Introduction

A whole supply chain approach encompasses all stages in the food supply chain. This includes all activities and destinations from production to final consumption or disposal. A user of this approach would be national and local governments. A useful application of this approach would be to analyze flows of specific food products or food categories across the entire food supply chain. Such an approach can provide insights into material flows, food availability, environmental impact, food waste hotspots and opportunities for waste prevention, disposal methods, production and consumption trends, and so on. A different user could vary the working definition of FLW by adjusting the scope of their analysis to focus on specific aspects of the food supply chain.

FLW can be generated for a variety of reasons throughout the supply chain, and the user is recommended to review the relevant modules in this guide for details at each stage. Interventions are often tailored to a stage in the food supply chain with a sector-specific perspective because both existing data and direct measurements tend to occur at the sectoral level.

In addition to the methods listed in Table 15, national governments may find the Food Loss Index and Food Waste Index to be useful tools. These indices, developed by the United Nations, estimate FLW within a country based on existing data relating to key commodities within a country.

Table 15. Methods Used to Measure FLW across the Whole Supply Chain

*Accuracy depends on the type of record used: for example, waste transfer receipts may be highly accurate for determining FLW levels, whereas other records are less accurate.
Note: The methods named are nonexhaustive.
Source: Authors.

Case Study for Measuring across the Whole Food Chain

The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Economic Research Service (ERS) estimates all post-harvest losses through the entire food supply chain for over 200 agriculture product types through its Loss-Adjusted Food Availability Data Series. This data series helps the USDA ERS produce estimates of loss-adjusted food availability as a proxy for food consumption. To create this data series, the USDA ERS developed loss coefficients, updated primary conversion factors and compared shipping and point-of-sales data. By estimating food losses in the United States with such a high level of accuracy, the USDA ERS helps US state and local governments, food industries, nongovernmental organizations and others identify opportunities to prevent FLW. These estimates allow others to identify hotspots in which to conduct more detailed research with the aim of preventing FLW (Buzby et al. 2014).

Introduction

Within the food supply chain, the household sector encompasses all food preparation and consumption in the home. While it is uncommon for individual households to independently track their food waste, governmental or nongovernmental organizations may want to monitor household FLW. In this guide, the household sector includes only food consumed in the home. Food consumed away from home falls under the food service stage in the food supply chain.

FLW in the household can be caused by preparation mistakes, lack of proper storage infrastructure or practices, trimming for consistency, misshapen products, spillage during handling, poor portion control, contamination, overproduction, food safety concerns, or many other factors.

Methods Used to Measure FLW

Appropriate methods for FLW measurement depend on the context of who is doing the measuring and what information is available. Start by answering the five questions below.

• Do you have direct access to the FLW? Does the method require the ability to directly count, handle or weigh the FLW?
• What level of accuracy do you need? How accurate will the data gathered with this method be?
• What amount of time and resources can you assign to measuring FLW? The relative amount of resources (time, money, equipment) needed to carry out the method.
• Do you need a method that can tracks causes of FLW? Some methods can track causes associated with FLW and others cannot.
• Do you want to track progress over time? Some methods can assess increases or decreases in FLW across time to track progress.

Based on your needs and the answers to these questions, you can use Table 13 to determine which method or methods are most appropriate. If you are addressing multiple types of FLW (for example, both solid and liquid FLW), you may need to select multiple types of methods.

Table 13. Methods Used to Measure FLW in the Household Sector

*Accuracy depends on the type of record used: for example, waste transfer receipts may be highly accurate for determing FLW levels, whereas other records are less accurate.
Note: The methods named are nonexhaustive.
Source: Authors.

For additional guidance in selecting a method, see the FLW Quantification Method Ranking Tool published by the Food Loss and Waste Protocol, which asks 11 questions and provides a ranked list of methods based on your answers,

Case Study for the Household Level

A household survey in Mexico City and Jiutepec, Mexico collected demographic and behavioral information alongside a week-long FLW diary. Using this data together gives a more complete image of household FLW and allows analysis of the effects of various socioeconomic factors to identify root causes of household FLW. The results could inform local government agencies, NGOs and others about the potential effectiveness of intervention strategies. Such a community-centered approach lends itself to more tailored (and hopefully more effective) approaches to prevent FLW than broader surveys and diaries (Jean-Baptiste 2013).

