The roadmap - Second Harvest
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
31 the avoidable crisisof food waste: the roadmap
acknowledgements
This Roadmap has been developed The Food Loss and Waste Stakeholder
by the following individuals at Advisory Committee played a critical
Second Harvest: role in ensuring this project delivered
primary data on food loss and waste
Lori Nikkel
in the Canadian supply chain and that
Madison Maguire
the strategic direction of this project
Benita Aalto
accurately represented the current
Christine Bomé
food waste landscape. We want to
Corresponding author: Martin Gooch thank the following organizations
for their contribution:
With key input from the Technical
Report authored by the following Dalhousie University
individuals from VCMI: Gordon Food Service
Loblaw Companies Limited
Martin Gooch, PhD
Maple Leaf Foods
Delia Bucknell
Metro Inc.
Dan Laplain
Provision Coalition
Benjamin Dent, PhD
Sodexo Canada
Peter Whitehead, PhD
University of Guelph
Abdel Felfel, PhD
Walmart Canada
Caroline Glasbey (Editor)
Bette Jean Crews, Independent
This project was made possible
by a generous donation from the
Walmart Foundation.
Keycontactsfor thisproject:
Second Harvest Value Chain Management
International Inc.
Lori Nikkel Martin Gooch
Chief Executive Officer Chief Executive Officer
Email: lorin@secondharvest.ca Email: martin@vcm-international.com
Tel: +1 416.408.2594 x 294 Tel: +1 416.997.7779
Suggested citation: Nikkel, L., Maguire, M., Gooch, M., Bucknell, D., LaPlain, D.,
Dent, B., Whitehead, P., Felfel, A. (2019). The Avoidable Crisis of Food Waste:
Roadmap; Second Harvest and Value Chain Management International;
Ontario, Canada.
Accessible from: www.SecondHarvest.ca/Research
1
Second Harvest is Canada’s largest greenhouse gases from damaging our
food rescue organization and an expert environment. The food Second Harvest
in perishable food recovery. Every recovers is redirected to social service
year we are expanding our network to organizations and schools, ensuring
include more farms, manufacturers, people have access to the good food
distributors and retailers. We work with they need to be healthy and strong.
hundreds of businesses across the Second Harvest is a global thought
food supply chain, reducing the amount leader and continually innovates
of edible food going to waste, which processes and shares methods, to
in turn stops millions of pounds of create a better future for everyone.
www.SecondHarvest.ca
www.FoodRescue.ca
Value Chain Management International create pragmatic and sustainable
(VCMI) has authored/co-authored solutions for businesses and industry
several publications on food loss and organizations along the value chain.
waste and is a leading public and VCMI applies specialized value chain
industry voice in bringing awareness diagnostic tools to detect where
to the opportunities and solutions waste occurs and to determine how to
surrounding food waste reduction, eliminate it. VCMI then participates in
traceability, and the environment. the implementation of new practices
VCMI measures waste within the to solve the issues and ensure
overall analysis of food systems to successful outcomes.
www.VCM-International.com
2
this
research
is a world first:
• It’s the first to measure volume (weight) using
a standardized system across the whole food
value chain
• It encompasses all food types from terrestrial and
marine commodities
• It identifies and validates loss factors based on primary
data provided by industry
• It provides a whole of chain analysis, from primary
production through to end of life
• It identifies the root causes of FLW, where they occur
along the value chain, and the extent to which they differ
by food type
• It establishes a replicable whole of chain FLW analytical
framework, comprising standardized metrics that can be
used at enterprise and industry level
• It establishes a means to connect commodities to
finished products (foods and beverages), to enable
extrapolations to be established between consumer
products and primary source
• It calculates mass balance: total available commodities
produced for food, minus exports, plus imports (from a
whole chain perspective)
• It assesses the destination of FLW occurring along the
value chain
3
W E NEED TO
radically change
how W E VALUE FOOD
The abundance of food in Canada has HOW FOOD WASTE DAMAGES
Apples rot under trees led us to dismiss its intrinsic value as a THE ENVIRONMENT
source of life-giving nutrition at the same
due to labour shortages time as 4 million Canadians – including Food loss and waste (FLW) is
an enormous economic cost to
or low prices making it 1.4 million children –struggle to access
businesses and society. It also has
healthy food.
uneconomical for farmers a significant environmental impact.
