Food Waste In Western Countries And Effects On Pillars Of Sustainability: A Food Production Concern

Introduction

Australians, Americans, and British people produce more food than is needed by each country, yet strategies to manage food waste like upcycling residues and following systems that rely on circular economies and waste hierarchies, are not being utilised. The justifications for food waste vary, and the contributing social, economic, and environmental factors as to why western countries are wasting food are different to those in non-western countries. Behaviours and attitudes toward food waste concerns play a crucial role. Conceptualising solutions that mimic natural processes and educate consumers to be receptive to change may be a means to solve food waste. By reviewing research involving specialists, aspects of the pillars of sustainability may reveal singular or holistic implications and solutions for Stakeholders.

Strategies to manage food waste

Global food production generates enough supply to meet the demands of consumers everywhere; however, Stancu et al. reveal attitudes and behaviours through research are a vital issue for food producers to solve. Approximately, there are 3. 9 Billion tonnes of food produced for human consumption every year. Of this figure, about 1. 3 Billion tonnes per year is waste. Stancu et al. performed an online survey in Denmark, looking at the reasons why food waste happens; attitudes were at the top of the list. Injunctive norms, moral norms, shopping routines, planning routines, and household skills were also found to be psychosocial factors that need to be addressed in order to address food waste. In order to address the behaviours, Stancu et al. believe that examples of British and Dutch government campaigns to reduce food waste through non-profit consumer movements, will increase consumer awareness, of this growing food issue by encouraging better shopping habits, and reuse routines. Stancu et al. conclude further research is needed into household routines related to planning shopping trips and reusing leftovers, and awareness of environmental and social impacts of food waste. Determinants over routines may provide understanding for behaviours and help to find ways in which we can reduce food waste.

According to Borrello et al. , Regarding food production conceptual solutions should be further researched and practised because the amounts of food being produced and wasted by consumers particularly in western countries are concerning. In this journal article, the authors have provided recommendations including upcycling and the participation of consumers in agri-food loops. The process of upcycling is simple and is defined, as waste equals food. By using a circular economy where humans mimic natural processes by which our biosphere recycles and reuses materials, agri-food loops are created. The goal of making agri-food loops is trying to stimulate good behaviours by humans and human activities integrating into the ecosystem. Some of the barriers preventing integration of our ecosystem relate to economic and psycho behavioural factors of consumers, i. e. Consumers are reluctant to change food habits in part because of sensitivities to technological change, Status Quo bias, perceptions, and overestimated risk. Borrello et al. conducted an experiment where 1270 Italian households were surveyed based on two scenarios, one using traditional techniques and the other with innovative technology. The results showed widespread potential participation and willingness to be involved in a circular economy framework. The article conceptualises Solutions designed to reduce food waste as the article recognises challenges when tackling the massive food waste concern, there are few examples where models of circular economies exist.

Papargyropoulou et al. performed research based on interviews with specialists in food waste and had formulated ideas and definitions that waste should be used as a resource relating to the three dimensions of sustainability. The professional opinions gathered in the author’s research recognised the need for boundaries between food surplus and food waste. Avoidable food waste requires strategies like the '3Rs' (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle) which is a concept of waste hierarchies. The articles' authors believe that sustainable production would be a more suitable solution for food waste and sustainability concerns. The article proposes that through reducing food surplus, avoidable food waste will be less. The food waste specialists used the three dimensions of sustainability to justify a holistic approach when tackling food waste issues. One of the experts referred to in the journal article is the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP), UNEP is used to provide a useful definition of sustainable production and consumption. UNEP also supported the social aspect of improving quality of life by reducing food inequality in the article. The article concludes the environment is affected by greenhouse gas emissions then, in turn, affect food production and consumption at a resident and worldwide level. The economic implications that exist in supply chains from food producers, farmers, and consumers are present and are unsustainable. Again, the article emphasises the need to set boundaries between avoidable food waste and unavoidable food waste.

In the journal article written by White et al. the authors explain In Australia’s backyard Queensland, banana growers produce ample supply, however up to 30 per cent is discarded due to the cosmetic standards imposed by the two major retailers. The author’s goal was to examine how much cosmetic standards impact the quantities of bananas discarded in northern Queensland are due to policies set by two major supermarkets. Waste audits enabled the research performed in banana packing sheds to be broken down and quantified the amount of fruit discarded because of cosmetic imperfections. Some losses of the crop are acceptable because of qualitative losses and legitimate food safety concerns; however, some attributes of the fruit are unacceptable to the supermarkets and therefore the fruit is thrown out before it even leaves the farm. White et al. refer to the environment as an invisible nutritional infrastructure, by providing goods and services to the ecosystem. The researchers used a life cycle assessment tool to evaluate impacts on the environment, and how cosmetic standards influences pollution. Interestingly on page 1491, the article discusses a local agricultural produce store that visited one of the banana farms to discuss costs to spray agrichemicals and aerial spraying contracts; this is useful because in order to grow crops in general agrichemicals can have a negative influence on the environment. The recommendation to lower cosmetic standards as a result waste audit data is a compelling solution for reducing banana food waste.