Introduction

The food service sector includes all institutions that serve prepared food intended for final consumption. In this sector, food products are taken from their raw, processed or manufactured state and prepared in-house. The final product is usually sold in single portions, though certain business models serve food in larger portions.

Examples of organizations in this sector are: restaurants, caterers, hotels or venues that prepare and/or serve food, street vendors, convenience stores with prepared food or cafeterias within facilities such as schools, hospitals and prisons.

In this sector, there is an important distinction between pre-consumer and post-consumer waste. Pre-consumer waste is any waste that occurs before the food is on the customer’s plate and post-consumer waste is any waste that occurs after that point. Some in the sector refer to this as “back-of-house” and “front-of-house,” respectively.

Some approaches to preventing FLW in food service are listed below.

• Working with actors upstream in the food supply chain to increase the share of second-grade products that are accepted and valorized to some point.
• Improving cold-chain management and infrastructure in order to prevent spoilage or degradation during storage and transport.
• Reducing overproduction of under-consumed products or shifting from production models that routinely overproduce food (e.g., buffets).
• Rethinking purchasing models in order to maintain freshness and reduce shrink.

Methods Used to Measure FLW

Appropriate methods for FLW measurement depend on the context of who is doing the measuring and what information is available. Start by answering the five questions below.

• Do you have direct access to the FLW? Does the method require the ability to directly count, handle or weigh the FLW?
• What level of accuracy do you need? How accurate will the data gathered with this method be?
• What amount of time and resources can you assign to measuring FLW? The relative amount of resources (time, money, equipment) needed to carry out the method.
• Do you need a method that can tracks causes of FLW? Some methods can track causes associated with FLW and others cannot.
• Do you want to track progress over time? Some methods can assess increases or decreases in FLW across time to track progress.

Based on your needs and the answers to these questions, you can use Table 12 to determine which method or methods are most appropriate. If you are addressing multiple types of FLW (for example, both solid and liquid FLW), you may need to select multiple types of methods.

Table 12. Methods Used to Measure FLW in the Food Service Sector

*Accuracy depends on the type of record used: for example, waste transfer receipts may be highly accurate for determing FLW levels, whereas other records are less accurate.
Note: The methods named are nonexhaustive.
Source: Authors.

Additional guidance can be found in the FLW Quantification Method Ranking Tool published by the Food Loss and Waste Protocol, which asks a series of 11 questions and provides a ranked list of methods based on your answers.

Case Study for the Food Service Sector

Sodexo has prevented FLW through its “WasteWatch powered by LeanPath” program, which reduces on site food waste by an average of 50 percent. This program uses smart scales, which categorize food waste and generate a food waste inventory that helps identify how much and where food goes to waste. These inventories and continuous direct measurement allow staff to identify hotspots, take action and monitor progress over time. Sodexo found that tailored messaging to employees improved staff engagement in the FLW prevention program and that this staff engagement was particularly impactful in the food service sector. Additionally, Sodexo identified products going to waste that could not be sold but were still safe for human consumption. In the United States, Sodexo has collaborated with Food Recovery Network, Feeding America and Campus Kitchens to connect surplus food to those in need (Clowes et al. 2018).

Introduction

Food retailers tend to have a relatively large influence on FLW throughout the supply chain. Because of their dominant buying power, retailers can influence FLW further upstream (i.e., primary production, processing and manufacturing) and even distribution. Because of their typical place right before final consumption in the food supply chain, variability within the retail sector can lead to FLW in the food service and household stages.

FLW in retail can be caused by any number of factors, including but not limited to: damage and spoilage, lack of cold-chain infrastructure, delays during transport (e.g., border inspections), variable customer demands, modification or cancellation of orders, inaccurate customer forecasting and overstocking, reliance on inefficient stocking practices or product sizes, misinterpretation of food safety standards, and misleading or confusing date labeling.

Because the specifics of this sector vary by country, so do the root causes behind the associated FLW. Generation and prevention of FLW differ from country to country and even organization to organization, and interventions must be tailored to the context.

Some approaches to preventing FLW in retail are listed below.

