Buyers and Traders

Tell us what to change or add.

Archived decisions

1. Check a decision

Open a decision below. Check the area, period, inputs, result and proposed next step.

2. Try the inputs

Use Change example to try different values. Use Data needed to check the fields and sources. The land-use change decision has its own comparison views.

Record your corrections below, then download your answers or print them.

3. Check each decision

1. Compare procurement offers for equivalent product gradesDEC-DP36-002 · Procurement prices
Try this decision

Compare procurement cost per retained kilogram for equivalent grades.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaLanded cost per retained kilogram [LKR/retained kg]Quoted headline price [LKR/initial kg]Next check
Matale supplier-quotation scenario / 2025210.526180Compare the stated price result and payment terms
Rattota supplier-quotation scenario / 2025220170Compare the stated price result and payment terms
Kandy supplier-quotation scenario / 2025206.122190Compare the stated price result and payment terms

What the selected record shows. (180 + 20) / 0.950 = 210.53 LKR per retained kg.

Next step. Compare the stated price result and payment terms. Prepare quote comparison in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.

Loss and transfer-cost assumptions must match; this is not a confirmed purchase price.

Example chart
Landed cost per retained kilogram — fictional 2025 examples
Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Supplier or offer referenceMatale supplier-quotation scenario
Product, grade and weighing basisTomato / same stated grade / per initial kilogram
Quoted purchase price180LKR/initial kg
Non-overlapping transfer and handling cost20LKR/initial kg
Assumed mass not retained for sale5%
Stated delivery date2025-06-25
Stated payment date2025-06-30
Matching grade, weighing basis and terms evidenced in this exampleRecorded
Quotation, grade and terms referenceFictional quotation and specification / version 1

Landed cost per retained kg = (purchase price per initial kg + matching transfer/handling cost per initial kg) / (1 − assumed mass loss% / 100), only when some mass is retained.

Quotes, loss assumptions and costs are fictional. Compare matching grades, weighing bases, payment timing and terms. The result does not authorize a purchase, sale, financing or supply agreement.

Other required records: Product; grade; offer price; unit; market; date; delivery cost.

Calculation appendix

  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
Your checks for this decision
2. Investigate wholesale and retail spreads after costsDEC-DP36-003 · Trading spreads
Try this decision

Compare purchase and sale quotations after stated costs and mass loss.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaQuoted net return per purchased kg [LKR/kg]Unadjusted quoted spread [LKR/kg]Next check
Laggala Pallegama — trading spreads / 202510.942Check matching product grades, quantities, losses and quote periods
Rattota — trading spreads / 202510.9550Check matching product grades, quantities, losses and quote periods
Panvila — trading spreads / 2025835Check matching product grades, quantities, losses and quote periods

What the selected record shows. Quoted net return per purchased kg: 10.9 LKR/kg.

Next step. Check matching product grades, quantities, losses and quote periods. Prepare quote comparison in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.

A spread does not establish actual profit or excess market power.

Example chart
Quoted net return per purchased kg — fictional 2025 examples
Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Comparable purchase quotation180LKR/kg
Comparable selling quotation222LKR/kg
Non-overlapping transfer costs20LKR/kg
Expected saleable mass loss5%
Product, grade and price basisTomato / same stated grade / per purchased kilogram

Quoted spread = sell−buy. Net scenario return per purchased kg = sell×(1−loss%/100)−buy−matching transfer costs.

Use matching grade, price date, currency, mass basis and payment terms. This quotation scenario excludes unlisted costs and is not realized profit or a forecast.

Other required records: Comparable purchase price; sale price; transport; handling; losses; period.

Calculation appendix

  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
Your checks for this decision
3. Prioritize time-sensitive buyer ordersDEC-DP36-004 · Delivery commitments
Try this decision

Check buyer-order tasks against deadlines, resources and dependencies.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaPlanned duration [days]Resource hours remaining [hours]Next check
Laggala Pallegama — delivery commitments / 202538Resolve overlapping resource bookings
Rattota — delivery commitments / 202538Resolve overlapping resource bookings
Panvila — delivery commitments / 202538Resolve overlapping resource bookings

What the selected record shows. Planned duration: 3 days. Resolve overlapping resource bookings.

