Peru introduced a national strategy and complementary measures to address key food system challenges. Food marketing channels remain largely traditional, with limited producer organisation, regional infrastructure limitations resulting in partial market integration, and nutritional challenges, with half of the population facing food insecurity, combined with 30% overweight or obese. This chapter explores Peru’s agro‑food supply chains, covering specific value chains, and reviews selected food systems policies, including food assistance, food safety and food loss and waste. It also examines Peru’s policies for encouraging healthy diet and consumption choices and its approach for promoting policy coherence to address food system challenges.
Policies for the Future of Farming and Food in Peru
Abstract
Peru has introduced a National Strategy for Food and Nutritional Security and complementary policies to address food system issues. Food marketing channels, which are differentiated regionally, are mostly traditional, with farmers selling to wholesale and open markets, and 7.5% of producers in co‑operatives. A quarter of the food is produced via “modern” value chains with a high concentration of food and beverage companies. Most medium and large agri-food companies tend to be oriented towards exports, contributing to making Peru highly integrated into global value chains for specific agricultural products.
Underdeveloped road networks hinder farmers, particularly in the Sierra and Selva regions, from effective integration into markets. Insufficient storage facilities, cold chains and specialised transportation options lead to significant food loss, income instability and food insecurity.
About half of the population suffers from food insecurity, most predominantly in rural areas. At the same time, around 30% of adults are obese or overweight, primarily in urban populations, with an increasing trend seen in rural areas. Several policies have been implemented to respond to this dual challenge:
The Food Supplementation Programme, the National School Meal Programme and conditional cash transfers, among others, have yielded measurable food security improvements, most notably concerning chronic child malnutrition. Still, more comprehensive and effective interventions are needed.
Policy measures have been introduced to improve the nutritional value of food and drinks in schools and to promote healthy diets and lifestyles. This includes the national warning food label system and advertising bans of unhealthy food and beverages aimed at children. Yet the impact of these policies has been limited thus far.
Food safety remains an important issue for Peru, particularly in informal channels. Further efforts can be made to improve institutional co‑ordination to eliminate overlapping functions and address enforcement gaps, while investing in education for hygiene, modern surveillance systems and accredited laboratories to detect chemical and microbiological hazards more effectively.
Peru has committed to SDG 12.3 on reducing food loss and waste and has introduced regulations to facilitate food recovery and donation. Peru, like many OECD countries, lacks quantified targets, defined baselines, and systematic monitoring mechanisms, which limits the ability to assess progress and fully realise the potential benefits of these efforts.
Food systems cover all the elements and activities related to producing and consuming food, as well as their effects (OECD, 2021[1]). They comprise all the institutions, people, places and activities that participate in growing, processing, transporting, selling, marketing and consuming food (Food Systems Dashboard, 2025[2]). This section describes the landscape of the agricultural supply chain to provide the context for the remainder of the chapter. While it does address policies, this section has a more descriptive nature. It looks into the distribution of value added across the agro-food supply chain, market concentration in processing and retail, co-operation, logistics and integration into global value chains, and responsible business conduct in agricultural supply chains.
5.1.1. Distribution of value added across the agro-food supply chain
Agriculture’s contribution to Peru’s total value added (6.8%) in 2024 is higher than the Latin American and Caribbean. It averaged 5.6%1 in 2024, which is significantly higher than the OECD average of 1.4% (World Bank, 2025[3]). The importance of primary production is reflected in the whole food value chain, where it has consistently accounted for around 50% of the total food value added over the past 15 years. While food and beverages manufacturing stood for around 30% of value added, food and beverages distribution accounted for 20% during the same period. Together, these three links of the food value chain make up 13% of the total national gross value added (Figure 5.1). The foreign value-added content of food exports is high and growing (see Chapter 1).
Note: Primary production includes the entire agriculture, animal husbandry, hunting and forestry sector. Food and beverages manufacturing includes fish products and tobacco products. No disaggregated data could be found for food and beverages distribution (wholesale and retail).
Source: INEI (2025[4]), Perú: Producto Bruto Interno Según Actividad Económica (Nivel 54), 2007-2024, https://m.inei.gob.pe/estadisticas/indice-tematico/national-accounts/.
5.1.2. Market concentration in processing and retail
The agro-processing industry accounted for 3% of the national gross domestic product (GDP) in 2023 (INEI, 2025[5]). Its main components are flour, pasta and bread-related products (23%); beverages and tobacco products (17%); meat processing (13%); and fruit and vegetable processing and preservation (7%). The manufacturing sector is almost exclusively located in the Costa region, with Lima and the Constitutional province of Callao alone concentrating around 55% of Peru’s manufacturing activity. The food and beverages industry represents 17.6% of the manufacturing industry (INEI, 2024[6]) and contributed 26.2% of the manufacturing GDP in 2022 (MEF, 2022[7]).
The two main food marketing channels are traditional, including wholesale (mercados) and open markets and stores, and modern including supermarkets and convenience stores. Fresh food is primarily sold through wholesale markets, around 47% of which are located in Lima (FAO, European Union and CIRAD, 2022[8]). Modern food channels are the main marketing channels for processed food and imported products, and their expansion increases as sales of ultra-processed foods, snacks and sugary drinks increase. The prevalence of modern channels in Peru remains low (25%) compared to other countries in the region like Brazil, Chile and Colombia, which see modern channels representing around 60-80% (FAO, European Union and CIRAD, 2022[8]). For every 10 000 inhabitants, Peru has 5.4 modern grocery retailers, in contrast with the average 21.2 in Latin America and the Caribbean (FAOSTAT, 2022[9]).
Peru’s food and beverage industry is highly concentrated among a few large companies across major sectors like poultry, milling, oils and dairy. Two conglomerates – Alicorp and Gloria –stand out as the dominant leaders in this industry. Their combined sales in 2023 accounted for more than 60% of food companies’ total revenue. For example, Gloria holds roughly 75-80% of the industrialised milk market in Peru and supplies 80% of the milk for the national school feeding programme (INDECOPI, 2023[10]). It is also the largest landowner, with more than 90 000 hectares dedicated to agro-export and sugarcane (FAO, European Union and CIRAD, 2022[8]). Alicorp, which is also the main importer of food products in Peru, has a very diversified product range spanning staples like cooking oil, flour, condiments, confectionery and more (FAO, European Union and CIRAD, 2022[8]).
This market concentration presents a compelling paradox with Peru’s competition-friendly regulatory framework (see Section 5.2.2). Although new companies do not face legal hurdles to entering the market, competing with Alicorp’s and Gloria’s extensive distribution networks that allow their products to reach every corner of Peru, from supermarkets to neighbourhood mom-and-pop stores, is difficult. Their logistics capabilities are a key competitive advantage in a market where most consumers prefer frequent small-scale purchases from nearby outlets. This market concentration is further exacerbated by underdeveloped value chains, where small-scale farmers lack organisation and financial leverage to obtain stronger positions in the market and compete with incumbents. Other dominant players of the industry are San Fernando and Redondos in poultry (over 50% of market share), and foreign companies like Nestlé and Molitalia (SNI, 2018[11]).
5.1.3. Co-operation and initiatives to improve farmers’ position in the value chain
Producer organisations and other associations are important for smallholders
Peru’s agricultural sector is dualistic. In 2022, around 2.4% of agricultural farm units were export-oriented businesses using state-of-the-art technology and processes and fully integrated into global markets. However, the largest majority of agricultural farm units – 95.4% – consist of non-commercial farming or smallholders producing mostly for self-consumption. They use limited or no technology at all and have limited access to input and output markets and financial services. For those who do have surpluses, produce is sold to local and domestic markets (INEI, 2023[12]).
However, these smallholders face various difficulties in marketing their products, which is mainly carried out through traditional wholesale markets. Only 4.1% have a cold chain, 15.1% have loading and unloading areas, and 80.5% do not have a waste collection centre. Furthermore, modern channels hardly sell products from small-scale agriculture, as their business model requires higher sales volumes, continuous supply and standardisation. These are difficult requirements to meet, as most smallholders practice subsistence agriculture (FAO, European Union and CIRAD, 2022[8]).
Around 42% of small and medium agricultural farmers rely on intermediaries to sell their products. Costly intermediary fees create a significant disparity between farm prices and wholesale rates, ultimately diminishing farmers’ profits. For ten of the most essential crops in domestic markets, wholesale prices are typically 69% above what producers receive, while consumer prices can soar to 249% higher. Due to limited access to markets, smallholder farmers struggle with weak negotiating power when dealing with intermediaries, leaving them vulnerable to unfavourable pricing (FAO, European Union and CIRAD, 2022[8]).
Agricultural co-operatives2 play an important role in supporting smallholder farmers, providing various services such as rural employment, market opportunities, access to information and technologies, and agricultural extension services (OCDC, 2019[13]). In 2017, 398 agricultural co-operatives were registered, with 23.3% classified as agricultural, 4.6% agricultural coffee, 2.2% agro-industrial and 1.9% agricultural (MIDAGRI, 2022[14]). These co-operatives are estimated to sell less than 10% of the total agricultural production.
Peru’s coffee and cocoa co-operatives are significant, with those located in the Selva region having a particular focus on organic, sustainable and internationally recognised products (OCDC, 2019[13]).They have expanded their productive capacity following increased presence in national and foreign markets. The Peruvian Association of Cocoa Producers represents more than 30 000 cocoa producers with around 60 000 hectares, acting as a spokesperson for all organised cocoa producers before national and international institutions. The association is organised into a further 25 co-operatives and associations. Although there is no official data on the organisation of cocoa producers throughout the country, estimates report as high as 65% of cocoa producers across the country to be organised (Mogrovejo, Vanhuynegem and Vásquez, 2012[15]).
The coffee co-operative movement has been especially effective in forming strategic alliances across the coffee value chain to improve its competitiveness in the international market. The National Coffee Board represents Peru’s coffee producers, managing around 165 000 hectares of coffee production. It is an entity made up of more than 50 coffee co-operatives and associations. Alongside the Peruvian Chamber of Coffee and Cocoa and other organisations of coffee producers, these collectively and entrepreneurially integrate around 43% of the entire coffee area (Mogrovejo, Vanhuynegem and Vásquez, 2012[15]).
Although there are some successful examples of farmer organisations in Peru, the numbers are low. In 2024, around 7.5% of Peruvian farmers belonged to some type of organisation, such as a co‑operative or an association. Agricultural producers’ participation in these organisations varies by region. The Selva region has the highest percentage (13.2%), followed by the Sierra (6.7%), then the Costa with 5.5% (INEI, 2025[16]). Furthermore, discrepancies are seen according to agricultural supply chain, whereby the milk industry saw an estimated mere 27 agricultural units, representing around 0.002% of milk producers, as organised in agricultural co-operatives in 2012 (INDECOPI, 2023[10]).
Moreover, the organisations of medium and large companies exert the greatest institutional influence in the agricultural sector, often oriented towards agricultural exports. The Association of Agricultural Producer Guilds incorporates many of these companies and has promoted various infrastructure efforts, such as large-scale irrigation projects. It is currently involved in 9 projects along the Costa region, covering a total of 400 000 hectares (FreshPlaza, 2025[17]).
During the 1950s and 1960s, Peru’s agriculture was defined by highly concentrated land ownership. Reforms addressing this issue started to evolve in the 1960s, which led to the key reform, Decree Law No. 17716, implemented in 1969 (see Chapter 1). This primarily distributed land to farmers, eliminating latifundos (large estates), minifundios (small estates) and all forms of antisocial land tenures. One of the key elements of the law was to establish an organised agriculture based on the associative effort of farmers.
Agricultural co-operatives and associations, such as the cooperativas agrarias de producción and the cooperativas comunales, sociedades agrarias de interés social were created. However, these were mostly large production co-operatives with a low level of accountability and limited management due to a lack of experience or dishonest managers who prioritised private gain (OCDC, 2019[13]).