• Working with actors upstream in the food supply chain to increase the share of second-grade products that are accepted and valorized to some point.
• Working with actors across the food supply chain to expand value-added processing in order to increase the proportion of produced food able to eventually be consumed.
• Standardizing date labels to reduce the amount of FLW generated from confusion over food safety.
• Implementing packaging adjustments to extend the life of food products and reduce damage during storage or transport.
• Rethinking purchasing models in order to maintain freshness and reduce shrink.

Methods Used to Measure FLW

Appropriate methods for FLW measurement depend on the context of who is doing the measuring and what information is available. Start by answering the five questions below.

• Do you have direct access to the FLW? Does the method require the ability to directly count, handle or weigh the FLW?
• What level of accuracy do you need? How accurate will the data gathered with this method be?
• What amount of time and resources can you assign to measuring FLW? The relative amount of resources (time, money, equipment) needed to carry out the method.
• Do you need a method that can tracks causes of FLW? Some methods can track causes associated with FLW and others cannot.
• Do you want to track progress over time? Some methods can assess increases or decreases in FLW across time to track progress.

Based on your needs and the answers to these questions, you can use Table 11 to determine which method or methods are most appropriate. If you are addressing multiple types of FLW (for example, both solid and liquid FLW), you may need to select multiple types of methods.

Table 11. Methods Used to Measure FLW in the Retail Sector

*Accuracy depends on the type of record used: for example, waste transfer receipts may be highly accurate for determing FLW levels, whereas other records are less accurate.
Note: The methods named are nonexhaustive.
Source: Authors.

If you need additional guidance in selecting a method, the FLW Quantification Method Ranking Tool published by the Food Loss and Waste Protocol asks a series of 11 questions and provides a ranked list of methods based on your circumstances.

Case Study for the Retail Sector

Delhaize America, a food retailer, implemented a food waste measurement and reduction program in its East Coast stores and distribution centers. Through direct measurement with Scanner information and waste separation, Delhaize America is able to consistently track food waste over time. They have used this information to identify waste hotspots and to reduce FLW across their operations. For example, daily deliveries of fresh product (via computer-assisted ordering systems) has improved order accuracy and inventory management, greatly reducing the amount of produce that goes to waste. In some locations, staff noticed that more food was going to compost, which signaled a need for better coordination with local food banks to ensure that food safe for human consumption was not needlessly being composted rather than serving those in need. Such observations led to more food going to feed people and less food becoming waste.

Introduction

Food distributors and wholesalers ensure that food products make it to market and consumers. Distributors typically maintain exclusive buying agreements with producers, manufacturers and processors or provide products to a certain territory. They rarely sell goods directly to consumers but may work with wholesalers (or larger retailers) that buy in bulk. Wholesalers typically resell goods to retailers, while retailers resell goods directly to consumers.

Because they are subject to supply and demand fluctuations across the food supply chain, they must balance time sensitivity and cost in their operations. Variability within the distribution and wholesale sector can also affect FLW downstream, in the food service, retail and household stages.

In distribution and wholesale, FLW can be caused by damage and spoilage, lack of cold-chain infrastructure, delays during transport (e.g., border inspections), variable customer demands, modification or cancellation of orders, product specifications, variable cost of transport methods, inaccurate forecasting or purchasing, miscommunication with other entities further up and down the food supply chain, and many other factors.

As the specifics of this sector vary by country, so do the root causes behind the associated FLW. Thus generation and prevention of FLW differ from country to country and even from organization to organization, and interventions must be tailored to the context.

Some approaches to preventing FLW in distribution and wholesale are listed below.

• Work with actors upstream in the food supply chain to increase the share of second-grade products that are accepted and valorized to some point.
• Improve cold-chain management and infrastructure to prevent spoilage or degradation during storage and transport.
• Work with actors across the food supply chain to expand value-added processing to increase the proportion of produced food able to be consumed. This could include the creation of processes to valorize food that is damaged or deteriorates during transport and distribution.
• Adjust packaging to extend the life of food products and reduce damage during storage or transport.
• Rethink business models to maintain freshness and reduce shrink.

Methods Used to Measure FLW

Appropriate methods for FLW measurement depend on the context of who is doing the measuring and what information is available. Start by answering the five questions below.