There is a way forward, but we need
to harvest to start by radically re-thinking how we FLW represents almost 60 percent of the
value food at each stage of the value food industry’s environmental footprint.
chain. As you will see, there is a strong Much of this waste and its environmental
business, social and environmental case footprint is entirely avoidable.
Surplus milk goes for reducing food loss and waste and Food that ends up in landfill creates
rescuing and redistributing surplus food. methane gas which is 25 times more
into sewers damaging to the environment than
Consumers also play a part: we shop
2 for 1 deals but let the second item carbon dioxide.
spoil because we didn’t need it; a The United Nations Intergovernmental
product passes its best before date Panel on Climate Change report states
Thousands of acres of and we throw it away because we think that significant action needs to be
produce are plowed under it’s not edible; we expect abundant taken to avoid global warming above
portions when we dine out but don’t 1.5˚C by 2030. Tackling food loss and
due to cancelled orders finish our meals. waste must be considered an urgent
Due to product dating practices that priority by all levels of government,
have no correlation to food safety, industry and individuals.
perfectly good foods and beverages All of us – from farmers to
Fish are caught then go to landfill rather than being donated. manufacturers, from producers to
tossed back into the water This pattern is repeated at retail: fresh distributors, from stores to homes
– need to rethink how we view
to die if they don’t match bread is thrown into garbage bins at
excess food and change our habits,
the end of the day along with tubs of
the quota yogurt that are a few days shy of their so that people can benefit and an
best before date and blemished fruit that environmental crisis can be avoided.
is still edible.
Every year, 56.5 M M tonnes of CO2 equivalent
emissions are created by food waste in Canada
4
why
we need to studyfood lossand waste
Second Harvest is in the Accurate measurement of food loss root causes of FLW. With this data a
and waste (FLW) is vital for economic framework was created for the entire
business of food rescue, and environmental reasons but food value chain to measure FLW.
and after more than three it has not been consistent: many
This study found a need to
people in the food industry don’t take
decades working on this full advantage of the commercial
standardize measurement in
order to compare results, create
problem, we know that opportunities that can be realized by
benchmarks and provide clearer
addressing the root causes of FLW.
there is much more that This includes how much food loss can
direction for government, industry
and consumer solutions. We would
can be done. The amazing be prevented and rescued.
then be able to implement sustainable
healthy and nutritious food Second Harvest partnered with Value solutions to help reduce FLW, through
Chain Management International prevention and redistribution.
we recover hides in plain (VCMI) and consulted with over 700 See the Technical Report for
sight: it is not waste; it is food industry experts through online a detailed explanation of the
surveys and interviews to identify the measurement framework.
surplus that can’t be sold
at market.
01 02 03 04 05
Production Post Harvest Processing and Distribution / Consumption
Handling and Manufacturing Retail / HRI
Storage
food loss food waste
In the food value chain, LOSS is the discarding WASTE is the discarding
the words “LOSS” and of food that occurs from of food during distribution
“WASTE” have distinct production through to and marketing to
but interconnected processing. Examples consumers through
meanings. include edible foods retail or foodservice
not meeting customer and subsequently in
specifications (e.g. too the home. Food waste
small, not perfect shape); also applies to food
orders from customers and beverages that are
being changed or donated to food rescue
cancelled; or a lack organizations but end up
of labour on the farm being discarded.
causing fruit to not
be picked.
5
isall food waste the same?
There are two types of food loss and
waste (FLW):
Tonnage (in Millions) and Percentage of total waste
Hotels, Restaurants & Institutions Production: 8.64, 24%
AVOIDABLE (HRI): 3.11, 9%
This would include FLW such as
apples that reach the retail store Households: 5.14, 14%
but are not purchased by consumers.
This unexpected or “unplanned” FLW
is the greatest opportunity to reduce
Retail: 1.31, 4%
FLW or rescue edible food.
Distribution: 0.55, 2%
Because unavoidable FLW occurs
in the production of foods and
Manufacturing: 4.63, 13%
beverages that are subsequently lost
and wasted, all types of losses and Processing: 12.14, 34%
waste can be reduced to a degree.