The justifications for food waste

Stancu et al. provide the best research in regards to determinants for the reasons consumers’ waste food. The research performed is useful because the authors recognise that in higher income countries the most significant contributors for avoidable food waste are those from the household level. Interestingly the authors provide an example wherein Sub-Saharan Africa it is in the agricultural post-harvest stage where certain food waste occurs. Unavoidable food waste consists of significant concerns such as environmental factors that lead to food being unfit for consumption, other factors such as natural disasters, and disease impact statistics contributing to unavoidable food waste. Lastly, food waste that for some is unavoidable and for others is avoidable for example the recent strawberry sabotage where needles had been placed sporadically in the fruit that has forced strawberry growers to discard entire yields.

Based on the research by Roe et al. in the USA, the authors determined that plate waste from dine-out settings such as buffets and school cafeterias show the highest percentage of plate waste. The USA is recognised as one of the most wasteful countries in the western world because of the large percentage of foods that are produced and avoidable food waste ensues. Over 40% of food waste discarded by consumers in a retail setting occurs in industrialised economies. Roe et al. have determined 30% of this waste is avoidable. In the research performed by the authors, studies performed in the United Kingdom gave the most detailed analysis of household food waste, which provided vital insights to conceptualise solutions for avoidable household food waste. Based on the studies in the UK that are referenced by Roe et al. , the authors determined that the UK is one of the most significant contributors to avoidable food waste. Roe et al. performed their study where data was collected to support previous research from other academic institutions based in the USA and the UK. The conclusion was particularly interesting because plate waste figures were considerably lower than previously published research by other academic institutions.

The three pillars, stakeholder values, and solutions

The three Pillars of sustainability are pivotal when assessing aspects of sustainability concerns, because food waste is a global issue, the adverse effects are numerous and require a holistic approach for solutions. Food waste affects the economic pillar negatively because households have inflated spending, farmers and producers have increased production cost and the flow on effects on community revenue due to unforeseen circumstances involving natural disasters and disease. Food wastage has had severe ramifications because the contribution that it makes to local and global food shortages, because of this it has increased the challenge to feed the world's population. Attitudes, social norms and behavioural controls are psychosocial factors that influence food waste. Producing excess food affects the environment negatively by producing excess greenhouse gas emissions, excess use of fertilisers and fossil fuels and increased water requirements. Each stakeholder relating to the food waste issue have individual concerns in regards to the three Pillars of sustainability, some of the concerns overlap, and others have conflicting interests. The two main parties of farmers and consumers share similar values and perspectives in regards to supporting quality of life; the social aspect overlaps with the environmental aspect, and as Borrello et al. discovered in their research there is a willingness for consumers who want to be involved in circular economy frameworks. Farmers and consumers are in agreeance when it comes to maintaining the environment by reducing avoidable food waste. Distributors and retailers conflict because barriers set by policies requiring the food to be of a high standard, restrict the products they sell from farmers to consumers. Unfortunately, because of these standards as White et al. discovered with their waste audit research much edible food with minor imperfections is being prevented from even making it off the farm because of distributors. The ultimate goal as per the food waste specialists supported by Papargyropoulou et al. should be to make all stakeholders compromise the barriers that are preventing smooth, cohesive values and perspectives overlapping. Devin & Richards have written a journal article that provides evidence retailers (Coles and Woolworths), and distributors claim to address food waste while simultaneously set standards resulting in large-scale refusal of imperfect food. Retailers and distributors are counter-intuitive because of a circle of blame where distributors and retailers blame the consumers for expecting higher standards of food. The article highlights the need for the creation of a legitimacy agreement between farmers, retailers and distributors where each Party has a corporate social responsibility to reduce avoidable food waste. The need for corporate social responsibility is pressing because retailers are not taking responsibility for the economic cost and the burden of wasting food.

According to Stancu et al. in Europe there is an increased interest for policymakers to decrease food waste due to social and environmental consequences, furthermore the European Union have already taken action in Britain and Holland by supporting research and campaigning against food waste by changing behaviours and norms.

Conclusion

Conceptual solutions, practical solutions, and recommendations by the various authors of multiple journals have led to the conclusion that food waste is a genuine concern that is recognised by both Western and non-western countries. Stakeholders like the two major supermarkets in Australia May believe that in the past they have been contributing to fighting food waste, however, given the evidence for the banana growers in Northern Queensland it becomes clear that cosmetic standards dictated by the supermarkets are having appalling consequences economically environmentally and socially in Australia.

Given the research in the USA and the UK, consumers are still generating the most amount of avoidable food waste when compared to lower socioeconomic countries; it is favourable to see however from Row et al. plate waste has reduced. The goals set by each article have congruent ideas like the need for waste hierarchies, corporate social responsibility legislation, and attempts to reduce waste with closed loop economies and strategies like the three R's reduce, reuse, and recycle. The purpose of all of these strategies is to improve human behaviour, because if we do nothing the environment that we rely heavily on may contribute to further deterioration of food equality and lead to environmental degradation caused by increased greenhouse gas emissions leading to climate change and global warming.