Next step. Resolve overlapping resource bookings. Prepare schedule review in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.

The example does not accept an order or guarantee delivery.

Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Required resourceWatershed field team
Task start2025-06-01
Task end2025-06-04
Earliest permitted start2025-05-28
Latest permitted finish2025-06-08
Required resource effort16hours
Available resource effort24hours
Predecessor task referenceNone
Mandatory permits and prerequisitesMet

Check start/end order, operating window, effort, predecessor completion and overlapping bookings for the same resource. A conflict is flagged; no optimal schedule is invented.

Other required records: Order; delivery window; available supply; transport capacity; contractual conditions.

Calculation appendix

  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
Your checks for this decision
4. Review supplier delivery performance using accepted recordsDEC-DP36-005 · Supplier reliability
Try this decision

Compare delivered and agreed quantities for the same accepted order.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaDifference [kg]Relative change [%]Next check
Laggala Pallegama — supplier reliability / 2025-10-10Check the matching records and reasons for the difference
Rattota — supplier reliability / 202555Check the matching records and reasons for the difference
Panvila — supplier reliability / 2025-2-2Check the matching records and reasons for the difference

What the selected record shows. Difference: -10 kg.

Next step. Check the matching records and reasons for the difference. Prepare difference review in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.

A shortfall needs acceptance and source checks before determining liability.

Example chart
Difference — fictional 2025 examples
Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Planned value100kg
Observed value90kg

Observed value minus Planned value. Relative change = 100 × difference / Planned value when the earlier value is positive.

Other required records: Supplier; promised quantity; delivered quantity; promised date; actual date; quality.

Calculation appendix

  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
Your checks for this decision
5. Plan replenishment without overcommitting perishable stockDEC-DP36-007 · Stock management
Try this decision

Check usable perishable stock against commitments and expected receipts.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaUncommitted usable stock [kg]Additional demand gap [kg]Next check
Laggala Pallegama — stock management / 2025310190Review replenishment gap
Rattota — stock management / 2025310190Review replenishment gap
Panvila — stock management / 2025310190Review replenishment gap

What the selected record shows. Uncommitted usable stock: 310 kg. Review replenishment gap.

Next step. Review replenishment gap. Prepare stock review in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.

Quantity does not establish freshness, saleability or certain replenishment.

Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Physical stock1,200kg
Quarantined stock100kg
Expired stock50kg
Committed usable stock740kg
Additional demand500kg
Supplier lead time14days
Remaining shelf life of usable stock30days

Usable = physical−quarantined−expired (non-overlapping groups). Available = usable−commitments. Additional gap = max(0, new demand−available).

Stock must be compatible by item, lot, condition, expiry and delivery window. Do not allocate quarantined/expired stock or silently erase overcommitment.

Other required records: Usable stock; commitments; expected demand; lead time; shelf life; expiry.

Calculation appendix

  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
Your checks for this decision
6. Identify handling and storage stages with verified lossesDEC-DP36-008 · Spoilage reduction
Try this decision

Reconcile input mass with saleable output, stock, transfers and by-products.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaUnaccounted physical share [%]Unaccounted mass [kg]Next check
Laggala Pallegama — spoilage reduction / 20256.66780Reconcile the input, output, stock and transfer records
Rattota — spoilage reduction / 20256.66780Reconcile the input, output, stock and transfer records
Panvila — spoilage reduction / 20256.66780Reconcile the input, output, stock and transfer records

What the selected record shows. Unaccounted physical share: 6.667 %.

Next step. Reconcile the input, output, stock and transfer records. Prepare loss-balance review in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.

An unaccounted balance does not identify the stage or cause of loss.

Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Batch input on stated moisture basis1,200kg
Saleable output970kg
Usable by-product85kg
Closing stock45kg
Documented transfers out20kg

Unaccounted = input − saleable output − usable by-products − closing stock − transfers out. Share =100 × unaccounted / input.

Use a consistent moisture basis and process boundary. Unaccounted mass is not automatically avoidable food loss or spoilage.

Other required records: Lot input; saleable output; spoilage; transfers; moisture; stage.

Calculation appendix

  • FAO food loss measurement — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
Your checks for this decision
7. Identify cash gaps from buying and selling schedulesDEC-DP36-011 · Trading cash flow
Try this decision

Review chronological purchase and sale cash events for temporary shortfalls.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaMinimum projected cash [LKR]Maximum projected cash shortfall [LKR]Projected closing cash [LKR]Next check
Produce purchase payment cash-plan scenario / 2025-200,000200,000180,000Review funding and payment timing before committing
Earlier receipt with the same costs / 2025100,0000180,000Check that the stated timing and funds are supported
Higher first-payment scenario / 2025-250,000250,000130,000Review funding and payment timing before committing

What the selected record shows. Lowest projected cash: -200000.00 LKR; shortfall: 200000.00 LKR; closing cash: 180000.00 LKR. The chronological events explain the difference.

Next step. Review funding and payment timing before committing. Prepare balance review in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.

Positive closing cash does not rule out an earlier financing gap.

Example chart
Minimum projected cash — fictional 2025 examples
Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Cash available before the first dated event100,000LKR
Produce purchase payment date2025-06-01
Produce purchase payment250,000LKR
Handling and storage payment date2025-06-08
Handling and storage payment50,000LKR
Buyer receipt date2025-06-25
Buyer receipt380,000LKR

Order the supplied dated receipts and payments. Start with the stated opening cash; add each receipt and subtract each payment once. Minimum cash is the lowest chronological balance, including opening cash. Shortfall = max(0, −minimum cash). Closing cash is opening + receipts − payments.

These are dated fictional cash assumptions, not actual bank balances or a credit recommendation. A positive closing balance can conceal an earlier shortage. Same-day receipt/payment ordering needs evidence.

Other required records: Opening cash; purchase payments; customer receipts; transport; debt; dates.

Calculation appendix

  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
Your checks for this decision
8. Review exposure to a small number of buyersDEC-DP36-013 · Customer dependence
Try this decision

Review the stated sales exposure across buyers.

Verified published component · HHI concentration component

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaCategory amount [LKR]Share of selected total [%]Next check
Kandy wholesale channel / 2025900,00045Review the complete portfolio, category definitions and exposure constraints
Matale retail channel / 2025450,00022.5Review the complete portfolio, category definitions and exposure constraints
Dambulla wholesale channel / 2025300,00015Review the complete portfolio, category definitions and exposure constraints
Colombo processing channel / 2025200,00010Review the complete portfolio, category definitions and exposure constraints
Local cooperative channel / 2025100,0005Review the complete portfolio, category definitions and exposure constraints
Hospitality channel / 202550,0002.5Review the complete portfolio, category definitions and exposure constraints

What the selected record shows. Category amount: 900,000 LKR.

Next step. Review the complete portfolio, category definitions and exposure constraints. Prepare concentration review in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.

Concentration does not establish buyer default probability or a complete portfolio.

Example chart
Category amount — fictional 2025 examples
Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Compatible category amount900,000LKR

Category share = 100 × category amount / total compatible category amounts. HHI = sum of squared fractional shares, displayed on a 0–1 scale.

Categories must be mutually exclusive and cover the stated frame. Do not mix values, quantities, plots or hectares, or treat an HHI competition threshold as an institutional policy. This is a fictional selected sales portfolio, not an actual trader or market total. No concentration-policy threshold is inferred.

Other required records: Buyer sales; total sales; payment history; product; period; concentration.

United States Department of Justice · Herfindahl Hirschman Index
Government publication · Definition and four-firm worked example

The screen uses fractional shares on a 0–1 scale, equivalent to the published percentage-share score divided by 10000. Local exposure categories and policy thresholds are not verified by this source.

