The study has empirically assessed factors responsible for influencing adoption choices among actors in the mango value chain. A multistage sampling technique is employed, where the two counties are selected purposively, since they are the project sites for Rockefeller foundation, and Nairobi on basis of largest fruit market in the country. Selection of wholesalers and retailers is done through snowballing, while farmers are randomly selected. A total of 74 wholesalers are selected and interviewed, 13 brokers, 101 retailers, and 70 farmers.The results reveal that in Embu, about 38.72% of farmers preferred stick and bag while 37.14% of respondents from Machakos preferred hand picking. At the wholesale level, respondent from Nairobi preferred use of cartons, in Embu and Machakos they preferred use of shades. Retailers preferred use of shades and peeling. The Heckpoisson model at the farm level showed that those with access to credit were 40% less likely to adopt more practices. However, farmers experiencing high PHL were more likely to adopt loss reduction practices by 4.3%, and were 19.2% more likely to embrace a number of practices. At the wholesale level, traders that were engaged in organized selling were 43.35% more likely to adopt one or more loss reduction practices. However, PHL increase led to a 39.53% less likelihood of adopting one or multiple practices. At the retailer’s level, the results indicated that retailers in the local county were 19.93% less likely to adopt loss reduction practices. On the other hand, those experienced in mango trading were 4.85% more likely to adopt the practices, while increase in PHLs led to a 30.16% more likelihood of adopting loss reduction practices.Thus, more probing to the low adoption rates revealed that the major limiting factors to adoption at the farm were lack of involvement in harvesting (44.1%) and high labor requirement (38.9%). At the trader’s level, wholesalers claimed the major limiting factors to be; reduced quantities (53.8%), lack of stores (53.1%), and time wastage (26.4%). Retailers claimed lack of stores (36.1%), and reduced quantities handled (23.4% and 32.4%) to be the major limiting factors.Hence, the study concluded that the technologies preferred were those that are cost effective, could reduce PHL, and could help increase the respondent’s income. It was evident that as PHL increase, the likelihood of adopting loss reduction practices increased. In addition, with high PHL, respondents were willing to adopt multiple loss reduction practices at the different levels of the value chain. However, credit is not an effective way of dealing with adoption as respondents were found to divert the funds thus negatively impacting on adoption. The study also asserted that most farmers were not involved in harvesting thus did not have control over harvesting and handling practices. Wholesalers were majorly involved, and feared of reduced quantities and lack of store. Similar fears were witnessed at the retail level. Therefore, from the findings, the research recommends for detailed research and upgrading of the available loss reduction practices to ensure they allow chain actors to meet their objective of profit maximization as well as meet the need for PHL reduction
