Avoidable food losses and associated production-phase greenhouse gas emissions arising from application of cosmetic standards to fresh fruit and vegetables in Europe and the UK

Abstract

Avoidable food losses and associated production-phase greenhouse gas emissions arising from application of cosmetic standards to fresh fruit and vegetables in Europe and the UK', Journal of Cleaner Production.

The Impact of Resource and Nutritional Resilience on the Global Food Supply System

“…There are a growing number of livestock product alternatives that are protein fortified from across the vegetable and fruit categories [23]. The vegetable category is also a major source of food loss in Tables 1 and 2; these observations are supported by recently-reported research [24]. Developing robust food loss data is a priority for the assessment of accurate supply chain food utilisation indices, and the Centreplate Model assessment identifies correlations between nationally reported data in FAOSTAT and studies that document food losses in vegetable supply chains.…”

Removing plastic packaging from fresh produce – what’s the impact?

“…A proportion of fruit and vegetable food waste is attributable to produce that is safe for consumption, yet does not meet the aesthetic standards for the shape and appearance set by retailers and therefore will often not leave the farm or will not be sold within supermarkets (Canali et al ). It is estimated that over a third of total farm production in the UK is lost due to this reason, up to an estimated 4500 kt ‐1 per year, equating to greenhouse gas emissions of up to 970 kt ‐1 of CO 2 annually (Porter et al ). For example, it has been estimated that 5–25% of apples, 9–20% of onions and 3–13% of potatoes are rejected based on appearance (Porter et al ).…”

“…It is estimated that over a third of total farm production in the UK is lost due to this reason, up to an estimated 4500 kt ‐1 per year, equating to greenhouse gas emissions of up to 970 kt ‐1 of CO 2 annually (Porter et al ). For example, it has been estimated that 5–25% of apples, 9–20% of onions and 3–13% of potatoes are rejected based on appearance (Porter et al ). Estimates of waste in primary production, however, may be higher than the reality, as fresh produce sent for use as animal feed is likely to be included, which would not be defined as food waste but is still considered an economic loss (WRAP ).…”

Net Yield Efficiency: Comparing Salad and Vegetable Waste between Community Supported Agriculture and Supermarkets in the UK

“…The FAO suggests that one-third of food produced for human consumption is lost or wasted annually (FAO, 2011). Waste is particularly high for fresh fruits and vegetables, up to a third of which never reach supermarket shelves because of (often aesthetically driven) supermarket standards (Institution of Mechanical Engineers, 2013;Porter, Reay, Bomberg, & Higgins, 2018). Such levels of FLW not only represent wasted resources such as land, water, and energy, but also contribute to greenhouse gas emissions.…”

“…Food systems are increasingly complex and global, dominated by powerful corporate bodies motivated primarily by profit (McMichael, 2013). In this context, supply chain waste is driven by a combination of regulations, private grading standards, power differentials between farmers and retailers, and the expectations and behaviors of consumers (Porter et al, 2018). Household waste is similarly driven by a complex range of factors, including ambivalent attitudes toward waste; preferences regarding safety, taste, and freshness; age of household members; household size; and wider social, economic, and cultural structures (Schanes, Dobernig, & Gözet, 2018).…”