By the late 1970s and early 1980s, large co-operatives were broken into smaller farms, yet individual farmers faced challenges such as global competition and economic instability. The agricultural sector suffered from terrorism, illicit crop production and inflation, further undermining co-operative structures and fostering scepticism about their effectiveness. Many agricultural co-operatives collapsed during the 1980s and the land was shared among their members or taken over by peasant communities (OCDC, 2019[13]). This land fragmentation caused both levels of productivity and profitability to decrease and created distrust in the co-operative model.
Sources: MIDAGRI (2023[18]), Objetivos de la reforma agraria, https://www.midagri.gob.pe/portal/objetivos/70-marco-legal/titulacion-agraria-en-el-peru/413-el-proceso-de-reforma-agraria; USAID, OCDC and International Cooperative Research Group (2019[13]), The Cooperative Context in Peru: A Review of the Historical, Legal, and Regulatory Environment, https://ocdc.coop/wp-content/uploads/imported-files/ContextStudy_Peru-1.pdf.
Several policy instruments have been implemented to strengthen farmers’ position in the value chain
Most of the agricultural policy instruments implemented in Peru, from technical assistance to support for variable inputs or fixed capital formation in the farm, are designed to address smallholders’ overall development and, in particular, their input and output market integration. These include the Compensation Programme for Competitiveness (AGROIDEAS) and the Rural Agricultural Productive Development Programme (AGRORURAL) (see Chapter 2). However, efforts are insufficient and scattered, with a limited reach and duration.
Some initiatives have been implemented to improve farmers’ integration into dynamic and developed value chains. For example, the 2019-2021 National Family Farming Plan (PLANAF) was created to sustainably improve the income of family farming producers. It sought to integrate small-scale producers into the national economic framework more effectively. The strategic approach included improving their access to markets, agricultural practices and socio-economic inclusion. One of the plan’s key features was the legal and institutional reform to create a more supportive environment for smallholder farmers. This included revising existing laws and regulations to better address the unique challenges faced by small-scale producers and establishing stronger institutional support mechanisms at both the local and national levels (El Peruano, 2019[19]).
The PLANAF also included significant financial initiatives, with tailored financial products and services designed to increase farmers’ access to credit and insurance. Technical assistance and capacity building were other critical elements of the plan. These aimed to enhance production efficiency and the quality of agricultural products through sustainable methods. The plan promoted the adoption of innovative agricultural technologies and practices that were environmentally sustainable and economically viable. Training and educational programmes were provided to equip farmers with the skills necessary to improve their productivity and manage their resources more effectively (El Peruano, 2019[19]). However, the plan had limitations and was not allocated new funding, as it was comprised of budgets already allocated across ministries rather than mobilising new resources. Also, its effective time frame was only two years, which was insufficient to reach more than 2 million smallholders.
The enactment of Law No. 31335 of 2021 on the Improvement of the Association of Agricultural Producers in Agricultural Cooperatives was another important initiative that promotes the development of a regulatory framework for agricultural co-operatives. The law established the National Registry of Agrarian Cooperatives (RNCA), a national centralised database of agricultural co-operatives in Peru. The RNCA currently has 837 registered co-operatives, representing 90 379 agricultural producers across the country.
Furthermore, the law established that income obtained by agricultural co-operatives derived from co-operative acts would not be subject to income tax and general sales tax (SUNAT, 2024[20]), promoting the formalisation of producers who join co-operatives. The Ministry of Agricultural Development and Irrigation (MIDAGRI) offers lines of credit for working capital to agricultural co-operatives, administered by AGROBANCO with resources from the Agroperú Fund. In 2022, AGROBANCO issued over 70 000 loans to small-scale producers with an average of USD 3 200 per loan (El Peruano, 2021[21]).
The Jaén San Ignacio Bagua Special Project (PEJSIB) is an executing unit of MIDAGRI, whose objective is to achieve competitive and productive agriculture by reducing gaps in the agricultural production structure (PEJSIB, 2025[22]). The project focuses on the construction and improvement of irrigation infrastructure and capacity building by providing technical assistance. Working together with smallholder producers in various regions, the primary objective is to reduce inequality and exclusion in the agricultural sector.
5.1.4. Logistics and integration into global value chains
Peru’s disparities in market access underpin the need for good logistics infrastructure
Peru is highly integrated into the global value chains of agricultural products. It has traditionally been a major exporter of traditional products such as coffee, cocoa and bananas. In the past 15 years, Peru has transformed into a major exporter of non-traditional crops such as blueberries, avocados, asparagus, mango, grapes, mandarins, quinoa and palm oil (see Chapters 1 and 2) (UN Comtrade, 2025[23]).
Peru produces different products according to economic and agroclimatic conditions. For example, around 78% of Costa’s farmland is engaged in production destined for the market, either domestically or internationally. The Costa primarily produces non-traditional crops destined for the global market, such as asparagus, berries, mango, grapes and avocado, as well as crops for the domestic market, such as beans and rice. The Sierra and Selva regions’ production is destined for the domestic market and self-consumption. The Sierra region produces crops such as Andean grains, potatoes, maize and quinoa, legumes such as tarwi and broad beans, among many others. The Selva produces, among others, maize, fruits, rice and agro-industrial products such as coffee, cocoa beans and palm oil (INEI, 2023[12]).
Integration into global and domestic markets varies significantly according to natural region. These discrepancies are primarily based on infrastructure differences (see Chapter 1). The geographic location of the Andes makes it more difficult for farmers in the Selva and Sierra regions to access markets due to poor road connectivity. Peru’s road network remains underdeveloped, with 174 709 kilometres of roads as of 2024 (MTC, 2024[24]). Around 19% of its road network is paved, a figure that has hardly changed over the last decade. Although 83% of the country’s national roads are paved, this drops to 24% for regional roads and 3% for rural roads.
Therefore, high transportation costs hinder farmers in the Sierra and Selva regions from effectively integrating into markets. For instance, subsistence farmers allocate around 46% of their production for sales. However, due to a lack of appropriate storage, distribution and marketing chain, subsistence farmers end up losing up to 45% of their total harvest, which reduces the actual marketed production, estimated at only 25% (FAO, European Union and CIRAD, 2022[8]). This lack of infrastructure particularly affects livestock farming, due to the absence of cold chains, formal slaughterhouses and specialised transportation to ensure the safety and quality standards of meat and dairy products are upheld (MIDAGRI, 2017[25]).
Establishing strategically placed regionalised food supply chains establishes greater linkages between urban and rural markets, as well as improves self-sufficiency and resilience of food supply chains in rural areas (FAO, 2020[26]). Furthermore, they decrease the transportation distance and the number of intermediaries between producers and consumers, reducing food loss and increasing the availability of cheaper and fresher food products. This is particularly important in times of crises such as the covid pandemic, where Peru’s centralised food distribution led to severe food shortages (Tirado-Kulieva, 2022[27])
The value chain of agro-food products varies according to the product and the intended market
There are differences between agro-food value chains in Peru, especially according to economic and agro-climatic conditions. Looking at the case of the avocado supply chain, three types of producers are observed, all supplied by agricultural input providers. Large producers are typically vertically integrated with the export activity, which includes product processing. A significant number of medium producers and associations of small producers also supply agro-export activities, often through “contract production”. All avocados destined for foreign markets consist of the Hass avocado variety (Figure 5.2).
On the other hand, small producers usually sell their production on the farm through local intermediaries or sometimes to agricultural input distributors who act as middlemen at this stage, who then collect the product and mostly transport it to wholesale markets in cities, especially those varieties that are not Hass. It is worth noting that a fraction of the Hass avocados collected by intermediaries manage to be placed in export companies, although small producers often have trouble meeting the sizes and seasonality required by the industry. Finally, the avocados placed in wholesale markets are purchased directly by individual retail traders.
Source: EDIR (2023[28]), Estrategias de Desarrollo e Innovación Regional: Region APURIMAC, https://www.grade.org.pe/wp-content/uploads/01-EDIR-Resumen_Apur%C3%ADmac_Web.pdf.
Quinoa production breaks the overall tendencies of the Sierra’s production. In 2005, Peru produced 32 600 tonnes of quinoa and exported less than 2%. Ten years later, in 2014, it produced 114 000 tonnes and exported 36 200 tonnes to foreign markets, mostly the United States (50%), Europe (23%) and Canada (10%). This still leaves almost twice as much quinoa for the domestic market as was available in 2005, to cover the rapid growth of the domestic demand. In just over a decade, quinoa had gone from a self-consumption staple food in rural Sierra to a globally traded, highly demanded speciality crop. Between 2019 and 2023, the average production of quinoa stabilised around 96 000 tonnes, of which 50% has been exported (Figure 5.3).
This trajectory illustrates the hidden opportunities for Sierra producers but also the perils of such sudden development: unstable prices, commercialisation problems and, more recently, growing competition from new producers from the Costa region as well as from other countries. In a way, the Sierra’s farmers’ failure to brand their quinoa and differentiate it from the rest is turning the golden grain’s success story into a cautionary tale for the marketing of other “underutilised plant species” (Gruere, Giuliani and Smale, 2006[29]; INEI, 2023[12]; MIDAGRI, 2024[30]). The commercial flows of quinoa are primarily aimed at the national market. Quinoa is produced by small-scale farmers only, with no large quinoa producers or vertical integration for export, making the intermediaries’ role extremely important. The input market sector is not well developed in many of the areas where quinoa is produced and is basically characterised by agrochemical stores situated in local markets or street markets of rural communities where fertilisers, agrochemicals, seeds, etc. are sold.
Source: EDIR (2023[28]), Estrategias de Desarrollo e Innovación Regional: Region APURIMAC, https://www.grade.org.pe/wp-content/uploads/01-EDIR-Resumen_Apur%C3%ADmac_Web.pdf.
In the potato value chain, most production is handled by smallholders and their associations. They sell the product to local intermediaries, both on the farm and at local fairs, who collect considerable volumes and transport them to the wholesale markets in cities. From there, a limited portion of the product undergoes basic processing and is destined for sale in supermarkets, but most are marketed through small retailers in traditional markets, fairs, and traditional grocery stores or bodegas. As in the case of quinoa, the input market is characterised by agrochemical stores located in local or street markets within rural communities, where fertilisers, seeds, and related products are sold. The global market is non-existent for this crop in the case of Peru (Figure 5.4).
Source: EDIR (2023[31]), Formulacion de la Estrategia de Desarrollo e Innovacion Regional: Huanuco, https://cdn.www.gob.pe/uploads/document/file/6614786/5749938-caracterizacion-de-cadenas-de-valor-de-huanuco.pdf?v=1722375624.
The milk supply chain is oriented towards the national market, with a dichotomy that is not based on national or external markets but on the type of industry that processes milk and its derivatives. The large dairy industry forms a monopsony that absorbs most of the national production, whereby 6% of producers are suppliers to industrial companies that encompass 50% of national production (INDECOPI, 2023[10]). The other commercial route consists of medium-sized local industries and artisanal processing plants, which produce and market dairy derivatives, generally through specialised distributors (Figure 5.5). Milk production in the Selva and Sierra regions is characterised by grazing, manual milking techniques, low density of livestock per hectare and low yields (INDECOPI, 2023[10]). On the other hand, the Costa region sees intensive milk production, characterised by high-density stabled exploitation of animals, mechanised milking techniques, and high yields. One agroindustry, Gloria S.A., controls more than 75‑80% of the national industrialised milk market. The inputs market is characterised by agrochemical stores in local markets that sell veterinarian products (MIDAGRI, 2024[30]).
Source: EDIR (2023[32]), Estrategia de Desarrollo e Innovacion Regional Region Ayacucho, https://cdn.www.gob.pe/uploads/document/file/6681753/5804000-edir-ayacucho-resumen%282%29.pdf?v=1721666183.
In general, some bottlenecks small and medium-scale farmers face in the four value chains described above are limited or no technical assistance and financial services, limited use of improved varieties and inputs, limited technology adoption, no organisation to create economies of scale, and a lack of rural and agricultural infrastructure, among others (MIDAGRI, 2024[30]).
