Newsletter
Don't miss a thing!
We regularly provide you with the most important news, articles, topics, projects and ideas for One World – No Hunger.
Newsletter
Don't miss a thing!
We regularly provide you with the most important news, articles, topics, projects and ideas for One World – No Hunger.
Please also refer to our data protection declaration.
The WWF has published a sensational study on food waste. The focus is on farm-stage loss. Peter McFeely, Global head of communications and strategic planning, Food, at WWF, explains what needs to be done.
In your report you do not distinguish between food loss and food waste. What is the difference and why did you decide not to use this distinction?
There are often misconceptions that loss, which happens prior to the point of consumption, is down to uncontrollable factors-like market conditions, pests, disease, extreme weather and so on) and poor infrastructure, while waste at the end of the supply chain happens because people make bad decisions. As a result, loss is often seen as less avoidable. In Driven to Waste we talk about food loss and waste on the farm, in other words a stage normally defined only as food loss to be clear that there are a multitude of human factors, conscious decisions or otherwise, that mean a huge amount of food produced with the intention and suitability of human consumption never even makes it off the farm. So it is possible to avoid a lot of the issues at this stage.
In the report you also point out that the extent of food loss and waste is probably more like 40 percent than the previously assumed and frequently communicated one third, how do these different figures come about?
The commonly-accepted estimation of one third of all food being lost or wasted comes from an FAO 2011 report. Numerous food waste studies have been conducted since then; however, the supply chain stages and parameters of each vary. Driven to Waste measures outputs from primary food production that are, or were at some point, intended and suitable for human consumption but which end up either not being harvested or sent to one of a range of food waste destinations.
As well as including harvest waste, which many studies since FAO’s 2011 report do not, these estimations provide an up-to-date view of the potential scale of whole supply chain waste.
This data was then combined with latest figures from UNEP (Food Waste Index 2020) and FAO (Food Loss Index 2019) and, as the data came from different years, standardised against a common production total. This results in an estimate of approximately 40 percent of all food produced being lost or wasted. This figure is indicative and, if anything, is likely to be an underestimation - it is an estimate based on academic assumptions.
You criticise the fact that primary production and the resulting farm stage waste of up to 8.3 percent was not included in SDG 12. How do you explain this oversight and what do you demand from the United Nations?
SDG12.3 sets a specific target for reducing food waste by 50 percent and a non-specific target for reducing post-harvest food loss. SDG 12.3 therefore seemingly places greater importance on food waste. Champions 12.3 suggest that this reduces “both ambition and focus on an issue (food losses) that is important for many regions of the world” We need specific and ambitious targets to motivate action to reduce all ‘loss’ not just post-harvest. We aren’t calling for a rewriting of the SDGs, rather for stakeholders across food supply chains - farmers, businesses, civil society, governments, multilaterals like the UN - to adopt more ambitious targets
and ensure loss and waste earlier in the supply chain is given equal attention.
The environmental impacts of farm-stage food waste seem to be enormous. But how realistic is it to reduce these impacts? Wouldn’t GHG emissions, water use and land use occur even if the food would not be wasted? And how important is the monitoring of farm-stage food waste impacts?
We already produce enough food to feed 10 billion people. We are producing more than we need, largely because we are wasting so much of it! If we produced only what we needed today, we would dramatically decrease our agricultural land and water use, and food-related emissions. But feeding a growing population within planetary boundaries isn’t just about eliminating food loss and waste. It is also about adopting nature-positive production practices which allow us to produce food with nature, not against it, and shifting to healthier, more sustainable consumption patterns which are less resource-intensive to produce.
It also must be noted that a significant portion of emissions attributed to unconsumed food are those released while food decomposes in landfill, releasing methane.
Over 100 years methane is 28 times more warming than carbon dioxide. Even though methane accounts for only about 3 percent of total emissions by mass, it’s responsible for 30-50 percent of the global warming we see today. Tackling food loss and waste would make a big difference. Especially as methane only stays in the atmosphere for about 12 years before breaking down, while carbon dioxide stays there for centuries, meaning we could rapidly reduce the current rate of warming by reducing methane emissions. Measuring on-farm food loss and waste is very important- as it is across the whole supply chain. What isn’t measured isn’t addressed. Evidence shows us that better measurement and understanding of the drivers behind food loss and waste is a pathway to provoke action. Effective separation, measurement, and reporting enable strategic action to prevent loss and waste. Across the whole food supply chain, we need to institutionalise measurement, benchmarking, and goal setting.
