Processors and Exporters

Sri Lanka decision proposal

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. Investigate high shipment cost per tonne-kilometreDEC-DP37-002 · Logistics costs
Try this decision

Compare shipment cost per matching tonne-kilometre.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaShipment cost per tonne-kilometre [LKR/(t km)]Next check
Laggala Pallegama — logistics costs / 2025187.5Review cost components and comparable verified outputs
Rattota — logistics costs / 2025187.5Review cost components and comparable verified outputs
Panvila — logistics costs / 2025187.5Review cost components and comparable verified outputs

What the selected record shows. Shipment cost per tonne-kilometre: 187.5 LKR/(t km).

Next step. Review cost components and comparable verified outputs. Prepare cost comparison in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.

A low ratio does not establish equivalent service quality, handling or delivery conditions.

Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Shipment cost180,000LKR
Actual carried load12t
Verified travelled route distance80km

Shipment cost / (actual load tonnes × verified route kilometres). Match empty-return treatment and cost allocation.

An absent or zero denominator has no unit-cost result. Keep fixed, variable and opportunity costs identifiable.

Other required records: Shipment cost; load tonnes; verified distance kilometres; route; 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
2. Review export unit values and destination performanceDEC-DP37-004 · Export performance
Try this decision

Compare export value per matching shipped kilogram.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaOutput per resource [LKR/kg]Next check
Laggala Pallegama — export performance / 20251,962.667Check matching outputs, denominators and operating conditions
Rattota — export performance / 20252,389.333Check matching outputs, denominators and operating conditions
Panvila — export performance / 20252,197.333Check matching outputs, denominators and operating conditions

What the selected record shows. Recorded export value: 8,832,000 LKR; Export quantity on matching product basis: 4,500 kg. This gives 1,962.667 LKR/kg.

Next step. Check matching outputs, denominators and operating conditions. Prepare performance comparison in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.

Unit value may reflect product mix and is not a price or profitability index.

Example chart
Output per resource — fictional 2025 examples
Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Recorded export value8,832,000LKR
Export quantity on matching product basis4,500kg

Recorded export value / Export quantity on matching product basis, for the same product, process and period.

A unit value mixes prices and product composition. It is not automatically a like-for-like market price. Match grade, product code, currency and period.

Other required records: Product; destination; export value; quantity; currency; 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. Compare orders with usable processing capacityDEC-DP37-006 · Capacity planning
Try this decision

Compare processing demand with usable machine hours.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaUsable capacity minus demand [machine hours]Usable capacity [machine hours]Next check
Laggala Pallegama — capacity planning / 2025-15135Review capacity shortfall
Rattota — capacity planning / 2025-15135Review capacity shortfall
Panvila — capacity planning / 2025-15135Review capacity shortfall

What the selected record shows. Usable capacity minus demand: -15 machine hours. Review capacity shortfall.

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

Capacity alone does not establish product compatibility or a production booking.

Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Demand in the selected period150machine hours
Rated capacity for that period180machine hours
Unavailable or restricted capacity45machine hours

Usable capacity = rated capacity − documented unavailable capacity. Surplus/shortfall = usable − matching demand.

Match peak/average basis, time window, skill, staffing, accessibility and other binding constraints. One aggregate capacity does not override a safety constraint.

Other required records: Orders; product mix; machine capacity; downtime; shifts; material availability.

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. Schedule batches around quality and delivery constraintsDEC-DP37-007 · Production scheduling
Try this decision

Check batch dates against resources, delivery windows and prerequisites.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

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

A schedule does not establish conformity 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: Orders; due dates; equipment; changeover; staff; materials; sanitation windows.

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. Identify affected lots when a source defect is confirmedDEC-DP37-009 · Traceability and recall
Try this decision

Trace the supplied source defect through recorded downstream lot links.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

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

Candidate links do not establish physical recall scope or authorise a recall.

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: Supplier lot; production batch; ingredients; shipments; customers; trace links.

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. Select loss-reduction actions at processing bottlenecksDEC-DP37-010 · Food loss
Try this decision

Reconcile processing input mass with output, transfers and stock.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaUnaccounted physical share [%]Unaccounted mass [kg]Next check
Laggala Pallegama — food loss / 20256.66780Reconcile the input, output, stock and transfer records
Rattota — food loss / 20256.66780Reconcile the input, output, stock and transfer records
Panvila — food loss / 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 bottleneck or the best intervention.

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: Input; output; rejects; by-products; moisture; stage; loss cause.