Peru’s agro-food sector is integrated into global value chains
As shown in Chapter 1, both the agricultural and food, beverages and tobacco industries in Peru have succeeded in integrating into global value chains (GVCs). While the indicators concerning backwards linkages with GVCs and reliance on foreign demand were lower than the OECD average, the forward linkages for both sectors were comparatively higher.
Almost one-third (30%) of the value added in Peru’s domestic demand for food, beverages, and tobacco comes from foreign sources (Figure 5.6). This is similar to the shares recorded in peer countries and lower than the OECD average (46%). Services are the most important foreign source industry, accounting for 13% of the value added in the food sector’s final demand.
Origin of value added in the domestic demand for food, beverages and tobacco, 2020
Note: OECD values correspond to averages of the values of OECD countries.
Source: OECD (2023[33]), Trade in Value Added (TiVA) [database], https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/trade-in-value-added.html.
5.1.5. Responsible agriculture supply chains
Peru is an adherent to the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct and established its National Contact Point for responsible business conduct in 2008. Through its National Plan on Human Rights 2018-2021, the government has committed to developing a National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights (NAP) to promote business respect of human rights. Since 2008, Peru has been an adherent to the Decision of the Council on the Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct.
Peru is not an adherent to the OECD Recommendation of the Council on the OECD-FAO Guidance for Responsible Agricultural Supply Chains (hereafter the “OECD-FAO Guidance”). In order to further its alignment with this Recommendation, Peru may wish to undertake additional actions such as incentivising the use of the OECD-FAO Guidance in company management systems and conditioning public procurement on demonstrated implementation of the guidance (OECD, 2022[34]).
Food systems around the world are expected to deliver on a formidable “triple challenge”:
1. Ensure food security and nutrition for all
2. Provide livelihoods to farmers and others in the food chain and promote rural development
3. Do all this while ensuring environmental sustainability – i.e. using natural resources sustainably (including protecting valuable ecosystems and biodiversity) and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, as well as meeting other societal expectations such as animal welfare (OECD, 2021[1]).
The 2022 OECD Agricultural Ministers’ Declaration, to which Peru has adhered, recognises the “triple challenge” framing and the relevance of a food systems approach.3 The National Plan for Food and Nutrition Security 2015-2021 (PNSAN) includes aspects of the three elements of the triple challenge in its objectives. Additionally, several other food systems-related policies co-exist and fall under the responsibility of authorities scattered across jurisdictions, government agencies and levels of government. This structure is common, given the complexity of food systems (OECD, 2021[1]).
Concerning government spending on food systems 2018-2022, the largest majority goes to social assistance4 (54%), followed by infrastructure for food systems (16%), agricultural development and value chains (13%), nutrition and health (13%) and climate change and natural resources (4%) (UN Food Systems Hub, n.d.[35]). Around 20% of total government spending on food systems comes from international funds, of which the majority (54%) is invested into agricultural development and value chains.
While an exhaustive overview of all food system-related policies would exceed the scope of this accession review, this section will briefly look at specific topics related to each of the three challenges faced by food systems:
Food security and nutrition: emphasis will be placed on the existence of school meals programmes and food banks, which are two types of important food assistance programmes in OECD countries (Giner and Placzek, 2022[36]).
Improved livelihoods of farmers and others: emphasis will be given to market regulation and competition issues.
Environmental sustainability: emphasis will be on food waste, a topic of growing interest for OECD countries.5
5.2.1. Food assistance programmes
Half of Peru’s population faces food insecurity, whilst the trend is increasing
Law No. 31315 on food and nutritional security establishes the legal framework for the formulation of public policies on food and nutritional security, recognising access to food as a fundamental right. It sets forth guidelines for action and emphasises the active and co‑ordinated participation of producers, traders, and consumers in overseeing compliance with food and nutritional security standards (El Peruano, 2021[37]).
However, Peru faces the growing challenge of food insecurity, with around half of the population suffering from moderate or severe food insecurity (World Bank, 2025[3]). Access to food is primarily determined by household income and food prices. Around 48% of households are vulnerable to food insecurity due to income instability, while food prices greatly depend on the external context due to the country’s reliance on exports for key inputs in agriculture (FAO, European Union and CIRAD, 2022[8]). This situation is exacerbated by the vulnerability of food production to climate change and the volatility of international food prices. The Puno region sees the highest share of households affected by food insecurity, with 74.3% in 2023 (MIDIS, 2024[38]).
In recent decades, El Niño and other natural phenomena such as droughts and wildfires have been more frequent and severe as a result of climate change, posing significant risks to the agricultural sector (see Chapter 3). Furthermore, food security is affected by limited access to water and sanitation services, and political instability that weakens public management (WFP, 2025[39]). In 2022, 20.3% of the population faced severe food insecurity, revealing an increasing trend over the past decade from 13.5% in 2015 (Figure 5.7). Peru stands out among peer countries in the region with the highest prevalence of severe food insecurity, a crisis that was further exacerbated by the pandemic.
Source: World Bank (2025[3]), World Development Indicators, https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators.
Responses to food insecurity are not limited to the food assistance programmes and cash transfers analysed in this section and could instead focus on livelihood assistance (Giner and Placzek, 2022[36]).
Food Supplementation Program
Peru’s Food Supplementation Program (PCA) aims to provide food to Peruvians in situations of poverty or extreme poverty as well as to vulnerable groups: children, the elderly, people affected by tuberculosis, people with disabilities, people in situations of risk or abandonment, and victims of family and political violence. The PCA provides nutritional supplements to its users through Care Centres, which are organised into five modalities: community kitchens and communal pots, shelter homes, at-risk individuals, and communal work. The Ministry of Development and Social Inclusion (MIDIS) manages and supervises the PCA. Its implementation is decentralised and carried out by 238 local governments (MIDIS, 2025[40]).
In 2023, the government reformed the PCA by streamlining programme renewals and improving efficiency; the changes also include the creation of a local management committee with community involvement, increased oversight and transparency. The framework of Law No. 32185 of Public Budget Law for the Year 2025 establishes the allocation of a budget in favour of the PCA amounting to USD 12 million for dining halls and USD 5 million for communal kitchens nationwide. This allocation is exclusively intended for the purchase and preparation of food, contributing to economic access for acquiring food through the mentioned care centres, which are operated by representatives of organisations benefiting populations that are poor, extremely poor, and vulnerable. Additionally, within the framework of Law No. 31071, the State Procurement Law for Food Originating from Family Farming, joint actions are being carried out with MIDAGRI to promote purchases in favour of smallholder farmers.
Earlier evaluations of the PCA suggest that its impact has been limited, with limited reach, especially in rural and high-poverty areas. Moreover, the nutritional impact is minimal due to low funding and poor infrastructure. Governance is improving, but results are not yet sufficient to meet Peru’s food security goals. For the PCA to fully achieve its intended outcomes, it needs better monitoring of the policy outcomes, greater investment, improved targeting and community-driven oversight (Caman, 2023[41]).
National school meal programme
Peru’s school meal programme, formerly Qali Warma established in 2012, provides daily meals to more than 4.1 million school children at pre-school, primary and secondary levels (FAO, 2025[42]). The programme provides varied and nutritious meals to children in early childhood and primary education in public schools throughout Peru, as well as to secondary school students in indigenous communities in the Peruvian Amazon, every day of the school year (MIDIS, 2019[43]). Furthermore, it aims to promote healthy eating habits by providing information to parents, members of purchasing committees and school feeding committees.
The programme is under the authority of MIDIS but co-managed with school feeding committees, who encompass representatives and authorities from local governments, the health sector and parents. Under this framework, the number of daily meals provided depends on the poverty conditions of the district in which the educational institutions are located. While breakfasts and lunches are provided for early schoolchildren in districts in the 1st and 2nd poverty quintiles, those in the 3rd, 4th and 5th quintiles only receive breakfast (MIDIS, 2019[43]). Furthermore, the school meal programme has progressively been providing food for secondary education institutions of Indigenous Communities in the Amazon region. In 2024, 228 local governments and 326 educational institutions were equipped with a total investment of USD 255 110 (MIDIS, 2025[44]).
Evidence indicates that the school meal programme especially benefits children who do not have breakfast at home, showing improved cognitive test performance when meals are provided. This suggests that the programme helps close social gaps in learning (MIDIS, 2019[43]). Additionally, the provision of meals allows families to save around 10-17% of their monthly consumption expenditure, a benefit most realised by vulnerable families. It is worth noting that the breakfast provided by the programme accounts for around 10% of daily calorie intake, while the average home breakfast for those who receive it accounts for around 16% of daily calorie intake.
However, limited resources of local governments hinder greater expansion and efficacy of the school meal programme, often due to budgetary constraints or they seek compensation in exchange for support. Furthermore, supervision and monitoring of the adequate provision of the programme in terms of nutritional level, availability of food product supply, cultural relevance of food provided, and territorial scope is limited. Since December 2024, the programme is undergoing restructuring in compliance with the provision of Supreme Decree No. 010-2024-MIDIS (MIDIS, 2025[44]).
Glass of Milk Program
The Glass of Milk Program (PVL) is Peru’s long-standing food subsidy programme launched in 1984 through Law No. 24059 and complemented by Law No. 27470. Its purpose is to provide a daily food ration to vulnerable populations to help overcome food insecurity. This food provision is delivered through municipalities at no cost to the beneficiaries and generally consists of 250 cubic centimetres of milk or an equivalent food product. For the delivery of these food rations, local governments carry out actions with community participation. The ultimate goal is to improve the nutritional status and quality of life of beneficiaries who, due to their precarious economic situation, cannot adequately meet their nutritional needs (MIDIS, 2025[45]).
Currently, this decentralised programme is managed by 1 981 district local governments, overseeing over 40 000 Glass of Milk committees, which deliver rations benefiting more than 1 826 535 individuals (MIDIS, 2025[45]). At the height of the programme in 2001, it reached over 3 million people but had a limited impact on child stunting. However, despite targeting lower income groups, corruption, clientelism and limited local governance have undermined the programme’s transparency and fairness (Cerna, 2015[46]).
Early childhood care (Cuna Más)
Previously called Wawawasi, the national Cuna Más is a targeted social programme that aims to provide comprehensive care to children under 36 months of age in areas of poverty and extreme poverty. This was done through day care service and family support service. The day care service provides food as part of the comprehensive care for children aged 6 to 36 months to meet their basic needs for health, nutrition, safety, protection, affection, rest, play, learning, and skill development during their stay at the care centers. Furthermore, three meals were provided per day to young children, integrating nutrition with early childhood development (MIDIS, 2025[47]).
Conditional cash transfer (Juntos)
Operating since 2005 under MIDIS, Juntos provides monthly transfers of around USD 20 to mothers living in poverty and extreme poverty who comply with health checks and school attendance requirements for their children. The programme tries to target intergenerational poverty by incentivising education and improved nutrition (MIDIS, 2025[48]). Since 2021, Juntos has introduced an additional cash transfer for pregnant women and children up to 12 months of age, with the aim of increasing coverage of growth and development check-ups, vaccination, iron supplementation and anaemia screening.
Studies have found that Juntos reduced extreme malnutrition in children under five, especially among children in the lowest nutrition percentiles. Improvements in height-for-age among children exposed to the programme for more than two years were also found (Andersen CT, 2015[49]), as well as a significant reduction in chronic malnutrition among children who were first enrolled in the programme during early childhood, compared to those enrolled during school age (15.9% difference) (Sánchez, 2020[50]). Furthermore, the additional cash transfer for pregnant women and children up to 12 months of age has reduced the share of 12-month-old children with chronic malnutrition by around 6.5% (MIDIS, 2024[51])
Elderly support (Pensión 65)
The National Solidarity Assistance Programme (Pensión 65) provides non-contributory cash transfers (USD 67 every two months) to citizens aged 65 and over in extreme poverty. In addition to providing financial assistance, the programme aims to promote the comprehensive protection of older adults living in extreme poverty by facilitating their access to health services. As a unit of MIDIS, it works in co‑ordination with other state entities to promote the dissemination of knowledge that contributes to the appreciation of their role within the family and community, ensuring the transmission of knowledge as a legacy for new generations and a driver of development. The OECD review of Peru’s pension system acknowledges Pensión 65 as largely successful in providing old-age financial security, though it notes low coverage and recommends increasing benefit levels, improving indexing to inflation and conducting broader outreach to raise awareness (OECD, 2019[52]).