Calculation appendix

  • US Department of Justice Herfindahl Hirschman Index — Government publication. HHI definition. Published squared-market-share concentration measure. Prototype uses fractional0–1 scale and no competition-policy threshold.
  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
Your checks for this decision
9. Compare sourcing alternatives where supply is concentratedDEC-DP36-014 · Supplier dependence
Try this decision

Review the stated procurement quantities across suppliers.

Verified published component · HHI concentration component

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaCategory amount [kg]Share of selected total [%]Next check
Laggala farmer group / 2025954.762Review the complete portfolio, category definitions and exposure constraints
Rattota farmer group / 20251909.524Review the complete portfolio, category definitions and exposure constraints
Panvila farmer group / 202528514.286Review the complete portfolio, category definitions and exposure constraints
Ukuwela farmer group / 202538019.048Review the complete portfolio, category definitions and exposure constraints
Dambulla supplier group / 202547523.81Review the complete portfolio, category definitions and exposure constraints
Deltota supplier group / 202557028.571Review the complete portfolio, category definitions and exposure constraints

What the selected record shows. Category amount: 95 kg.

Next step. Review the complete portfolio, category definitions and exposure constraints. Prepare concentration review in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.

Concentration does not establish supplier reliability or an available substitute.

Example chart
Category amount — fictional 2025 examples
Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Compatible category amount95kg

Category share = 100 × category amount / total compatible category amounts. HHI = sum of squared fractional shares, displayed on a 0–1 scale.

Categories must be mutually exclusive and cover the stated frame. Do not mix values, quantities, plots or hectares, or treat an HHI competition threshold as an institutional policy.

Other required records: Supplier volumes; product; total supply; alternatives; risk; delivery reliability.

United States Department of Justice · Herfindahl Hirschman Index
Government publication · Definition and four-firm worked example

The screen uses fractional shares on a 0–1 scale, equivalent to the published percentage-share score divided by 10000. Local exposure categories and policy thresholds are not verified by this source.

Calculation appendix

  • US Department of Justice Herfindahl Hirschman Index — Government publication. HHI definition. Published squared-market-share concentration measure. Prototype uses fractional0–1 scale and no competition-policy threshold.
  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
Your checks for this decision
10. Adjust procurement exposure after reviewing price volatilityDEC-DP36-015 · Price variability
Try this decision

Review variation in comparable procurement-price observations.

Verified published formula · Sample coefficient of variation

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaObserved value [LKR/kg]Next check
Laggala Pallegama — price variability / 2025104Check the comparable series and the reason for its variation
Rattota — price variability / 2025111Check the comparable series and the reason for its variation
Panvila — price variability / 2025118Check the comparable series and the reason for its variation

What the selected record shows. Observed value: 104 LKR/kg.

Next step. Check the comparable series and the reason for its variation. Prepare variation report in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.

A short series does not forecast prices or establish a safe procurement position.

Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Comparable observation104LKR/kg

Display observations in dated order. Sample SD uses n−1; coefficient of variation = 100 × SD / positive mean.

Match definitions, methods, grade, location and reference basis. Gaps are not joined. Descriptive variation is not a forecast, causal effect or significant trend.

Other required records: Comparable price series; dates; product grade; market; sample coverage.

National Institute of Standards and Technology United States · Dataplot Coefficient of Variation
Government publication · Description, sample coefficient of variation and ratio-scale restrictions

Use a meaningful zero and positive mean. Local series selection and decision limits still need confirmation.

Calculation appendix

  • NIST Coefficient of Variation — Government publication. Definition of sample CV. Published sample SD/mean ratio; positive ratio-scale mean is needed.
  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
Your checks for this decision
11. Resolve missing provenance for traded lotsDEC-DP36-016 · Traceability
Try this decision

Trace missing source links for the stated traded lots.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaBroken or affected lineage [items]Next check
Laggala Pallegama — traceability / 20251Investigate linked downstream lot
Rattota — traceability / 20251Investigate linked downstream lot
Panvila — traceability / 20251Investigate linked downstream lot

What the selected record shows. Broken or affected lineage: 1 items. Investigate linked downstream lot.