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. Target processes with high energy per saleable unitDEC-DP37-011 · Energy efficiency
Try this decision

Compare process energy per matching saleable output.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaSpecific energy use [kWh/kg]Next check
Laggala Pallegama — energy efficiency / 20250.695Check matching outputs, denominators and operating conditions
Rattota — energy efficiency / 20250.846Check matching outputs, denominators and operating conditions
Panvila — energy efficiency / 20250.778Check matching outputs, denominators and operating conditions

What the selected record shows. Energy consumed: 3,128 kWh; Saleable product output: 4,500 kg. This gives 0.695 kWh/kg.

Next step. Check matching outputs, denominators and operating conditions. Prepare performance comparison in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.

A high ratio requires process and operating checks before selecting an improvement.

Example chart
Specific energy use — fictional 2025 examples
Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Energy consumed3,128kWh
Saleable product output4,500kg

Energy consumed / Saleable product output, for the same product, process and period.

Other required records: Saleable output; energy kWh; machine hours; product; process; 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
8. Compare process water use and reuse alternativesDEC-DP37-012 · Water efficiency
Try this decision

Compare water-saving and reuse choices using quality, treatment and process evidence.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaPotential benefit · assumptionResources and adverse effectsSupporting records / conditionsNext check
Reduce process-water losses / Laggala PallegamaReduce process-water losses.Needs a matching water balance, process controls and measured effects.Records: Not provided; condition evidence: Not providedObtain the missing records before choosing
Reuse water after suitable treatment / Laggala PallegamaReuse suitably treated water.Needs use-specific quality, treatment, regulatory and process-safety evidence.Records: Not provided; condition evidence: Not providedObtain the missing records before choosing
Stage process and treatment upgrades / Laggala PallegamaStage process and treatment upgrades.Needs design, compatible stages, resources and monitored quality.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: Water input; usable recycled water; output; water quality; costs; controls
  • Applicable conditions, what was checked and the supporting reference

Cost alone does not establish safe reuse or measured water savings.

Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Option cost1,500,000LKR
Available budget1,800,000LKR
Mandatory constraintsMet
Potential benefit and its evidence or assumptionReduce process-water losses.
Resource needs and adverse effectsNeeds a matching water balance, process controls and measured effects.
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 safe reuse or measured water savings.

Other required records: Water input; usable recycled water; output; water quality; costs; controls.

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
9. Prioritize critical equipment repairs and preventive workDEC-DP37-013 · Equipment reliability
Try this decision

Identify equipment-repair cases past their recorded response date.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaOpen days past due [days]Calendar age [days]Next check
Laggala Pallegama — equipment reliability / 20252990Follow up overdue case; confirm the missing condition evidence
Rattota — equipment reliability / 20252990Follow up overdue case; confirm the missing condition evidence
Panvila — equipment reliability / 20252990Follow up overdue case; confirm the missing condition evidence

What the selected record shows. Open days past due: 29 days. Follow up overdue case.

Next step. Follow up overdue case; confirm the missing condition evidence. Prepare evidence request in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.

Information still needed
  • Documented critical unresolved condition: Unknown

Age alone does not establish criticality or a safe operating condition.

Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Received or defect observed2025-04-01
Recorded due date2025-06-01
Assessment date2025-06-30
Case/work closedNo
Documented critical unresolved conditionUnknown
Responsible office or maintainerProposed responsible office
Actual closure date when closedNot provided

Open age = assessment date − received date. Days past due = max(0, assessment date − recorded due date) for open cases. Show documented critical conditions separately.

Example due dates are not legal service standards. Do not alter statutory deadlines by silently subtracting pauses, or infer severity from age alone.

Other required records: Asset; downtime; condition; failure history; production criticality; repair 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
10. Avoid using expired or quarantined materialsDEC-DP37-014 · Inventory expiry
Try this decision

Check usable stock after the stated unavailable and committed quantities.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

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

The underlying expiry and quarantine records must be checked before use.

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: Lot; stock; commitments; expiry; storage condition; quarantine; demand.

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
11. Identify cash shortfalls across purchase production and payment cyclesDEC-DP37-016 · Working capital
Try this decision

Review chronological buying, production and receipt cash events.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaMinimum projected cash [LKR]Maximum projected cash shortfall [LKR]Projected closing cash [LKR]Next check
Raw-material 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
Raw-material payment date2025-06-01
Raw-material payment250,000LKR
Production payment date2025-06-08
Production payment50,000LKR
Customer receipt date2025-06-25
Customer 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: Receivables; payables; inventory; operating payments; dates; opening cash.