Community Kitchens (Comedor Popular)
Community kitchens are Grassroots Social Organisations (OSB) composed of people living in poverty or vulnerable situations, whose primary role is food preparation and social support. These organisations can take various forms, such as Community Kitchens, Mothers’ Clubs, Parish Kitchens, and other similar groups. To operate officially, OSBs must be recognised by Local Governments according to current regulations, including Law No. 25307, Law No. 27731, their regulations, and other applicable provisions. This modality has the widest coverage within the Food Supplementation Program, providing food assistance through more than 14 342 community kitchens and 4 361 communal pots, benefiting approximately 775 853 and 293 112 users, respectively (MIDIS, 2025[40]).
Commonly located in Lima, these kitchens serve those facing food insecurity, including migrants and informal sector workers, and people who are in extreme poverty. Evidence indicates the capacity for improving meals, especially through the inclusion of salads and fruits. However, while children may benefit in terms of caloric adequacy, frequent adult use, especially by women, may carry an increased risk of obesity, likely due to the nutrient-poor composition of typical meals. The structure of these kitchens, as community-run, under-resourced entities, creates both strengths, such as social cohesion, but also weaknesses, such as fragility and limited nutritional diversity. Strategic nutrition interventions, such as menu diversification and cooking lessons, show promise but require stability and institutional support for scaling up (Brewer et al., 2021[53]).
5.2.2. Market regulation and competition issues
Peru has a competition-friendly regulatory framework
Competitive product markets can boost productivity, employment and living standards. The OECD Product Market Regulation indicators assess the alignment of a country’s regulatory framework with internationally accepted best practices.6 The economy-wide indicator measures distortions to competition that can be induced by the regulatory barriers to entry and expansion faced by firms across the economy, as well as by the state’s involvement in the economy.
With a score of 1.33 (on a scale of 0-6), Peru is recognised as a competition-friendly country, slightly better than the OECD average of 1.34 (Figure 5.8). While this is an economy-wide indicator, it highlights where Peru’s regulatory framework stands compared to OECD countries in several areas which can affect businesses, including those along the food supply chain. This is a result of reforms since 2020, improving the country’s initial score of 1.92 in 2018 (OECD, 2024[54]). In particular, in terms of impact evaluations of regulation, which include an assessment of the impact on competition and interaction with stakeholders, Peru outperforms even the five most competition-friendly OECD countries. Barriers to trade and investment are also comparatively low.
Note: The Product Market Regulation (PMR) values range from 0 to 6, or from the most to the least competition-friendly regulatory regime.
Source: OECD (2025[55]), Product Market Regulation database, https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/product-market-regulation.html#PMR-sector-indicators.
On the other hand, areas with room for improvement include simplifying the administrative and regulatory burdens on businesses, in particular, the requirements for establishing new firms (OECD, 2024[54]). Furthermore, aligning the governance of state-owned enterprises and public procurement rules with OECD best practices is important for ensuring a level playing field for all firms. As mentioned in Section 5.1.2, Peru’s food and beverages industry remains highly concentrated due to the deep-rooted supply chains of a few conglomerates, as well as underdeveloped value chains, weakening the position of smallholder farmers.
5.2.3. Food waste
The largest share of food waste occurs in the initial stages of the supply chain
Like many countries, Peru does not comprehensively monitor food loss and waste (FLW) data, which makes it difficult to accurately determine and assess the country’s performance. A study analysing the 2007-17 period estimated average food loss and waste at 12.8 million tonnes per year, representing around 47.6% of the country’s annual food supply and thus 427 kg per capita per year (Bedoya-Perales, Dal’ Magro, 2021[56]). This is significantly higher than the 2011 FAO global estimate of 30% (FAO, 2011[57]). The largest share of food loss occurred in the processing and packaging stage and in the agricultural production stage (Figure 5.9). Around 44% of this loss is fruits and vegetables.
Source: Bedoya-Perales, Dal’ Magro (2021[56]), Quantification of Food Losses and Waste in Peru: A Mass Flow Analysis along the Food Supply Chain, https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052807.
The Food Systems Dashboard looks at the share of losses for certain crops. Losses in cereal are lower in Peru (2%), compared to LAC countries and the global average (4% for both) (Figure 5.10). However, vegetable and pulse losses are comparatively higher, with 15% vegetable loss in Peru, compared to 8% in LAC and 7% globally.
% of domestic supply
Note: Quantities of crops that are lost along the food supply chain from post-harvest up to, but not including, retail (as a percentage of domestic supply). This amount does not include quantities lost before or during harvest, nor food waste, which commonly refers to food that is lost during retail or at the household level.
Source: FAOSTAT (2022[9]), Food Systems Dashboard- Peru, https://www.foodsystemsdashboard.org/countries/per/fsci.
Peru committed to SDG 12.3 to halve per capita global food waste at the retail and consumer levels and reduce food losses along production and supply chains, including post-harvest losses by 2030. Furthermore, as a member of the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation (APEC) forum, Peru adheres to the Principles for Preventing and Reducing Food Loss and Waste in the Asia-Pacific Regions. These include (1) strengthening institutions responsible for the agri-food system; (2) promoting public-private partnerships and co-ordination efforts; (3) fostering research, innovation, technology and digitalisation in addressing FLW; (4) promoting capacity building, awareness and education on FLW; (5) improving data collection and knowledge management; (6) creating an enabling environment to promote investment in physical infrastructure; and (7) promoting food rescue and donation (APEC, 2024[58]). Peru has implemented regulations aligning with both the SDG 12.3 and the APEC principles.
In 2019, the government adopted the Law No. 30988 Against Food Loss and Waste with the aim of tackling food waste at all stages of the food chain, from primary production to consumption (El Peruano, 2019[59]). The law promotes the co-ordination of multistakeholder efforts to reduce and prevent food loss at the local, regional and national levels, assigning MIDAGRI as the key institution in charge.
The law promotes food donations, complementing the 2016 Law No. 30498 on Food Donation, which established guidance and financial support for the donation of food that is still safe to consume but has lost commercial value, as well as the donation of food goods and services during emergency situations following natural disasters (El Peruano, 2017[60]). The General Directorate on Environmental Health and Food Safety (DIGESA) ensures that donating entities comply with relevant food safety requirements. Furthermore, tax benefits are available for donations made to public or private non-profit donation-receiving entities. Since the enacting of the Food Donation Law back in 2016, donations to Peru’s major food bank, Banco de Alimentos Perú, have tripled (APEC, 2024[61]).
Food banks such as Adra, Caritas del Peru and Fundacion Lima, deliver recovered food from markets to dining halls and communal kitchens. As of 2025, there are nine food banks with three more under development. Between September 2023 and August 2024, approximately 316 000 people benefitted from food banks (MIDAGRI, 2025[62]). The Food Bank of Peru (BAP) was established in 2014, which receives food that is safe to consume but cannot be marketed by private companies. The food is then delivered to schools, shelters and soup kitchens. The aim is to tackle the loss of food at supermarkets, where Peru loses more than Sol 500 million of food annually (IANAS, 2017[63]). The National Registry of Final Recipients of Recovered Food is an online system led by MIDIS, recording information on food recovered in food markets. The regulations of Law No. 31477 promoting food recovery were established in 2025 and aim to strengthen this practice.
However, fragmentation and gaps in food waste regulations hinder the efficacy of these policies. The food recovery being carried out in 9 departments amounts to around 8 200 tonnes per year, representing only 0.5% of what is lost in marketing alone (FAO, 2024[64]). Despite the established frameworks in place for safe food donations, a lack of knowledge continues to persist on the necessary steps to donate food in compliance with applicable regulations safely (FLPC and GFN, 2021[65]).
As is the case for several OECD countries, Peru’s commitment to SDG 12.3 is hindered by the fact that the country has not established a baseline year for comparison, quantified targets specific to Peru, nor has it systematically monitored FLW. Complementing these efforts on food recovery, and recognising that Peru is a middle-income country with a challenging topography, the country should address as much as it can, FLW by prioritising investments in food value chain infrastructure to prevent spoilage at earlier stages. As previously mentioned, significant investment in rural roads, appropriate storage facilities and cold chains is vital to reduce food waste, particularly in rural areas.
There is significant room for improvement in food waste treatment in Peru
When preventing, reusing or recycling food waste is not possible, composting organic waste into functional products such as fertiliser or energy sources is an effective alternative. Around half of Peru’s solid waste is thrown away into open dumpsites. As over half of that waste is organic waste, Peru is missing a significant opportunity to implement sustainable waste management solutions (CCAC, 2021[66]; MINAM, 2011[67]). Furthermore, the organic solid waste sector contributes to over a third of the country’s methane emissions. The separation of organic and inorganic waste is scarce across the country, despite the government obliging municipalities to properly treat and use their organic waste (Holland Circular Hotspot, 2021[68]). This reflects the greater issue of limited household waste separation, few composting plants; and underdeveloped infrastructure to effectively collect, transport and treat waste (CCAC, 2021[66]).
5.3.1. Selected dietary risks
Peru faces a double burden of malnutrition, with a high prevalence of caloric deficit on the one hand and a growing problem of obesity and overweight on the other. The issue of caloric deficiency tends to affect the poorest regions of the country, which also see the highest rates of chronic malnutrition. In 2024, chronic malnutrition affected 20.9% of rural households, compared to 8.5% in urban areas (MIDIS, 2025[44]). However, the issues of obesity and overweight are growing in rural areas, with 34% of the population unable to afford a healthy diet (FAOSTAT, 2022[9]). Obesity and overweight are still the most prominent issues in urban regions.
In 2012, around one-fifth of diseases recorded in Peru corresponded to diseases related to overweight and obesity (FAO, European Union and CIRAD, 2022[8]). Furthermore, around 85% of deaths from COVID-19 were associated with obesity (MINSA, 2023[69]). Estimations indicate that malnutrition induces a cost of around 4.6% of Peru’s GDP, with around 62% of that cost attributable to child malnutrition and 38% to overweight and obesity (MINSA, 2022[70]), not to mention the consequences on children who endured malnutrition during their first year, which affects their physical, cognitive, motor, emotional and social development (FAO, European Union and CIRAD, 2022[8]). In 2024, 12.1% of children under the age of five suffered from chronic malnutrition, a slight increase from 11.5% in 2021.
Obesity rates are higher in urban areas than in rural ones
Being overweight or obese is a major risk factor for various non-communicable diseases, including diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and certain cancers (OECD/European Union, 2022[71]). Peru has seen an increase in obesity rates among Peruvians aged 18 and older. From 2015 to 2022, obesity rates climbed from 20.8% to 27.3%, higher than the OECD average of 18%7 (Figure 5.11). This trend is reflected in other countries in the region, with Chile leading the ranks with an obesity rate of 38.9% in 2022.
Obesity among adults, BMI >= 30, prevalence (age-standardised estimate)
* OECD32 uses 2021 data and includes 32 OECD countries.
Note: BMI: body mass index; LAC: Latin American and the Caribbean. LAC includes Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico and Peru. More recent data for Peru show an obesity rate of 24.1% (INEI, 2024[72]). Data from the World Health Organisation have been used in this figure for comparability.
Sources: WHO (2024[73]), GHO Indicators, https://www.who.int/data/gho/data/indicators/indicator-details/GHO/prevalence-of-obesity-among-adults-bmi--30-(age-standardized-estimate)-(-); OECD (2023[74]), OECD Health Statistics, https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/obesity-diet-and-physical-activity.html.