Next step. Investigate linked downstream lot. Prepare source comparison in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.

A reference chain does not prove physical identity or product conformity.

Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Upstream lot/source referenceEXAMPLE-ROOT
Downstream lot/batch reference2025-BATCH-1
Exact upstream source versionSample version1
Recorded upstream issueConfirmed defect

Follow recorded upstream→downstream links within the same scope and period. Flag missing links; a confirmed defect identifies downstream linked candidates for authorized investigation.

Recorded lineage is not proof of product identity or recall authority. Preserve multi-source batches, transfers and versions; do not clear unlinked lots as safe.

Other required records: Farm source; lot ID; transfers; storage; buyer shipment; certification.

Calculation appendix

  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
Your checks for this decision
12. Compare candidate markets against logistics and demandDEC-DP36-017 · Market expansion
Try this decision

Compare candidate markets using buyer, product and logistics evidence.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaPotential benefit · assumptionResources and adverse effectsSupporting records / conditionsNext check
Local cooperative market / Laggala PallegamaInvestigate the local cooperative market.Needs actual demand, grades, costs, terms and delivery access.Records: Not provided; condition evidence: Not providedObtain the missing records before choosing
Dambulla wholesale market / Laggala PallegamaInvestigate the Dambulla wholesale market.Needs matching current quotes, fees, losses, transport and buyer evidence.Records: Not provided; condition evidence: Not providedObtain the missing records before choosing
Contracted processing buyer / Laggala PallegamaInvestigate a contracted processing buyer.Needs product specifications, acceptance, capacity and contract terms.Records: Not provided; condition evidence: Not providedObtain the missing records before choosing

What the selected record shows. There is not enough information to choose this option. Obtain the records and evidence about conditions listed below. The supplied budget less cost is 300,000 LKR.

Next step. Obtain the missing records before choosing. Prepare evidence request in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.

Information still needed
  • Records needed: Market demand; access; competition evidence; transport; margins; regulatory needs
  • Applicable conditions, what was checked and the supporting reference

Cost alone does not establish demand or a feasible sale.

Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Option cost1,500,000LKR
Available budget1,800,000LKR
Mandatory constraintsMet
Potential benefit and its evidence or assumptionInvestigate the local cooperative market.
Resource needs and adverse effectsNeeds actual demand, grades, costs, terms and delivery access.
Required records available for this optionNot provided
Reference for the required recordsNot provided
Applicable conditions, check result and supporting referenceNot provided

Compare each alternative's stated benefit, adverse effects, domain evidence and mandatory constraints. Where cost and budget are supplied, budget balance = budget − option cost. A budget balance alone does not determine domain feasibility or select an option.

Cost alone does not establish demand or a feasible sale.

Other required records: Market demand; access; competition evidence; transport; margins; regulatory needs.

Calculation appendix

  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
Your checks for this decision
13. Compare packaging options for losses cost and buyer needsDEC-DP36-019 · Packaging choices
Try this decision

Compare packaging choices using loss evidence, costs and buyer requirements.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaPotential benefit · assumptionResources and adverse effectsSupporting records / conditionsNext check
Reusable crates / Laggala PallegamaUse reusable crates.Needs product compatibility, cleaning, return logistics and measured loss evidence.Records: Not provided; condition evidence: Not providedObtain the missing records before choosing
Ventilated cartons / Laggala PallegamaUse ventilated cartons.Needs strength, moisture, ventilation, buyer acceptance and disposal evidence.Records: Not provided; condition evidence: Not providedObtain the missing records before choosing
Improved handling with existing packs / Laggala PallegamaImprove handling with existing packs.Needs tested procedures, labour, product compatibility and loss monitoring.Records: Not provided; condition evidence: Not providedObtain the missing records before choosing

What the selected record shows. There is not enough information to choose this option. Obtain the records and evidence about conditions listed below. The supplied budget less cost is 300,000 LKR.

