigation, energy, and labour used to produce it. Without proper storage, those same inputs must be reapplied to produce the equivalent quantity again. Investing in post-harvest systems that prevent such loss is both a climate and an economic decision.

Better storage also has financial payoffs

Access to reliable storage changes that outcome. Rather than seeing quality decline due to pests or moisture, farmers can retain the market value of their produce. This allows them to sell when conditions are favourable and reduces the emissions intensity of the food that reaches consumers. In many situations, access to storage also works as a form of informal insurance. It provides similar benefits to financial cover, without the paperwork or cost.

Loss at the household level is often missing from national data, but it affects real decisions. When produce is lost, families may have to delay paying school fees, postpone buying improved seed, or take on additional loans to manage expenses. Storage infrastructure that protects the value of grain also protects economic opportunity and forward planning. These are development benefits with direct environmental returns.

Our decentralised post-harvest network has supported the preservation of more than one million metric tonnes of grain in the last ten years.

To widen the lens: saving one million tonnes of food grain is comparable to taking nearly 300,000 average diesel cars, each driving 12,000 km annually - off the road. That’s the climate cost of food spoilage, often invisible, but enormous when avoided.

The financial impact is significant as well. Without storage or access to fair credit, many farmers are forced to sell immediately after harvest. This often means settling for low prices. When storage is linked to finance, grain is no longer just a commodity. It becomes an asset that can secure credit. A warehouse receipt is more than a record of quantity. It becomes a tool that enables financial access. In places where formal collateral is uncommon, this change can be transformational. It also strengthens the economic foundation of rural communities in the face of climate disruptions.

Less visible but hugely impactful

Most policy conversations about agriculture and climate tend to focus on visible technologies such as solar-powered irrigation, seed innovation, or satellite-based monitoring. These tools are important. However, less visible systems that preserve value after harvest are often more immediately effective in building resilience. Their impact is economic, environmental, and structural.

Post-harvest infrastructure contributes to less food waste, protects income at the household level, and reduces the need to reapply the same inputs year after year. The ripple effects reach beyond farming. When grain holds its value, families are better able to plan their spending for food, schooling, and healthcare. In many cases, it is women who bear the pressure when income falls short. Preventing that loss helps ease the burden on them and improves the overall well-being of farming families.

As India shapes its approach to climate and agriculture, greater attention is needed on what happens after the harvest. Storage should not be seen only as a logistical necessity. It is a critical part of how farming systems absorb shocks, adapt to new conditions, and prepare for the seasons to come. The convergence of agritech and climate tech is already underway. Recognising that overlap is essential to designing interventions that are both environmentally sound and economically viable.

(Shenoy Mathew is Chief Sustainability Officer, Arya.ag.)

(Views are personal and do not represent the stand of this publication.)