Tackling Food Loss And Waste For Climate And Food Security

Reducing food loss and waste could improve food security but it may not necessarily lead to expected environmental benefits, according to researchers of a recent study published in Nature Food. Bringing down losses, by improving efficiencies, would also bring down food costs. Cheaper and more accessible food, in turn, could result in overconsumption, overriding environmental benefits such as lowering carbon emissions, says the study.

The study highlights the complexities of balancing food security with environmental impacts, even as other experts note that the gains from lowering food loss and wastage are more significant in certain parts of the world and for certain demographics.

Globally, around 14 percent of food produced is lost between harvest and retail, while an estimated 17 percent of the total global food production is wasted. Food loss or wastage occurs either on the supply side, where it is damaged or spoiled before reaching consumers, or on the demand side where food is spoiled or thrown away by consumers or retailers. Food lost and wasted accounts for 38 percent of total energy usage in the global food system, according to the United Nations.

The Rebound Effect

The study, led by researchers from the University of Colorado Boulder and the University of California, Irvine in the United States, looks into the potential rebound effect of reducing food loss and waste. In economic terms, the rebound effect refers to the improvements in efficiency that often lead to cost reductions which then provide opportunities to buy more of the improved products or services.

The researchers hypothesised that reducing food loss and wastage, by improving efficiency, could make food cheaper, thereby making it more accessible to a larger population. This could result in overconsumption which, in turn, could reduce the expected environmental and health outcomes expected of reduced food loss and wastage, the researchers argue.

Lead author of the study, Margaret Hegwood, said that the study did not contest the big win for food security as an outcome of reducing food loss and waste, but one needs to think about the implications of large-scale reductions of food loss and waste, particularly the impact on the environment. “The study was meant to give an idea to policymakers on how to proceed when making decisions about reducing food loss and waste, to balance the food security and environmental trade-offs,” she said.

The study highlights how two objectives of reducing food loss and waste – environmental benefits and food security benefits – can be at odds with each other. The models project that in a scenario of reducing food loss and waste by 100%, the predicted environmental benefits (reduced carbon emissions, land use, water use) decrease by 53-71%, influenced by the rebound effect where more food is available and consumed.

The multi-country data study also included some countries in South Asia where food loss and waste as well as food security are significant issues.

Liz Goodwin, Senior Fellow and Director, Food Loss and Waste at the World Resources Institute (WRI), said that the study has used a simplistic model as it did not take the cost involved in reducing food loss and waste into consideration. “There is a cost involved in improving the infrastructure, packaging, awareness, etc. which has not been accounted for in this study,” said Goodwin, who was not associated with the study.

WRI India’s Director, Sustainable Landscapes and Restoration, Ruchika Singh concurred. She said that the study assumed that the cost saved by consumers from reduced food prices would be spent on more food. “From India and Global South’s perspective, we may need more data to assess if the cost saved by consumers would be spent on more food; they could even use it for other purposes,” she said.

Goodwin added that in certain regions of the world, such as in sub-Saharan Africa, reducing food loss and waste give large food security gains. “There are various (nutritionally) poor foods which are readily available to people in poorer countries which makes them obese and leads to lifestyle diseases. That’s a bigger societal problem which will be solved by reducing food loss and waste,” she said.

Environmental, Economic Wins

Reducing food loss and waste has significant environmental and economic wins. Food loss and waste generate eight to ten percent of greenhouse gas emissions, annually, from energy, fertilisers, land conversion and landfill waste associated with food that is grown but ultimately not consumed. A 2019 World Resources Institute estimate suggests that reducing food loss and waste by 25% globally would reduce the food calorie gap by 12%, the land use gap by 27% and the greenhouse gas mitigation gap by 15%.

Not addressing food loss and waste leads to a global economic loss of around $1 trillion annually. This is a conservative estimate that does not take into account the economic burden of labour days lost due to poor health among employees. In India, the cost of lost productivity, illness and death due to malnutrition is $10 to $28 billion.

A 2021 working paper by World Resources Institute India says that there is very little data available on food loss and waste in India and is mostly limited to post-harvest loss (Rs. 1,527 billion or $18.5 billion). The data on food waste at the retail, household and service level is limited to a few perception studies.

Singh of WRI India said that any increase in food loss and waste leads to food and nutrition insecurity, resulting in nutritional deficiencies, more among women and marginalised communities. In many households in India, women eat last, after ensuring everyone else is fed; they may forgo meals if food is in short supply. Thus, a lack of access to nutritious food, especially for the poor and vulnerable, is further curtailed due to the losses. “The food that is rescued across the supply chain could be provided to people in need to curb hunger and improve nutritional security,” she said.

Climate Preparedness To Avoid Food Loss

Climate change related disasters are also emerging as a source of food loss and waste which makes tackling it important not only from a climate mitigation point of view, but also for adaptation.

“The impact of climate change can exacerbate food losses if there is poor infrastructure at the farmgate or across the food supply chain. For instance, risks due to extreme heat, rains and flooding could lead to quality and quantity losses,” Singh said. There is also the food lost during transportation to be accounted for in times of disasters. It is important to focus on making farming techniques as well as packaging better since adverse weather events have become the new normal around the world, she said.

Reducing food loss and food waste is one of the top global climate change mitigation solutions. According to Singh, the solutions across the food supply chain could vary from addressing behavioural aspects, bridging capacity gaps, planning for infrastructure and innovative solutions (e.g., tech solutions), and, most importantly, reducing the supply-demand gaps which require timely data and policy incentives.

She added that encouraging countries and states to set up methods that can enable measurement of food loss and waste through public-private partnerships, setting explicit targets on its reduction, and inspiring action through incentives can go a long way in reducing food loss and waste and its impacts. “Consumers are significant for reducing food waste; we all as citizens, can play a critical role, and every action counts,” Singh said.

(Published under Creative Commons from Mongabay-India. Read the original article here)