Next step. Obtain the missing records before choosing. Prepare evidence request in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.

Information still needed
  • Records needed: Packaging costs; damage rates; capacity; buyer specification; handling conditions
  • Applicable conditions, what was checked and the supporting reference

Descriptive benefits do not establish measured loss reduction or packaging conformity.

Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Option cost1,500,000LKR
Available budget1,800,000LKR
Mandatory constraintsMet
Potential benefit and its evidence or assumptionUse reusable crates.
Resource needs and adverse effectsNeeds product compatibility, cleaning, return logistics and measured loss evidence.
Required records available for this optionNot provided
Reference for the required recordsNot provided
Applicable conditions, check result and supporting referenceNot provided

Compare each alternative's stated benefit, adverse effects, domain evidence and mandatory constraints. Where cost and budget are supplied, budget balance = budget − option cost. A budget balance alone does not determine domain feasibility or select an option.

Descriptive benefits do not establish measured loss reduction or packaging conformity.

Other required records: Packaging costs; damage rates; capacity; buyer specification; handling conditions.

Calculation appendix

  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
Your checks for this decision
14. Hold a rice lot that exceeds its applicable moisture specificationDEC-DP36-021 · Published method
Try this decision

Source. International publication.

Data needed. Rice type, lot, representative moisture result, buyer specification and destination requirements.

Method. For rice covered by CXS 198, compare mass-percent moisture with the applicable limit. Codex gives 15% as the general maximum and allows lower limits for specified destinations or conditions.

Worked example. A milled rice lot tests at 14.4%. Compare it with the applicable buyer or destination specification before accepting it. A 15% example limit would pass the moisture check.

Next step. Hold the affected lot for retest or seek the buyer’s quality determination before acceptance.

Codex Alimentarius Commission, Standard for Rice. CXS 198-1995, §§1 and 3.2.1, product scope and moisture content.

Confirm scope, sampling method and the stricter local, buyer or destination requirement that applies.

Your checks for this decision

4. Existing data forms for your institution

Check which existing source fields can supply the decision inputs.

Wholesale food prices — 2026-10-28 · Markets & Value Chains

Existing form reference: 5ef25f806a9c3864

FieldUnitRequired
CommodityConfirm if neededNo
MarketConfirm if neededNo
DateConfirm if neededNo
Average priceConfirm if neededNo
UnitConfirm if neededNo
Source pageConfirm if neededNo
Wholesale food prices — 2026-10-27 · Markets & Value Chains

Existing form reference: 65fb55fc4bacaeb4

FieldUnitRequired
CommodityConfirm if neededNo
MarketConfirm if neededNo
DateConfirm if neededNo
Average priceConfirm if neededNo
UnitConfirm if neededNo
Source pageConfirm if neededNo
Wholesale food prices — 2026-10-26 · Markets & Value Chains

Existing form reference: 3d27791c0b26d5a7

FieldUnitRequired
CommodityConfirm if neededNo
MarketConfirm if neededNo
DateConfirm if neededNo
Average priceConfirm if neededNo
UnitConfirm if neededNo
Source pageConfirm if neededNo
Wholesale food prices — 2026-10-23 · Markets & Value Chains

Existing form reference: 362fe913ea87b4d5

FieldUnitRequired
CommodityConfirm if neededNo
MarketConfirm if neededNo
DateConfirm if neededNo
Average priceConfirm if neededNo
UnitConfirm if neededNo
Source pageConfirm if neededNo
Wholesale food prices — 2026-10-22 · Markets & Value Chains

Existing form reference: 4c6b93b0f4ec772d

FieldUnitRequired
CommodityConfirm if neededNo
MarketConfirm if neededNo
DateConfirm if neededNo
Average priceConfirm if neededNo
UnitConfirm if neededNo
Source pageConfirm if neededNo
Wholesale food prices — 2026-10-21 · Markets & Value Chains