In the study, the authors differentiate between direct drivers and indirect drivers of farm-stage waste and point out that combined approaches which consider the problem holistically are necessary to solve it. What kind of approaches are already in use?
Interventions in the past have tended to focus on discrete technical solutions addressing issues with farm technology or storage, whilst largely ignoring socio-economic and market factors that shape the agricultural system. Crucially, these wider influences involve actors and agencies beyond the farm gate which farmers and farm-stage interventions have little influence over. Moving forward, we need more holistic solutions that balance actions that combine actions of technology and training, and address biological and environmental drivers, markets factors and so on: no single intervention is likely to succeed.
That means actors all across food supply chains need to take action.
With help from WRAP and WWF, governments in Mexico, South Africa, and the United States Pacific Coast are building voluntary agreements and public-private sector partnerships, with a model proven first in the UK with the Courtauld Commitment.
With 44 percent loss in relation to total production, fishing is a major cause of food waste. What does this problem look like in Tanzania and Uganda and what countermeasures do you recommend?
One example is losses of dagaa, a small fish in Lake Victoria, which occurs while these fish are being sun-dried on the ground near landing sites. During rainy seasons, when it is hard to dry the fish, huge amounts of fish can rot or be washed away. The immediate issue is the lack of suitable drying equipment and technology, but it’s indirectly caused by low market prices and lack of access to capital; or lack of investment in infrastructure. Improving local micro-investment infrastructure could enable fishing communities to invest in simple technology such as raised platforms for drying the fish. This in turn could greatly reduce the volume of food wasted, increasing fishers incomes, food and nutrition security, and reducing the amount of fish removed from the lake and other environmental impacts.
Rice production in Asian countries also generates about 41 million tonnes of farm-stage rice waste annually. What practices drive the waste and what role does market demand play?
Rice waste is driven by numerous on-farm practices such as choice of rice variety for example, when farmers select a crop that may command a higher price, but be less suitable for the growing environment, use of poor quality rice seed, poor agricultural practices and the timing and method of harvesting and threshing. Some of these issues could be addressed by improving access to seeds and varieties, or providing improved training. However, a lot of the problem comes from market demands and behaviours: for example, many farmers are picking varieties not well suited for their region or land because of market demand for specific types of rice, such as basmati. They could grow something else, increase their yields and reduce their waste, and reduce impacts on the environment, but their livelihoods would likely suffer as there isn’t a market for the alternative grain. Despite lower yields and higher waste rates, farmers are able to secure better prices for more popular variants of rice, so they keep growing the high-waste varieties.
The implementation of true cost accounting, in which the social and environmental costs of food are accounted for in the price, would help shift market demand away from these wasteful products.
What measures do governments need to implement in order to reduce farm-stage food waste? Are there already countries that can be a role model for other nations and their food policies through incentives or taxes?
City, regional and national governments need to set clear and measurable goals to develop circular food economies and show measured reductions in food waste across the supply chain. One of the best examples of this is the US Food Waste Action Plan published in February 2021.Around the world we are seeing ambitious policies to shift away from waste going to landfills - landfill ban policies forbid landfill disposal of food waste, necessitating increased availability and access to government services and market-based solutions. In Korea, consumers and businesses are mandated to separate and measure their food waste and pay proportionate disposal costs. In France businesses are penalised if they throwaway any edible food. These approaches could be explored and adapted on the farm. At the same time, voluntary agreements and other partnerships are necessary to pressure governments to increase ambition and planning around circular food economies. There’s a responsibility for everyone across the food supply chain.
What do you think are the chances that we will better handle the farm-stage food waste problem globally by 2030?
Optimistic and hopeful! There’s more attention than ever before on sustainability, and on food loss and waste itself as an issue. Driven to Waste is a synthesis of nearly 4,000 farm stage food loss data points - there’s more data being produced and more measurement happening than ever before. The ‘Food is Never Waste’ coalition that has emerged from the UN Food Systems Summit is an exciting opportunity to accelerate the implementation of solutions.With all this information and the appetite for action across broader society, there is no reason for action not to happen. If we are to have any hope of delivering the SDGs we need to transform food systems - and tackling food loss and waste, including farm-stage, is essential to ending both hunger and the over-exploitation