Reducing food wastage footprint is crucial to conserve natural resources as a basis for food security Food wastage assessment should include the socio-environmental impacts in order to fully understand the cost and benefit of reduction options, and investment requirements Environmental issues and related social costs (e.g. health, public mitigation costs) must be considered for efficient food loss reduction strategies, they do have an “hidden” cost born by society at large. © FAO: http://www.fao.org

1. Food losses footprint highlights
Natural Resources and Environment Department
11 December 2013

2. Food Wastage Footprint
Impact Drivers
Direct use of natural
resources (water,
land, energy,…)
increasing scarcities
Inp
ut
Distribution
Processing
Consumption
Postharv. handling
and storage
Agricultural
production
Indirect use of
natural resources via
the manufacturing of
inputs and the
machinery
End of life
Output
Pollution (GHG
emissions, fertilizer
run-off, landfill
leakages,…)
t
Inpu
2

3. Food Wastage Footprint
Yearly Environmental Impacts
3.7 Gt CO2eq/year
=
3rd largest emitter if food
wastage was a country
36 EJ/ Year
=
½ USA Energy
production/ Year
CO2
250 km3/year
=
3 times Geneva lake
1.5 billion ha to grow
food which ends up
lost/wasted
=
28% of agricultural land
66% of
endangered/vulnerable
species threatened by
food production

4. Origins of the environmental impacts
Value Chain
Environmental impacts arise all along the agriculture value chain
4
3
Distribution
Distribution
Processing
Processing
Postharvest
2Postharv. handling
handling and
and storage
storage
Agricultural
1
Agricultural
production
production
Consumption
5
Consumption
End of life
6
End of life
Sources of food wastage (stages 1 to 5) and sources of
environmental impacts (stages 1 to 6) in the food life cycle.
4

5. Origins of the environmental impacts
Value Chain
The agricultural phase is always the most impacting phase
Carbon footprint at consumption phase with respective contribution of
embedded life-cycle phases
17,4%
Agricultural production
45,4%
Postharvest handling and
Storage & Processing
Distribution
Consumption
27,8%
End-of- ife
L
4,8%
4,6%
5

6. Origins of the environmental impacts
Commodities
Wastage volume/footprint relationship is not linear
Cereals and fruits contribute to 52 % and 18% of total water footprint
Animal product have high footprints
60%
60%
Contribution of each commodity to food wastage and blue water footprint
Contribution of each commodity to food wastage and blue water footprint
50%
50%
40%
40%
ll
aa
tt
ff
oo
%%
30%
30%
20%
20%
10%
10%
0%
0%
Cereals (excluding
Cereals (excluding
beer)
beer)
Commodity 1
Commodity 1
Starchy roots
Starchy roots
Commodity 2
Commodity 2
Oilcrops & Pulses
Oilcrops & Pulses
Fruits (excluding
Meat
Fruits (excluding
Meat
wine)
wine)
Commodity 3
Commodity 4
Commodity 5
Commodity 3
Commodity 4
Commodity 5
Food wastage
Blue water footprint
Food wastage
Blue water footprint
Milk (excluding
Milk (excluding
butter) & Eggs
butter) & Eggs
Commodity 7
Commodity 7
Vegetables
Vegetables
Commodity 8
Commodity 8
6

7. Origins of the environmental impacts
Geography
Depending on the region, the commodity footprint differs
Top 10 of "region * commodity" pairs for carbon footprint + contribution to food
wastage volume
Contributing to 60% of total carbon footprint and 39% of total food wastage
16%
14%
12%
10%
l
a
t
f
o
%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
Ind. Asia *
Cereals
S&SE Asia *
Cereals
Ind. Asia *
Veg.
Ind. Asia * Europe * Veg. NA&Oce *
Meat
Meat
Carbon footprint
LA * Meat
Europe *
Meat
Europe *
Cereals
S&SE Asia *
Veg.
Food wastage volume
7

8. Origins of the environmental impacts
Footprint Hotspot Example
Loss of cereals in South/South East Asia emerges as a significant hotspot
rice and wheat
CO2
8

9. Food Loss
Particularities
Usually at the beginning of the value chain due to pre and post
harvest capacity issues :
•
•
•
•
•
Unforseen climatic events
Lack of agronomy capacity (pest control, proper harvesting techniques,…)
Lack of proper storage facilities
Lack of processing units
Lack of distribution infrastructure
More linked to developing countries where process and market
value chains are less developed
Loss usually touches the most vulnerable and the ones who can not
afford to have a reduced access to natural resources
9

10. Food Loss
Food Security
Food Loss = double negative effect on food insecurity
Direct impact on availability
Less food
available for
consumption
Increased scarcities of
Natural Resources at the
basis of production
10

11. Food Loss
Inverted Pyramid

12. Food Loss
Reduce
Improving management and infrastructures
Example: Solar technology to reduce food loss
SOLAR DRYERS
FOOD LOSS
REDUCTION
In a West Africa project, one dryer
= 3.75 tons of mangoes saved
= 0.86 tCO2eq saved
= 1 133m3 saved
= children saved through less Vitamin A deficiency
SOLAR REFRIGERATORS
PASTEURIZER UNITS

13. Food Loss
Reuse
Reusing for food or feed
Gleaning
"The biggest value to the farm is that
product that was raised for the purpose
of consumption, is consumed"
Rod Parker, general manager,
Parker Farms in Oak Grove, Virginia, USA, volunteers collect up
to 900 kg of produce/day = 2 173 kgCO2eq and 85 000 m3 of
water

14. Food Loss
Recycle/Recover
143 kg CO2eq
236 kg CO2eq

15. Food Wastage Footprint
Balancing Act
Importance local full cost-benefits analysis
15

16. Conclusions
Reducing food wastage footprint is crucial to conserve natural
resources as a basis for food security
Food wastage assessment should include the socioenvironmental impacts in order to fully understand the cost and
benefit of reduction options, and investment requirements
Environmental issues and related social costs (e.g. health,
public mitigation costs) must be considered for efficient food loss
reduction strategies, they do have an “hidden” cost born by society
at large
16

17. THANK YOU
http://www.fao.org/nr/sustainability/food-loss-and-waste/en/