Looking at the share of the population classified as overweight, there is an evident discrepancy between urban and rural areas. While this remained close to 38% for urban areas from 2017 to 2023, rural areas saw an increase from 28.6% to 32.9% (Figure 5.12). This trend reflects the growing influence of urban dietary habits in rural regions, characterised by increased consumption of fast food and sugary drinks, and fewer home-cooked meals. Looking at differences between genders, we see women with a slightly lower overweight rate (36.5%) than men (38%) in 2023. However, obesity rates are significantly higher in women at 28%, compared to 19.9% for men.
Overweight among people aged 15 and above
Note: Excludes pregnant women.
Source: INEI (2024[72]), Perú: Enfermedades No Transmisibles Y Transmisibles, 2023, https://www.inei.gob.pe/media/MenuRecursivo/publicaciones_digitales/Est/Lib1951/libro.pdf.
Peru faces a caloric deficit and a diet high in carbohydrates
Alongside growing obesity and overweight rates, the issue of caloric deficit remains present among the Peruvian population, spurred on by inequality of access rather than unavailability of food. The average Peruvian consumes 1 827 kilocalories per day (FAO, European Union and CIRAD, 2022[8]), although the daily per capita food supply is 2 805 kilocalories (FAOSTAT, 2022[9]), 53.5% more than what is being consumed. Around half of adults fail to meet their daily energy requirements (46.6%), while 25.7% consume more than recommended and 27.7% consume an adequate amount. Small-scale farming struggles to improve food access, particularly for its producers who generally suffer the most from food insecurity. This partly stems from lower average incomes, poor infrastructure affecting the food value chain and a tendency to homogenise crops rather than diversify to several underutilised native crops, which have greater acclimatisation capabilities (FAO, European Union and CIRAD, 2022[8]).
Around 41% of adults in Peru consumed all five food groups typically recommended for consumption in 2023, similar to the regional average and higher than the global average (32%) (FAOSTAT, 2022[9]). However, the average diet in Peru is high in carbohydrates and low in protein. Around 50% of dietary energy comes from cereals, roots and tubers, which the FAO categorises as a potential challenge area8 (FAOSTAT, 2022[9]). Only 9% comes from fruits and vegetables, and 6% from meat and fish. This results in 64.3% of adults consuming an excess of carbohydrates, which increases to 86.9% in rural areas. While most manage to meet the recommended requirements of protein (86.6%), this is also lower in rural areas (78.5%). Looking at fat consumption, only half of adults meet their requirements, and 39.6% are deficient, a figure that rises to 64.1% in rural areas.
Regular consumption of fruits and vegetables is an important element of a healthy, balanced diet and is associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular diseases and certain types of cancer (OECD/European Union, 2022[71]). The World Health Organisation recommends eating at least 400 grammes, or 5 or more portions, of fruits and vegetables per day. In 2023, 9.5% of Peruvians aged 15 and above consumed the recommended minimum of 5 servings of fruits and vegetables per day (INEI, 2024[72]), compared to 15%9 across 30 OECD countries in 2019 (OECD, 2023[75]). Compared to its regional peers, Peru has the highest average daily consumption of fruits and vegetables (Figure 5.13). However, at 150 g of fruits and 150 g of vegetables per day, this is still below the World Health Organisation’s recommendation.
Note: Estimated values from national surveys: Argentina (2018), Chile (2022), Costa Rica (2019), Mexico (2022) and Peru (2023).
Source: FAOSTAT (2024[76]), Apparent intake (based on household consumption and expenditure surveys), https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/HCES.
5.3.2. Policies to encourage healthier and sustainable food choices
The high prevalence of non-communicable diseases associated with dietary risk factors underscores the need for Peru to transition to healthier diets. There are multiple ways in which governments can integrate public health considerations into food sector policies. Previous OECD analysis of policies that encourage healthier food choices (Giner and Brooks, 2019[77]) suggests a four-track policy approach to reconcile food security and nutrition objectives with wider food systems objectives (Box 5.2).
The large and growing burden that unhealthy consumption habits impose on public health underpins the legitimacy of government intervention. Accordingly, governments have resorted to a wide range of health-related policies, from nutritional guidelines to fiscal policy, to address obesity and other main dietary risks. As in other policy areas, there is no “silver bullet” and policymakers need to carefully chose the right set of instruments, considering the specific characteristics of their respective food systems.
Recognising the diversity of policy responses, the potential synergies among them and the need to find the right policy combination for each context, previous OECD work has proposed a “five-track policy approach” to encourage healthier food choices. This five-track approach can also be easily adapted to encourage more sustainable choices.
The five tracks proposed under this approach are:
1. Demand-side public interventions (e.g. education programmes or providing dietary information).
2. Voluntary collaborations with the food industry at the supply-demand interface (e.g. food reformulation, food labelling).
3. Firmer regulations when public-private incentives are misaligned (e.g. rules on advertising aimed at children).
4. Fiscal measures to make the price of certain processed food products more closely reflect their social cost (e.g. excise or sales taxes).
5. Public investment in enabling factors, which can improve the evidence-base, facilitate innovation and foster knowledge sharing (e.g. funding of academic or expert studies to understand consumers’ behaviour or identify and categorise consumer profiles).
Sources: Giner and Brooks (2019[77]); OECD (2021[1]); OECD (2025[78]).
Peru has implemented diverse policies related to nutrition and diet
Peru published its first food-based dietary guidelines in 2019, developed by the National Centre for Food and Nutrition within the National Health Institute. These guidelines can be useful tools to translate nutrient recommendations into easy-to-understand messages for the general public and are a common first-track demand-side public intervention in OECD countries. Peru’s food guide focuses on physical activity and drinking on the one hand, and recommended food groups and their proportionality on the other (FAO, 2025[79]).
Legislative and policy measures have aimed to improve the nutritional value of food and drinks available in schools, and to promote healthy diets and lifestyles. Key policies include the national warning label system and the ban on all types of advertising of unhealthy food and beverages aimed at children. Many of these align with the four-track approach developed by the OECD (Table 5.1).
Source: World Cancer Research Fund International (2025[80]), Nourishing and Moving policy databases, https://policydatabase.wcrf.org/level_one?page=nourishing-level-one#step2=0#step3=309.
OECD countries are increasingly using simplified front-of-pack food labelling schemes. Peru’s Law No. 30021 on the Promotion of Healthy Eating for Children and Adolescents was published in 2013 and came into force in 2019 (Figure 5.14). It established a front-of-package warning labelling system (seals) indicating if a food is high in saturated fats, sugars, sodium or trans fats (MINSA, 2024[81]). Many public health experts praised this measure as an important step to inform consumers about the risks associated with certain food products. However, industry compliance is poor, and the full implementation of regulations, in addition to the technical parameters, has not yet been published (World Cancer Research Fund International, 2025[80]).
Source: Diez-Canseco et al. (2024[82]), Recall, understanding, use, and impact of front-of-package warning labels on ultra processed mothers of preschool children in Peru, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003938.
Some first evaluations of the seals suggest a high level of recognition and a positive trend in reducing the consumption of products with seals, especially in households with children and in middle- and high-income families. One study reported that mothers had a high recall and understanding, especially for sugar warnings, and also reported modifying purchase and eating habits, favouring homemade or “no-octagon” items. However, labels had a limited impact on familiar or favoured foods, or those considered essential. Moreover, their impact on vulnerable groups and schoolchildren was less pronounced. It is, therefore, suggested that they be supplemented with educational campaigns and point-of-sale reinforcement to consolidate their effectiveness (Diez-Canseco, 2024[82]).
Another study found significant reductions in key nutrients in a sample of food products collected over time, with total decreases of 3.4% in calories, 14% in sodium, 36.7% in sugar and 9.2% in saturated fats, except for trans-fat labelling, which remained unchanged. Among liquid ultra-processed foods, sugar content showed a notable 49% reduction during the initial implementation phase. These findings suggest that the implementation of Law No. 30021 in Peru has led to a decline in critical nutrient levels in processed foods, particularly in calories and saturated fats. Front-of-package warning labels play a role in improving nutritional profiles, potentially promoting healthier food choices (Mamani-Urrutia, 2025[83]). To strengthen its policy mix to encourage healthier food choices, Peru could seek inspiration from the wide variety of policy interventions implemented in OECD and accession countries (Table 5.2).
Sources: World Cancer Research Fund International (n.d.[84]), Nutrition policy database, https://policydatabase.wcrf.org/nourishing-moving-search; OECD (2022[85]), Healthy Eating and Active Lifestyles: Best Practices in Public Health, https://doi.org/10.1787/40f65568-en .
Food safety is another important risk for a healthy diet, Peru has put in place several institutions, practices and protocols, but they do not always function efficiently
Food safety is essential for ensuring a healthy diet in Peru because it protects people from foodborne illnesses, chemical contaminants, and unsafe handling practices that can undermine nutrition and well-being. Even when food is abundant and diverse, such as Peru’s rich variety of fruits, vegetables, grains, fish, and meats, it must be produced, transported, and prepared under safe conditions to preserve its nutritional value and prevent health risks. Unsafe food can lead to acute diseases and long-term problems such as malnutrition, particularly affecting vulnerable groups like children and the elderly. By prioritising food safety, Peru safeguards public health, strengthens consumer confidence, supports agricultural livelihoods, and promotes the sustainable use of its vast natural food resources (DIGESA, 2025[86]).
Several government institutions share the responsibility for food safety, each covering different segments of the food supply chain. These include:
DIGESA (Dirección General de Salud Ambiental e Inocuidad Alimentaria), a subdivision of MINSA, is responsible for regulating, overseeing, and inspecting the safety of processed foods, beverages, and food establishments. It also issues sanitary permits and conducts risk monitoring and outbreak responses, as well as sanitary certification for the export of processed foods. Under Legislative Decree No. 1062 (the Food Safety Law, 2008), DIGESA plays a central role in ensuring food intended for human consumption is safe. (DIGESA, 2025[86]).
SENASA, under MIDAGRI, oversees the safety of food of agricultural origin, including fresh fruits, vegetables, dairy, and meat, throughout production, transport, and entry into the market. SENASA also issues phytosanitary and zoosanitary certificates, monitors contaminants like pesticides and veterinary residues, and controls imports and exports of agro-food products (SENASA, 2025[87]).
SANIPES (National Authority for Health and Food Safety in Fisheries and Aquaculture) under the Ministry of Production, is the regulator for the safety and quality of seafood and aquaculture products. It manages the sanitary control across the entire fish supply chain and provides certifications for exports (SANIPES, 2025[88]).
INACAL (National Institute for Quality), a specialised technical body under the Ministry of Production, develops and promotes national quality standards, including those related to food safety to strengthen competitiveness, consumer protection, and international trade. For food safety specifically, it ensures Peruvian regulations are harmonised with global standards, accredits labs that test for contaminants, and supports SENASA, SANIPES, and DIGESA with technical tools for control and certification (INACAL, 2025[89]) (more details in the forthcoming Peru’s Market Openness Review).
MINAM (Ministry of Environment), in co‑ordination with the National Water Authority (ANA), sets quality standards for environmental factors influencing food safety, such as contaminant limits in irrigation water. This indirectly supports food safety by ensuring safe agricultural inputs (ANA, 2025[90]) (see Chapter 3).
Regional, municipal and local authorities are involved in implementing national food safety policies at the local level. Municipalities often oversee the sanitary control of markets and food services, such as restaurants and vendors (DIGESA, 2025[86]).
Despite co‑ordination efforts in forums such as the Permanent Multisectoral Commission on Food Safety (COMPIAL), under MINSA, which brings together SENASA, DIGESA, and SANIPES to address food safety issues. Co‑ordination among these institutions is often weak, leading to overlaps or gaps in enforcement and surveillance. Another problem is the limited surveillance and monitoring, as well as inconsistent monitoring of pesticide residues, veterinary drugs, heavy metals, and microbiological hazards in food products. Limited capacity of accredited laboratories in rural areas slows the detection of foodborne risks. Better co‑ordination to avoid overlapping functions and stronger law enforcement would help achieve food safety in the country (Galagarza et al., 2021[91]).