• Do you have direct access to the FLW? Does the method require the ability to directly count, handle or weigh the FLW?
• What level of accuracy do you need? How accurate will the data gathered with this method be?
• What amount of time and resources can you assign to measuring FLW? The relative amount of resources (time, money, equipment) needed to carry out the method.
• Do you need a method that can tracks causes of FLW? Some methods can track causes associated with FLW and others cannot.
• Do you want to track progress over time? Some methods can assess increases or decreases in FLW across time to track progress.

Based on your needs and the answers to these questions, you can use Table 10 to determine which method or methods are most appropriate. If you are addressing multiple types of FLW (for example, both solid and liquid FLW), you may need to select multiple types of methods.

Table 10. Methods Used to Measure FLW in the Distribution and Wholesale Sector

*Accuracy depends on the type of record used: for example, waste transfer receipts may be highly accurate for determing FLW levels, whereas other records are less accurate.
Note: The methods named are nonexhaustive.
Source: Authors.

If you need additional guidance in selecting a method, the FLW Quantification Method Ranking Tool published by the Food Loss and Waste Protocol asks a series of 11 questions and provides a ranked list of methods based on your circumstances.

Case Study for the Distribution and Wholesale Sector

The Mexican Transport Institute (Instituto Mexicano del Transporte–IMT) developed a methodology to identify cold-chain coverage and gaps across the country. The IMT uses a database with several metrics, including origin and destination of shipments, classification of loads, ownership of transportation units and cost of transportation. It monitors the status of the distribution and transportation system across Mexico alongside relevant costs, shipment data and records. This allows them to identify potential FLW hotspots and regions needing cold-chain management and infrastructure (Morales 2016, CEC 2017).

Introduction

The processing and manufacturing stage of the food supply chain encompasses all processes intended to transform raw food materials into products suitable for consumption, cooking or sale. In this guide, “food processing” and “food manufacturing” are used interchangeably. This stage in the supply chain includes the processes that turn raw agricultural products into saleable goods, which often move to retail, wholesale, distribution or food service institutions. It also includes packaging of processed goods.

Examples of organizations in this sector are: fruit and fruit juice processing plants, cereal manufacturing facilities, pastry factories, canneries, butchers, breweries, bakeries and dairy processing plants.

In processing and manufacturing, FLW can be caused by trimming for consistency, misshapen products, spillage, degradation during processing, production line changes, contamination, overproduction, order cancellation, changes in customer demand or specifications, or improper labeling, among other things.

Food processing represents 15–23 percent of the entire manufacturing industry (including nonfood manufacturing) in North America (USDA ERS 2016, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2014, ProMéxico 2015).

Some approaches to preventing FLW in processing and manufacturing are listed below.

• Work with actors upstream in the food supply chain to increase the share of second-grade products that are accepted and valorized to some point.
• Improve cold-chain management and infrastructure to prevent spoilage or degradation during storage and transport.
• Work with actors across the food supply chain to expand value-added processing to increase the proportion of produced food able to be consumed.
• Standardize date labels to reduce the amount of FLW generated from confusion over food safety.
• Adjust packaging to extend the life of food products and reduce damage during storage or transport.
• Optimize manufacturing lines and production processes to increase yields and reduce inefficiencies.

Methods Used to Measure FLW

Appropriate methods for FLW measurement depend on the context of who is doing the measuring and what information is available. Start by answering the five questions below.

• Do you have direct access to the FLW? Does the method require the ability to directly count, handle or weigh the FLW?
• What level of accuracy do you need? How accurate will the data gathered with this method be?
• What amount of time and resources can you assign to measuring FLW? The relative amount of resources (time, money, equipment) needed to carry out the method.
• Do you need a method that can tracks causes of FLW? Some methods can track causes associated with FLW and others cannot.
• Do you want to track progress over time? Some methods can assess increases or decreases in FLW across time to track progress.

Based on your answers to these questions, use Table 9 to determine which method or methods are most appropriate. If you are addressing multiple types of FLW (for example, both solid and liquid), you may need multiple types of methods.

Table 9. Methods Used to Measure FLW in the Processing and Manufacturing Sector

*Accuracy depends on the type of record used: for example, waste transfer receipts may be highly accurate for determing FLW levels, whereas other records are less accurate.
Note: The methods named are nonexhaustive.
Source: Authors.