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 equipment and facility expansion investmentsDEC-DP37-017 · Expansion appraisal
Try this decision

Compare equipment or expansion cash flows under explicit assumptions.

Verified published formula · Discounted cash-flow NPV

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaFive-year net present value [LKR]Next check
Base cash-flow scenario / 2025109,847.353Review the cash flows, discount assumptions and constraints
Lower net-receipts scenario / 2025-497,196.989Review the cash flows, discount assumptions and constraints
Higher initial-cost scenario / 2025-370,152.647Review the cash flows, discount assumptions and constraints

What the selected record shows. At the supplied 8% annual discount assumption, the five-year cash flows and residual value give 109,847.353 LKR net present value after the initial investment. The figure compares cash flows under these assumptions.

Next step. Review the cash flows, discount assumptions and constraints. Prepare cash-flow comparison in the prototype creates a visible, downloadable draft. It is unassigned and not sent.

Net present value does not establish technical suitability or investment authority.

Example chart
Five-year net present value — fictional 2025 examples
Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
Initial investment2,400,000LKR
Net cash flow year1400,000LKR
Net cash flow year2550,000LKR
Net cash flow year3680,000LKR
Net cash flow year4720,000LKR
Net cash flow year5760,000LKR
Residual value at end of year5120,000LKR
Example discount rate8%

NPV = −initial investment + sum of year1…5 net cash flows discounted at the stated annual rate, including residual value once in year5.

Match currency, price year, real/nominal basis and cash-flow timing. The example rate and five-year horizon are assumptions, not institutional financing terms; no credit approval follows.

Other required records: Capital cost; output; demand; operating costs; lifespan; finance; discount rate.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations · Guidelines for defining financial economic environmental and social information
Institution publication · Sections 2.2.2 and 2.2.3, discounting and Net Present Value

The five-year horizon, discount rate and cash assumptions are local settings. Verification does not approve an investment or loan.

Calculation appendix

Your checks for this decision
13. Refer complete shipment documentation for required clearanceDEC-DP37-018 · Export documentation
Try this decision

Find missing shipment documents before an authorised clearance referral.

Validation required

Fictional default example · 2025.

Fictional case / areaInformation still neededNext check
Laggala Pallegama — export documentation / Laggala PallegamaShipment: MissingObtain the missing evidence listed below
Rattota — export documentation / Rattotacertificates: MissingObtain the missing evidence listed below
Panvila — export documentation / Panvilaorigin: MissingObtain the missing evidence listed below

What the selected record shows. The required evidence is incomplete for this export documentation case. The items below identify what must be obtained or reconciled.

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

Information still needed
  • Shipment: Missing

The prototype does not grant customs, health or export clearance.

Inputs, method and sources
Supplied inputValueUnit
ShipmentMissing
Shipment evidence referenceNot provided
certificatesDocumented
certificates evidence referenceSample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
originDocumented
origin evidence referenceSample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
permitsDocumented
permits evidence referenceSample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
specificationDocumented
specification evidence referenceSample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
current requirementsDocumented
current requirements evidence referenceSample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
authorityDocumented
authority evidence referenceSample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025

Check each required item and retain its reference. A documented item is not a scientific, legal or institutional approval.

Evidence completeness alone cannot establish suitability, eligibility, safety, permission or method validity.

Other required records: Shipment; certificates; origin; permits; specification; current requirements; authority.

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. Check food factory evidence before applying for export certificationDEC-DP37-021 · Published method
Try this decision

Source. Sri Lanka publication.

Data needed. Factory registration, inspection evidence, product, destination and relevant export certificate.

Method. Check registration and inspection evidence against the Food Control Administration Unit’s export certification route. Identify destination-specific documentation separately.

Worked example. A processor requests food export certification but has no factory inspection evidence. Check the Food Control Administration Unit’s requirements and request the missing document.

Next step. Request the missing inspection or registration evidence before submitting the application.

Food Control Administration Unit, Ministry of Health. Food export certification and factory registration and inspection prerequisites.

Confirm the current certificate, product and destination requirements with the responsible officer.

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
Tea production cost per kilogram, 2018–2024 · Markets & Value Chains

Existing form reference: da0b466d0b1b89c9

FieldUnitRequired
Cost itemConfirm if neededNo
PeriodConfirm if neededNo
CostLKR/kgNo

5. Documents and images

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

Processors and Exporters Documents and images prototype screen
Processors and Exporters. 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.

Processors and Exporters Data structure management prototype screen
Processors and Exporters. 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.

Processors and Exporters Users and access prototype screen
Processors and Exporters. 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.