Moreover, a large portion of food in Peru is sold through traditional markets, street vendors, and informal distribution channels where hygiene and safety controls are minimal. This increases the risk of cross-contamination and outbreaks of foodborne diseases. Furthermore, small-scale farmers and small-scale processors often lack access to cold chains, clean water, proper storage, and sanitary facilities. In rural areas, food safety risks are aggravated by poor waste management and contaminated irrigation water. Excessive or improper use of pesticides, veterinary drugs, and food additives creates residue problems that affect consumer health. Also, many consumers have limited knowledge about food safety practices, and some nutrition programs sometimes overlook the link between diet quality and food safety. Moreover, climate change creates new challenges with emerging pests, pathogens, and water scarcity, increasing risks in agriculture and fisheries (Balcazar, 2015[92]; Galagarza et al., 2021[91]).
In the context of the triple challenge, policymakers are faced with multiple objectives and policy instruments, which inevitably involve synergies and trade-offs. Furthermore, policymakers need to overcome disagreements over facts, diverging interests and differences over values, which often complicate policy design and political decision-making processes (OECD, 2021[1]). This section explores how Peru is dealing with these paradigms, looking at its national food and nutrition security plan.
5.4.1. Policy assessment and evaluation
Peru has a comprehensive food security plan addressing components of the triple challenge
The National Strategy for Food and Nutritional Security (PNSAN) is Peru’s principal multisectoral policy instrument, addressing the various facets of the country’s food systems in a unified manner. Both frameworks focus on five key objectives, which include the availability, access and adequate consumption of safe and nutritious foods, as well as the institutional stability and framework necessary for their implementation (Table 5.3). The aim is to reduce moderate and severe food insecurity to 34.5% by 2050, in contrast to the predicted 59% following current trends (MIDAGRI, 2024[30]). MIDAGRI is currently leading the renewal of the strategy in co‑ordination with the Multisectoral Commission for Food and Nutritional Security (COMSAN).
Source: MIDAGRI (2024[93]), Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricional, https://cdn.www.gob.pe/uploads/document/file/5689382/3122595-folleto-seguridad-alimentaria-y-nutricional.pdf?v=1705421836.
The PNSAN’s objectives10 address components outlined by the OECD’s triple challenge (farmers’ livelihoods, food security and food sustainability) and encompass the directives outlined by sectoral policies and plans pertaining to food system issues. In terms of improving farmers’ livelihoods, it focuses on increasing access to agricultural markets and strengthening the agricultural value chain through various support programmes. These include initiatives to enhance agricultural productivity by providing better access to technological resources and financial services, which are crucial for small to medium-sized farm operations. Such efforts are designed to bolster farmers’ economic standing and create a more resilient agricultural sector that can better withstand economic and environmental challenges.
Food security is another critical area addressed by the PNSAN. The government has implemented policies to improve food availability and access, particularly for vulnerable populations in remote and rural areas. These include developing infrastructure and food assistance programmes (see Section 5.2.1). Food sustainability is addressed by the objective to adapt to climate change and effectively manage potential food security crises.
Resources and co-ordination are limited in tackling food systems-related issues
Despite these efforts, the implementation of these policies faces challenges, including limited resources, logistical constraints and the need for greater co-ordination between different governmental and non-governmental entities. An institutional framework to implement these policies in an integrated manner is still missing.
One key issue is the lack of necessary information for the government to provide public services efficiently and to implement and monitor policies across the country. Transforming food systems requires sound evidence on (1) the extent, characteristics, and drivers of issues; (2) the effectiveness of different policy instruments and their synergies and trade-offs; (3) how policy proposals would affect stakeholders; and (4) citizens’ values and preferences (Deconinck and Giner, 2023[94]). Peru recognises the gaps in terms of impact evaluations of food system policies, with their National Pathway for Food Systems Transformation highlighting the lack of continuous evaluation and feedback on programmes’ abilities to address nutritional issues and ensure the effective supply of healthy food (MIDAGRI, 2021[95]).
Additionally, high levels of informality (71% of the workforce) make it difficult to address the population’s needs with basic essential services such as health and education, particularly in rural areas, which further complicates public investments and programmes for the different needs of key players in food systems.
Furthermore, the current PNSAN has not been updated to reflect recent changes in sectoral institutional frameworks, nor does it explicitly mention some entities or instruments critical to achieving its objectives. Peru’s history of political instability with a high turnover of officials in recent years11 further hinders the consolidation of key actors necessary to implement comprehensive support policies and programmes.
This reflects the overarching issue in Peru of a policy system characterised by isolated activities, implemented by individual agencies, without consistent use of available policy co-ordination tools. The result, then, beyond any theoretical “integration” that might be represented in the PNSAN, or any other document, is actually a collection of disjointed interventions, not designed to generate synergies but rather to meet very specific sectoral objectives.
The PNSAN does propose the creation of an institutional framework to strengthen the role of the COMSAN as the leading entity for all state efforts related to this issue, from production to marketing and proper food consumption. However, achieving the creation of such a multisectoral space with this level of influence will require significant political commitment. However, the PNSAN expired in 2021, and an updated version has not yet been produced (although it is currently in progress), suggesting that integration will remain challenging, at least in the short term.
Peru has made strides to develop its regulatory impact assessments
Regulatory impact assessments (RIA) are increasingly being used as a routine “screening” of proposed new laws and regulations (OECD, 2018[96]) and are among the best practices to ensure that policies are based on the best available evidence. They also assess whether policies provide a net positive to society and whether they are coherent with other government policies. The OECD’s 2016 cross-sectional study on regulatory policy in Peru found that the country already had elements of effective regulatory policy in place, such as an obligatory cost-benefit analysis for all agencies and ministries for certain sets of draft regulations, which need to be publicly available (OECD, 2016[97]). However, Peru also lacked oversight on RIA as it was missing a regulatory policy that encapsulates the entire government, with programmes scattered across ministries and agencies (OECD, 2016[97]). There was also no single inventory on laws, regulations and formalities, making it difficult for citizens and businesses to understand their legal obligations.
Over the past decade, the Peruvian government has implemented a series of measures to improve the quality of regulations. The 2016 OECD study highlighted that Peru lacked, at the time, an exhaustive system for ex ante assessment of draft bills and regulations subject to amendments, with the OECD recommending the implementation of a central government RIA system. In 2021, the Ex-Ante Regulatory Impact Analysis Regulation was approved, with 31 entities applying this instrument before developing a regulation as of November 2022 (GOB, 2023[98]). Furthermore, the Regulatory Quality Analysis system creates an ex-ante evaluation system of the administrative procedures for drafting regulations, the first systemised process in the government of Peru to evaluate the impacts of new rules (OECD, 2019[99]). In 2025, the OECD RPC review concluded that Peru’s recent policies concerning RIAs were satisfactory.
Furthermore, Peru has been working on standardising the requirements, workflows and timetables of subnational governments’ administrative procedures. A Unique System of Procedures has been implemented to facilitate the preparation of standardised documents for completing formalities (GOB, 2023[98]).
Stakeholder engagement
The agro-export sector is comprised of over 2 000 companies, the 10 largest of which produce 21% of the agro-export value (FAO, European Union and CIRAD, 2022[8]). The unions that represent their interests are present in policy decision-making spaces, with the sector often having received priority support from the government. This includes beneficial tax treatments, signing trade agreements easing the passage into new markets, and public investments in irrigation and sanitary quality.
Since the first OECD Integrity Review of Peru in 2017, the country has made significant progress in the areas of integrity and transparency (OECD, 2024[100]). The country has established its Secretariat of Public Integrity as well as the National Authority of Transparency and Access to Public Information, which play a central role in preventing and sanctioning corruption. Peru has also developed an Integrity Model and made advances in inter-institutional co-ordination mechanisms. However, impact is limited by challenges linked to their credibility and independence, as well as overlapping responsibilities and insufficient resources (OECD, 2024[100]).
Inter-ministerial co-ordination and information-sharing on food systems-related policy areas is limited
Inter-ministerial co-ordination is essential to achieve food systems transformation. Strong inter-institutional mechanisms should integrate relevant actors and engage them in strategic development. Such mechanisms facilitate the identification of potential synergies and trade-offs and offer the opportunity to discuss the best way to address them (UN Food Systems Coordination Hub, 2021[101]). As mentioned previously, Peru’s lack of policy co-ordination on food systems-related policies, such as the PNSAN has hindered its ability to tackle the triple challenge effectively. Other tools used by OECD countries to enhance inter-ministerial co-ordination include bilateral agreements (e.g. memorandum of understanding) and deploying networks and peer-learning opportunities.
5.4.2. Engagement at the international level
The United Nations Food Systems Summit
The United Nations Food Systems Summit (UNFSS) took place in September 2021. It gave participants an opportunity to discuss five axes or action areas, with follow-up stocktaking meetings to be held every two years. Engagement by OECD countries has been high in relation to the different official and unofficial initiatives in the context of the UNFSS. For example, 33 out of the 38 OECD countries and the European Union have participated in at least one of the UNFSS coalitions, and 27 OECD countries and the European Union have presented national pathways (Figure 5.15). Peru has presented a national pathway, although it has not participated in a coalition.
Note: Besides OECD and accession candidate countries, the list also includes the European Union.
Source: UN Food Systems Coordination Hub (n.d.[102]), UN Food Systems Coordination Hub Website, https://www.unfoodsystemshub.org/en.
Peru’s food systems face a complex array of challenges that hinder its progress towards achieving sustainable development and food security. The country’s diverse geography contributes to significant regional disparities in sufficient infrastructure, including road networks, cold chains and specialised transport. These disparities are exacerbated by limited access to advanced agricultural technologies and practices, which are often concentrated in more developed areas, leaving remote and less developed regions at a disadvantage.
Governance challenges add another layer of complexity, with a notable lack of cohesion and co-ordination among the various government bodies and sectors. This lack of a unified approach leads to inefficiencies and a fragmented policy landscape, making it difficult to implement comprehensive strategies addressing the OECD’s triple challenge effectively across the entire agri-food system.
The Peruvian Government has enacted a series of policies spanning regulatory reforms, support for smallholder farmers, and initiatives aimed at improving agricultural value chains and sustainability. However, the implementation of these policies is fraught with challenges. The systemic governance issues, characterised by a lack of integration and co-ordination across different levels of government, lead to siloed and uncoordinated efforts that fail to achieve their full potential. Additionally, resource constraints, both financial and human, a lack of monitoring systems, and low programme outreach, further complicate the effective implementation of these policies. Many regions, especially those that are less developed, lack the necessary resources and capacities to execute complex agricultural and food security programmes, which results in uneven benefits and impacts across the country.
The country faces the double challenge of a high incidence of food insecurity, while an increasing trend of obesity is observed in both urban and rural areas. The government has implemented several food assistance programmes which target the most vulnerable groups suffering from food insecurity, alongside policies to encourage healthier diets, such as the front-of-package seals and restrictions on advertising of unhealthy food and beverages. However, continued rising trends of both severe food insecurity and obesity rates indicate the limited impact of these policies. The need for better data collection across the country is necessary to strengthen policy evaluation and formulate more effective policies.
Participation in co-operatives, producer organisations and other associative forms is low. There are some interventions designed to promote organisation, quality schemes and short value chains; however, more efforts are needed to better link smallholders to both domestic and global markets.
Upon reflecting on the broader context of the OECD’s triple challenge – enhancing farmers’ livelihoods, ensuring food security and promoting sustainability – it is evident that Peru’s strategic approaches, while well-intentioned and theoretically robust, can struggle in practice due to significant internal and external pressures. Moreover, challenges of governance, resource allocation and regional disparities could start to be addressed through a more integrated and co-ordinated policy approach that may help to bridge the gaps between different sectors and regions.
There is a critical need for an overarching institutional framework that not only unifies various efforts but also fosters collaboration between government agencies, private sector entities and community organisations. Peru could enhance collaborations with the private sector and encourage more ambitious actions from their side, as the role of the private sector in OECD countries concerning healthier and more sustainable food choices has been significant. Such a framework could enhance the scalability of successful initiatives and ensure that the benefits of policies are more uniformly distributed across the entire country.