Existing form reference: edf7d040b8bcbc45

FieldUnitRequired
CommodityConfirm if neededNo
MarketConfirm if neededNo
DateConfirm if neededNo
Average priceConfirm if neededNo
UnitConfirm if neededNo
Source pageConfirm if neededNo
Wholesale food prices — 2026-10-20 · Markets & Value Chains

Existing form reference: f462aa65988abf9a

FieldUnitRequired
CommodityConfirm if neededNo
MarketConfirm if neededNo
DateConfirm if neededNo
Average priceConfirm if neededNo
UnitConfirm if neededNo
Source pageConfirm if neededNo
Export earnings by sector, 2015–2026 · Markets & Value Chains

Existing form reference: b3d77003d1866be4

FieldUnitRequired
SectorConfirm if neededNo
YearConfirm if neededNo
Export earningsUSD millionNo
Reporting basisConfirm if neededNo
Export contribution by sector, 2015–2026 · Markets & Value Chains

Existing form reference: 1084af35eff25970

FieldUnitRequired
SectorConfirm if neededNo
YearConfirm if neededNo
Export contribution%No
Reporting basisConfirm if neededNo
Major export markets, 2025 · Markets & Value Chains

Existing form reference: d897e621e1f5fb87

FieldUnitRequired
SectorConfirm if neededNo
MarketConfirm if neededNo
YearConfirm if neededNo
Export earningsUSD millionNo

5. Documents and images

Your institution has its own document and image library. Use the same library for reports, photos and other evidence.

Buyers and Traders Documents and images prototype screen
Buyers and Traders. Prototype screen. Select the image to enlarge it.

What you can try

  1. Open Documents and images. Check the institution name.
  2. Use All files, Documents or Images to find a file. Open its preview or download the original.
  3. Use a sample file to try Add file. Private is the starting choice. Public needs a source, permission to share and review.
  4. Use Access preview to try the institution reviewer and Public visitor views.

Files added in the prototype stay in this browser. Public sharing is an access preview. Existing public reference links already work online.

What your institution needs to confirm

6. Data structure management

Data structure keeps the existing source tree, records, charts and map. Manage structure adds a place to propose changes to definitions.

Buyers and Traders Data structure management prototype screen
Buyers and Traders. Prototype screen. Select the image to enlarge it.

What you can try

  1. Open Data structure and choose Manage structure.
  2. Use Add base domain for a main information area. Add inside creates a subject area, a nested subject, an entity type or a field under the right parent.
  3. Give the definition a clear name, code and meaning. Reuse an existing definition when the meaning is the same.
  4. For a field, check the data type, unit, required value, limits and missing-value rule. Save a Draft, then try the separate reviewer view.

An entity type means a kind of thing or event, such as a reservoir or an inspection. Drafts stay in this browser. A demo approval does not change real definitions, data, chart links or sharing rights.

What your institution needs to confirm

7. Users and access

User management shows example profiles for each institution. People and Roles and access let you review the proposed account screens.

Buyers and Traders Users and access prototype screen
Buyers and Traders. Prototype screen. Select the image to enlarge it.

What you can try

  1. Open User management and choose the institution. The rows are examples, not a list of your staff.
  2. Use View access to check a role. An administrator title alone does not give access to Private files.
  3. Try Preview invitation or Preview access change. Check the role, start date, optional end date and reason.
  4. Review the example permissions and tell us which job roles should receive each one.

These are interface previews only. They create no account, send no email and change no access. Use example details in the preview. Institution verification does not grant a real permission.

What your institution needs to confirm

8. Can you share data regularly?

We currently use public data and published reports where available. Please confirm whether your institution can provide data directly, so we can avoid retyping or reading figures from PDFs.

Do not enter passwords, access keys or private account details.

9. Anything else we should change?

Use the Download answers button at the top of this page. Share the downloaded file or printed copy through your agreed review channel. Nothing is sent automatically.