For additional guidance, see the FLW Quantification Method Ranking Tool published by the Food Loss and Waste Protocol, which asks 11 questions about your circumstances and provides a ranked list of methods based on your answers.

Case Study for the Processing and Manufacturing Sector

Byblos Bakery is the top branded pita maker in western Canada. Working with Provision Coalition and Enviro-Stewards to measure and prevent FLW in their manufacturing operations Byblos saved over C$200,000. Enviro-Stewards conducted a food waste prevention assessment of the facilities, and the Provision Coalition’s FLW Toolkit was used to develop a set of FLW reduction strategies and solutions. By using a facility assessment along with the FLW Toolkit, Byblos could identify root causes for FLW generation and tailor interventions to their business. For example, improvements to retail inventory management helped minimize retail returns, and relatively small tweaks to the production process and facility immediately reduced waste in the factory. In total, Byblos reduced its food waste by 29 percent and saw an aggregate payback over 0.3 years (Provision Coalition 2017).

Introduction

The primary production stage of the supply chain encompasses agricultural activities, aquaculture, fisheries and similar processes resulting in raw food materials. This first stage in the chain includes all activities related to the harvest, handling and storage of food products before they move to either processing or distribution. Any level of processing of raw food products does not fall within this stage of the supply chain but would rather be classified as processing and manufacturing.

Examples of primary production activities are: farming, fishing, livestock rearing and other production methods.

Food losses in primary production can be caused by many factors, including but not limited to: pests or adverse meteorological phenomena, damage incurred during harvest, lack of proper storage infrastructure, cosmetic or size requirements or economic or market variability (i.e., cancellation of orders, rigid contract terms, price variability or high labor costs).

The following nonexhaustive, illustrative list shows ways to prevent FLW during primary production.

• Work with actors downstream in the food supply chain to increase the share of second-grade products that are accepted and valorized to some point.
• Improve cold-chain management and infrastructure to prevent spoilage or degradation during storage and transport.
• Work with actors downstream in the food supply chain to expand value-added processing to increase the proportion of produced food able to eventually be consumed.

Methods Used to Measure FLW

Appropriate methods for FLW measurement depend on the context of who is doing the measuring and what information is available. Start by answering the five questions below.

• Do you have direct access to the FLW? Does the method require the ability to directly count, handle or weigh the FLW?
• What level of accuracy do you need? How accurate will the data gathered with this method be?
• What amount of time and resources can you assign to measuring FLW? The relative amount of resources (time, money, equipment) needed to carry out the method.
• Do you need a method that can tracks causes of FLW? Some methods can track causes associated with FLW and others cannot.
• Do you want to track progress over time? Some methods can assess increases or decreases in FLW across time to track progress.

Based on the answers to these questions, use Table 8 to determine which method or methods are most appropriate. If you are addressing multiple types of FLW (for example, both solid and liquid FLW), you may need to select several methods.

Table 8. How Some Methods to Measure Production Sector FLW Rank according to the Five Questions

*Accuracy depends on the type of record used: for example, waste transfer receipts may be highly accurate for determing FLW levels, whereas other records are less accurate.
Note: The methods named are nonexhaustive.
Source: Authors.

For additional guidance in selecting a method, see the FLW Quantification Method Ranking Tool published by the Food Loss and Waste Protocol, which asks 11 questions about your circumstances and provides a ranked list of methods based on your answers.

Case Study for the Primary Production Sector

In the US state of California, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) collected baseline primary data and supported measurement of post-harvest losses of several crops. The data were quantitative and qualitative data and they performed subsequent analyses to identify root causes of farm-level losses. They also calculated environmental impacts to illustrate the resource intensity of various crops and the associated impacts of any related FLW. Such a holistic measurement approach and conversion into other metrics helped identify the scale of FLW, identify root causes and find opportunities for interventions.

For example, during the 2017–18 growing season, the average measured losses at harvest on the farms sampled were 40 percent of fresh tomatoes, 39 percent of fresh peaches, 2 percent of processing potatoes and 56 percent of fresh romaine lettuce. Qualitative results highlighted the difficulties farmers face when balancing large yields and fixed contracts, as well as meeting strict product quality standards. WWF recommended further research into whole-farm purchasing contracts for specialty crops, flexible quality/visual standards and further valorization of preserved products to account for overproduction (WWF 2018).