Lastly, food safety in Peru faces multiple challenges, including a fragmented institutional framework where responsibilities are divided among DIGESA, SENASA, INACAL, SANIPES, and local governments with limited co‑ordination, leading to enforcement gaps and limited monitoring of chemical and microbiological hazards. Surveillance is further constrained by the lack of accredited laboratories in rural areas, slowing risk detection. At the same time, the predominance of informal markets and street vendors with minimal hygiene controls, combined with small-scale farmers’ limited access to cold chains, clean water, and sanitary facilities, heightens risks of contamination and foodborne disease outbreaks. Additional threats arise from improper pesticide and veterinary drug use, limited waste management, contaminated irrigation water, and low consumer awareness of safe practices, while climate change exacerbates vulnerabilities by introducing new pests, pathogens, and water scarcity into the food system.
References
[90] ANA (2025), Autoridad Nacional del Agua, https://www.gob.pe/institucion/ana/institucional.
[49] Andersen CT, R. (2015), “articipation in the Juntos Conditional Cash Transfer Program in Peru Is Associated with Changes in Child Anthropometric Status but Not Language Development or School Achievement”, J Nutr, Vol. 145/10, https://doi.org/10.3945/jn.115.213546.
[61] APEC (2024), From Farm to Fork: Tackling the Global Challenge of Food Loss and Waste, https://www.apec.org/press/features/2024/from-farm-to-fork--tackling-the-global-challenge-of-food-loss-and-waste (accessed on 22 August 2025).
[58] APEC (2024), Trujillo Principles for Preventing and Reducing Food Loss and Waste in the Asia-Pacific Region, https://www.apec.org/meeting-papers/sectoral-ministerial-meetings/food-security/9th-apec-food-security-ministerial-meeting/trujillo-principles-for-preventing-and-reducing-food-loss-and-waste-in-the-asia-pacific-region (accessed on 22 August 2025).
[92] Balcazar (2015), Regulations is not the same as prohibition: The major challenge of regulating the food industry in Peru, https://ideas.llorenteycuenca.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2015/06/150609_report_DI_food_industry_regulation_Peru_ENG.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
[56] Bedoya-Perales, Dal’ Magro (2021), “Quantification of Food Losses and Waste in Peru: A Mass Flow Analysis along the Food Supply Chain”, Sustainability, Vol. 13/5, https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052807.
[53] Brewer, J. et al. (2021), “Use of Formal and Informal Food Resources by Food Insecure Families in Lima, Peru: A Mixed-Methods Analysis”, Journal of Community Health, Vol. 46/6, pp. 1069-1077, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-021-00989-y.
[41] Caman, V. (2023), CamAnálisis de la eficiencia del Programa de Complementación Alimentaria (PCA) en la reducción del hambre de la población pobre en la provincia de Cañete en el período 2013-2017. Tesis para optar el grado académico, Universidad Continental, Lima Peru.
[66] CCAC (2021), Inspired by Chile’s National Organic Waste Strategy, Peru Aims to Transform the Sector, https://www.ccacoalition.org/news/inspired-chiles-national-organic-waste-strategy-peru-aims-transform-sector.
[46] Cerna, S. (2015), Mujeres, leche y política: Estudio comparativo del Programa del Vaso de Leche, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima, https://alacip.org/cong15/app-herrera8c.pdf.
[94] Deconinck, K. and C. Giner (2023), “Overcoming evidence gaps on food systems: Synthesis”, OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers, No. 199, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/043db97b-en.
[82] Diez-Canseco, F. (2024), “Recall, understanding, use, and impact of front-of-package warning labels on ultra processed mothers of preschool children in Peru”, PLOS GLOBAL PUBLIC HEALTH, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003938.
[86] DIGESA (2025), DIGESA, http://www.digesa.minsa.gob.pe/index.asp.
[32] EDIR (2023), Estrategia de Desarrollo e Innovacion Regional Region Ayacucho, https://cdn.www.gob.pe/uploads/document/file/6681753/5804000-edir-ayacucho-resumen%282%29.pdf?v=1721666183.
[28] EDIR (2023), Estrategias de Desarrollo e Innovación Regional: Region APURIMAC, https://www.grade.org.pe/wp-content/uploads/01-EDIR-Resumen_Apur%C3%ADmac_Web.pdf.
[31] EDIR (2023), Formulacion de la Estrategia de Desarrollo e Innovacion Regional: Huanuco, https://cdn.www.gob.pe/uploads/document/file/6614786/5749938-caracterizacion-de-cadenas-de-valor-de-huanuco.pdf?v=1722375624.
[21] El Peruano (2021), Ley de Perfeccionamiento de la Asociatividad de los productores agrarios en cooperativas agrarias Ley 31335, https://busquedas.elperuano.pe/dispositivo/NL/1980284-1.
[37] El Peruano (2021), Ley de Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricional, https://busquedas.elperuano.pe/dispositivo/NL/1976374-1.
[19] El Peruano (2019), Decreto Supremo que aprueba el Plan Nacional de Agricultura Familiar 2019-2021, https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/per193709.pdf.
[59] El Peruano (2019), Normas Legales Ley 30988, https://busquedas.elperuano.pe/dispositivo/NL/1791312-3.
[60] El Peruano (2017), Normas legales Ley 30498, https://www.mef.gob.pe/en/por-instrumento/decreto-supremo/15696-decreto-supremo-n-055-2017-ef/file.
[79] FAO (2025), Food-based dietary guidelines - Peru, https://www.fao.org/nutrition/education/food-dietary-guidelines/regions/countries/peru/en/#:~:text=Take%20care%20of%20your%20weight,of%20physical%20activity%20every%20day.
[42] FAO (2025), School food global hub- Peru, https://www.fao.org/platforms/school-food/around-the-world/latin-america-and-the-caribbean/peru/en.
[64] FAO (2024), More than 12 million tons of food are lost throughout the production chain in Peru, https://www.fao.org/peru/noticias/detail-events/en/c/1712376/.
[26] FAO (2020), Urban Food Systems and COVID-19: The Role of Cities and Local Governments in Responding to the Emergency, http://www.fao.org/3/ca8600en/CA8600EN.pdf.
[57] FAO (2011), Global Food Losses and Food Waste – Extent, Causes and Prevention, https://www.fao.org/sustainable-food-value-chains/library/details/en/c/266053/.
[8] FAO, European Union and CIRAD (2022), Perfil de sistemas alimentarios: Perú. Catalizar la transformación sostenible e inclusiva de nuestros, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome; European Union, Brussels; CIRAD, Montpellier, France, https://doi.org/10.4060/cc2239es.
[76] FAOSTAT (2024), Apparent intake (based on household consumption and expenditure surveys), https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/HCES (accessed on 5 July 2025).
[9] FAOSTAT (2022), Food Systems Dashboard- Peru, https://www.foodsystemsdashboard.org/countries/per/fsci (accessed on 22 August 2025).
[65] FLPC and GFN (2021), The Global Food Donation Policy Atlas: Peru Legal Guide Food Donation Law and Policy, https://www.foodbanking.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Peru-Legal-Guide.pdf.
[2] Food Systems Dashboard (2025), About Food Systems, https://www.foodsystemsdashboard.org/information/about-food-systems.
[17] FreshPlaza (2025), “We are not lacking optimism, because Peru is one of the most entrepreneurial countries in the world”, https://www.freshplaza.com/north-america/article/9626316/we-are-not-lacking-optimism-because-peru-is-one-of-the-most-entrepreneurial-countries-in-the-world/.
[91] Galagarza, O. et al. (2021), “Occurrence of Chemical Contaminants in Peruvian Produce: A Food-Safety Perspective”, Foods, Vol. 10/7, p. 1461, https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10071461.
[77] Giner, C. and J. Brooks (2019), “Policies for encouraging healthier food choices”, OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers, No. 137, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/11a42b51-en.
[36] Giner, C. and O. Placzek (2022), “Food insecurity and food assistance programmes across OECD countries: Overcoming evidence gaps”, OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers, No. 183, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/42b4a7fa-en.
[98] GOB (2023), Improving regulatory quality. Peru in the path to the OECD membership, https://cdn.www.gob.pe/uploads/document/file/4720542/Peru%20on%20its%20Way%20to%20the%20OECD_versi%C3%B3n%20ingl%C3%A9s.pdf?v=1687476557.
[29] Gruere, G., A. Giuliani and M. Smale (2006), Marketing underutilized plant species for the benefit of the poor: a conceptual framework, EPTD Discussion Paper 154. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington DC., https://hdl.handle.net/.
[68] Holland Circular Hotspot (2021), Waste Management Country Report: Peru, https://hollandcircularhotspot.nl/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Report_Waste_Management_Peru_20210322.pdf.
[63] IANAS (2017), Challenges and Opportunities for Food and Nutrition Security in the Americas The View of the Academies of Sciences, https://ianas.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Peru.pdf.
[89] INACAL (2025), INACAL, https://www.gob.pe/institucion/inacal/institucional.
[10] INDECOPI (2023), Estudio de mercado sobre el sector lacteo en el Peru, https://cdn.www.gob.pe/uploads/document/file/6215219/5476622-estudio-de-mercado-sobre-el-sector-lacteo-en-el-peru.pdf?v=1713476833.
[5] INEI (2025), Cuentas Nacionales, https://m.inei.gob.pe/estadisticas/indice-tematico/national-accounts/ (accessed on 6 June 2025).
[4] INEI (2025), Perú: Producto Bruto Interno Según Actividad Económica (Nivel 54), 2007-2024, https://m.inei.gob.pe/estadisticas/indice-tematico/national-accounts/.
[16] INEI (2025), Productores Agropecuarios – Principales Resultados de la Encuesta Nacional Agropecuaria (ENA), 2018-2019 y 2022-2024, https://cdn.www.gob.pe/uploads/document/file/8237929/6879473-productores-agropecuarios-principales-resultados-de-la-encuesta-nacional-agropecuaria-ena-2018-2019-y-2022-2024%282%29.pdf?v=1750438114.
[72] INEI (2024), Perú: Enfermedades No Transmisibles Y Transmisibles, 2023, https://www.inei.gob.pe/media/MenuRecursivo/publicaciones_digitales/Est/Lib1951/libro.pdf.
[6] INEI (2024), Perú: Estructura Empresarial, 2021, https://www.inei.gob.pe/media/MenuRecursivo/publicaciones_digitales/Est/Lib1948/libro.pdf.
[12] INEI (2023), Encuesta Nacional Agropecuaria 2022 - Principales Resultados: Pequeñas y Medianas Unidades Agropecuarias 2014-2019 y 2021-2022, Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática (INEI), https://www.inei.gob.pe/media/MenuRecursivo/publicaciones_digitales/Est/Lib1912/libro.pdf.
[83] Mamani-Urrutia, V. (2025), “Evaluating nutrient profiles of packaged foods in Peru pre- and post-introduction of front-of pack warning labels, 2018-2021”, Rom J Diabetes Nutr Metab Dis, Vol. 32/1, pp. 26-33, https://doi.org/10.46389/rjd-2025-1814.
[7] MEF (2022), El Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas crea la “Mesa Ejecutiva para el Desarrollo del Sector de Alimentos y Bebidas Industrializadas, https://www.mef.gob.pe/en/?option=com_content&language=en-GB&Itemid=101108&view=article&catid=100&id=7512&lang=en-GB (accessed on 20 August 2025).
[62] MIDAGRI (2025), Member economy report: Progress review on FLW reduction- Peru, https://apec-flows.ntu.edu.tw/upload/edit/file/S4-4-Peru_Presentation%20Workshop%20FLW%20FV.pdf.
[30] MIDAGRI (2024), Política Nacional de Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricional, https://www.cooperacionsuiza.pe/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/PNSAN-INFORME-PASOS-3-y-4-19-07-2024.pdf.
[93] MIDAGRI (2024), Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricional, https://cdn.www.gob.pe/uploads/document/file/5689382/3122595-folleto-seguridad-alimentaria-y-nutricional.pdf?v=1705421836.
[18] MIDAGRI (2023), Objetivos de la reforma agraria, https://www.midagri.gob.pe/portal/objetivos/70-marco-legal/titulacion-agraria-en-el-peru/413-el-proceso-de-reforma-agraria.
[14] MIDAGRI (2022), Mas de 10mil socios integran las coopertivas agrarias inscritas ante el MIDAGRI, https://www.gob.pe/institucion/midagri/noticias/583737-mas-de-10-mil-socios-integran-las-cooperativas-agrarias-inscritas-ante-el-midagri.
[95] MIDAGRI (2021), Hoja de ruta: Para lograr un sistema alimentario sostenible en el Perú, https://www.unfoodsystemshub.org/docs/unfoodsystemslibraries/national-pathways/peru/2021-09-23-es-hoja-de-ruta-sas-peru-v1-midagri.pdf?sfvrsn=146c4d04_1.
[25] MIDAGRI (2017), Plan Nacional de Desarorollo Ganadero 2017-2027, https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwj0_NeypJyPAxWARKQEHVk1DA8QFnoECBYQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.midagri.gob.pe%2Fportal%2Fdownload%2Fpdf%2Fdg-ganaderia%2Fplan-nacional-ganadero-2017-2027.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ITg7Q5GJ_uGOsilu.
[44] MIDIS (2025), Política Nacional de Desarrollo e Inclusión Social al 2030 Reporte de cumplimiento año 2024, https://cdn.www.gob.pe/uploads/document/file/8221743/6868947-formato-de-reporte-de-cumplimiento-ds-029-2018-pcm-12-06-2025-de-dgsei_rev-f.pdf?v=1750115040.
[40] MIDIS (2025), Programa de Complementación Alimentaria (PCA), https://www.gob.pe/11779-ministerio-de-desarrollo-e-inclusion-social-programa-de-complementacion-alimentaria-pca.
[45] MIDIS (2025), Programa de Vaso de Leche, https://www.mef.gob.pe/es/?option=com_content&language=es-ES&Itemid=100964&lang=es-ES&view=article&id=448.
[47] MIDIS (2025), Programa NAcional Cuna Mas., https://www.gob.pe/cunamas.
[48] MIDIS (2025), Programa Nacional de Apoyo directo a los Mas Pobres JUNTOS, https://www.gob.pe/institucion/juntos/institucional.
[51] MIDIS (2024), Evaluacion transferencia primera infancia juntos, https://evidencia.midis.gob.pe/evaluacion-transferencia-primera-infancia-juntos-ife/ (accessed on 21 August 2025).
[38] MIDIS (2024), Perú: Evaluación de la Seguridad Alimentaria ante Emergencias (ESAE) 2023, https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjinZfE952PAxVvTKQEHWHwEfoQFnoECAoQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fevidencia.midis.gob.pe%2Fesae-seguridad-alimentaria-2023%2F&usg=AOvVaw1Yiom-JCloiDx2c_hTteTu&opi=89978449.
[43] MIDIS (2019), Evaluación de impacto del Programa Nacional de Alimentación Escolar Qali Warma, https://repositorio.minedu.gob.pe/bitstream/handle/20.500.12799/6894/Evaluaci%c3%b3n%20de%20impacto%20del%20Programa%20Nacional%20de%20Alimentaci%c3%b3n%20Escolar%20Qali%20Warma.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
[67] MINAM (2011), Plan Nacional De Acción Ambiental Planaa - PERÚ 2011-2021, https://www.minam.gob.pe/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/plana_2011_al_2021.pdf.
[81] MINSA (2024), Conoce las advertencias publicitarias (octagonos), https://www.gob.pe/1066-ministerio-de-salud-conoce-las-advertencias-publicitarias-octogonos.
[69] MINSA (2023), Minsa: nutricionistas advierten que 7 de cada 10 peruanos sufre de exceso de peso, https://www.gob.pe/institucion/minsa/noticias/720469-minsa-nutricionistas-advierten-que-7-de-cada-10-peruanos-sufre-de-exceso-de-peso.
[70] MINSA (2022), El Costo de la Doble Carga de la Malnutrición Impacto Social y Económico, https://docs.wfp.org/api/documents/WFP-0000140902/download/?_ga=2.145783543.2110746719.1750866027-1715034018.1748604482.
[15] Mogrovejo, R., P. Vanhuynegem and M. Vásquez (2012), Visión panorámica del sector cooperativo en Perú. El renacimiento de un modelo, p. 104.
[24] MTC (2024), Red Vial del SINAC, según tipo de superficie de rodadura y jerarquía y , 1990 - 2024, https://www.gob.pe/institucion/mtc/informes-publicaciones/344790-estadistica-infraestructura-de-transportes-infraestructura-vial.
[13] OCDC (2019), The Cooperative Context in Peru: A Review of the Historical, Legal, and Regulatory Environment, https://ocdc.coop/wp-content/uploads/imported-files/ContextStudy_Peru-1.pdf.
[78] OECD (2025), “Beyond food loss and waste reduction targets: Translating reduction ambitions into policy outcomes”, OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers, No. 214, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/59cf6c95-en.
[55] OECD (2025), Product Market Regulation database, https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/product-market-regulation.html#PMR-sector-indicators.
[54] OECD (2024), OECD Product Market Regulation (PMR) indicators- Country Notes Peru, https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/topics/policy-sub-issues/product-market-regulation/Peru_PMR%20country%20note.pdf.
[100] OECD (2024), Towards a National Integrity and Transparency System in Peru: Ensuring Impact Through Greater Coherence and Co-ordination, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/4207602e-en.
[75] OECD (2023), Health at a Glance 2023: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/7a7afb35-en.
[74] OECD (2023), OECD Health Statistics, https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/obesity-diet-and-physical-activity.html (accessed on 8 July 2025).
[33] OECD (2023), Trade in Value Added (TiVA) [database], https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/trade-in-value-added.html (accessed on December 2023).
[85] OECD (2022), Healthy Eating and Active Lifestyles: Best Practices in Public Health, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/40f65568-en.
[34] OECD (2022), Report on the Implementation of the OECD Recommendation on the OECD-FAO Guidance for Responsible Agricultural Supply Chains, https://one.oecd.org/document/C(2022)99/en/pdf.
[1] OECD (2021), Making Better Policies for Food Systems, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/ddfba4de-en.
[99] OECD (2019), Implementing Regulatory Impact Analysis in the Central Government of Peru: Case Studies 2014-16, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264305786-en.
[52] OECD (2019), OECD Reviews of Pension Systems: Peru, OECD Reviews of Pension Systems, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e80b4071-en.
[96] OECD (2018), OECD Regulatory Policy Outlook 2018, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264303072-en.
[97] OECD (2016), Regulatory Policy in Peru: Assembling the Framework for Regulatory Quality, OECD Reviews of Regulatory Reform, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264260054-en.
[71] OECD/European Union (2022), Health at a Glance: Europe 2022: State of Health in the EU Cycle, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/507433b0-en.
[22] PEJSIB (2025), Proyecto Especial Jaén San Ignacio Bagua, https://www.gob.pe/institucion/pejsib/institucional (accessed on 21 August 2025).
[50] Sánchez, A. (2020), “Impact of the Juntos Conditional Cash Transfer Program on Nutritional and COgnitive Outcomes in Peru: Comparison between Younger and Older Initial Exposure”, Economic Development and Cultural Change, Vol. 68/3, pp. 1-56.
[88] SANIPES (2025), SANIPES, https://www.gob.pe/institucion/sanipes/institucional.
[87] SENASA (2025), SENASA, https://www.gob.pe/institucion/senasa/institucional.
[11] SNI (2018), Sociedad Nacional de Industrias Memoria Anual, https://www.sni.org.pe/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/memoria-anual.pdf.
[20] SUNAT (2024), Ley de perfeccionamiento de la asociatividad de los productores agrarios en cooperativas agrarias – LEY Nº 31335, https://www.gob.pe/institucion/sunat/informes-publicaciones/5268543-ley-de-perfeccionamiento-de-la-asociatividad-de-los-productores-agrarios-en-cooperativas-agrarias-ley-n-31335.
[27] Tirado-Kulieva, V. (2022), “The vulnerability of a centralized food system: An opportunity to improve food security in times of COVID-19-Peru perspective”, Front. Sustain. Food Syst., Vol. 6, https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2022.901417.
[23] UN Comtrade (2025), UN Comtrade Database, https://comtradeplus.un.org/ (accessed on 3 September 2025).
[101] UN Food Systems Coordination Hub (2021), Policy Brief - Governance of Food Systems Transformation, https://www.unfoodsystemshub.org/docs/unfoodsystemslibraries/fss-community/chapter-2/policybrief_governanceunfss.pdf?sfvrsn=edae3afc_1.
[102] UN Food Systems Coordination Hub (n.d.), UN Food Systems Coordination Hub Website, https://www.unfoodsystemshub.org/en.
[35] UN Food Systems Hub (n.d.), Peru- Domestic Financing to Food Systems, https://www.unfoodsystemshub.org/docs/unfoodsystemslibraries/regional-progress-reviews/latin-america-and-caribbean/domestic-financing-to-food-systems_peru.pdf (accessed on 23 August 2025).
[39] WFP (2025), Annual Country Report 2024- Peru, https://www.wfp.org/publications/annual-country-reports-peru.
[73] WHO (2024), GHO Indicators, https://www.who.int/data/gho/data/indicators/indicator-details/GHO/prevalence-of-obesity-among-adults-bmi--30-(age-standardized-estimate)-(-) (accessed on 8 July 2025).
[3] World Bank (2025), World Development Indicators, https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators (accessed on 10 September 2025).
[80] World Cancer Research Fund International (2025), Nourishing and Moving policy databases, https://policydatabase.wcrf.org/level_one?page=nourishing-level-one#step2=0#step3=309.
[84] World Cancer Research Fund International (n.d.), Nutrition policy database, https://policydatabase.wcrf.org/nourishing-moving-search (accessed on 8 July 2025).
← 1. LAC includes Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico, and Peru. This entails agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value-added.
← 2. Agricultural cooperatives in Peru are cooperativas agrarias in accordance with Peruvian legislation and terminology of Law No. 31335 of 2021. This refers broadly to the entire rural production sector, including agriculture, livestock and forestry.
← 3. Peru has adhered to both the 2022 OECD Declaration on Transformative Solutions for Sustainable Agriculture and Food Systems and the 2016 Declaration on Better Policies to Achieve a Productive, Sustainable and Resilient Global Food System.
← 4. Social assistance includes emergency food assistance
← 5. The 2022 OECD Declaration on Transformative Solutions for Sustainable Agriculture and Food Systems refers to food loss and waste both in the commitments section, as well as in the call for the OECD to develop data, common metrics and analysis that help measure progress. At the same time, a stocktaking of food loss and waste policies is currently being done by the OECD Trade and Agriculture Directorate is currently carrying out a stocktaking of food loss and waste policies, which includes a commitment to reduce food loss and waste and improve its measurement, as well as a call for the OECD to develop data, common metrics and analysis that helps measure progress.
← 6. The Product Market Regulation PMR sectoral indicators do cover retail, including specific information on food and beverages retail outlets. However, data on Peru are not available.
← 7. Based on the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) classification, adults with a BMI body mass index of 25-30 are defined as overweight, and those with a BMI body mass index of 30 or over as obese.
← 8. The Food Systems Dashboard brings together data for around 300 indicators. Countries performance is assessed for 39 diagnostic indicators which include food supply chains, nutrition and health outcomes. For each indicator, countries are considered to be in the green (unlikely challenge area), yellow (potential challenge area), or red (likely challenge area) Peru - Food Systems Dashboard.
← 9. Refers to adults aged 18 and over who report consuming five or more portions per day, excluding fruit or vegetable juices and potatoes, collected from the European Health Interview Survey of 2019.
← 10. As of August 2025, this policy is being updated in Congress.
← 11. The last six years have seen 10 Ministers of Agriculture and 12 Ministers of Production (FAO, European Union and CIRAD, 2022[8]).