58% 32%
UNAVOIDABLE
By-products that are inedible are
thrown out, such as animal bones,
husks, and the planned waste that
happens when food is cooked and
processed. This is expected or
of all the of thislostand wasted food
“planned” FLW. food produced is could be rescued to support
lostor wasted communitiesacrossCanada
35.5 M M Tonnes 11.2 M M Tonnes
THE SOURCE, VOLUME AND VALUE OF AVOIDABLE FLW
Food Supply Volume Value
Chain Stage (Million Tonne) (Billion)
These figures don’t
include the immense Production (Produce Only) 0.66 $2.88
production costs,
Processing & Manufacturing 4.82 $20.96
such as water, power,
fertilizer, labour etc., Distribution .55 $2.41
as well disposal fees.
The environmental costs Retail 1.31 $5.70
include GHG emissions
produced by food Consumer 2.38 $10.37
decomposition in landfill.
HRI 1.44 $7.14
TOTAL 11.17 $49.46
6
The TOMATO:
a story of loss
from field
to
fork
7
overview
In the pages ahead, we will The issue of food waste is complex
and challenging but it’s vital for all of
follow the path of a tomato us to understand how, why and where
through the supply chain to it happens. Knowing the root causes
of FLW enables the development of
see how and why food loss sustainable FLW solutions.
and waste (FLW) occurs. The path of a tomato is an ideal
example to illustrate the pain points
We’ll conclude by of where loss and waste can occur
envisioning how we can along the chain because tomatoes
reach retail in both their original fresh
work towards longer-term form – prepackaged or loose – and
change and a revolution in as a processed good, like canned
tomatoes or tomato paste.
how we value food.
Tonnage (in Millions) and Percentage of Unplanned,
Post-Processing (Avoidable), Potentially Edible FLW
Hotels, Restaurants & Institutions Production: 0.66, 6%
(HRI): 1.44, 13%
Processing: 2.25, 20%
Households: 2.38, 21%
Manufacturing: 2.57, 23%
Retail: 1.31, 12%
Distribution: 0.55, 5%
8
production
grown and gathered
01
Millions of tomatoes are grown each year in Canada and
it’s expected that hundreds of thousands won’t make it
to market. Some won’t even make it off the farm or out
of the greenhouse.
whyand where lossand waste occur on the
farm or greenhouse
aesthetic criteria Variety
6%
Only “perfect” Grade One or Grade There are many varieties of tomatoes
Two produce will be sold to retail. and some can only be sold to certain
Particularly if produced for sale in the markets due to their appearance,
fresh market, a tomato that is not the size, taste or internal qualities. This
exact right size, shape or colouring increases the potentially negative
will likely not have a market. effects that aesthetics, incorrect
forecasts and low prices already have
on farmers. Due to forecasting, price of avoidable flw
during PRODUCTION
Forecasts or variety, the farmer may not even
(produce)
harvest the product – especially if
What growers are asked to grow by they have no food rescue connection. .66 M Tonnes
their customers, sometimes ahead of If grown in the field, crops may be
crops being planted may exceed actual plowed back into the ground.
$2.88 B
demand. This can leave farmers with a
crop that they cannot sell.
Temporaryand seasonal workers
Prices The farming and food processing percentage of produce being discarded
sector has been negatively impacted and higher than usual losses occurring
The prices paid to many farmers, by changes to the seasonal and in storage.
particularly those supplying the temporary worker regulations. In
fresh market, can fluctuate widely, All this good food is lost at the source,
agriculture and horticulture, having
sometimes falling below the cost where it’s grown and gathered. When
too few workers leads to on-farm
of production. we take a look at a tomato’s journey
losses due to the inability to harvest
through the food value chain, we see
crops at peak quality. Some crops are
the amount of food thrown away is
not harvested at all. In the fruit and
enormous. This has been acceptable
vegetable industry, crops harvested
practice for far too long.
past their prime result in a higher9
post-harvest
handling and storage
02
barriersto rescuing issue: issue:
and donating food-- Crop insurance The perception of liability
and whatcan Weather or other growing factors can Food businesses state liability
be done create quality and size issues that concerns as one of the main
prevent a farmer from selling their reasons for not donating food.
crops to the commercial market.
To protect themselves financially
issue:
in the event of such an occurrence, Proposed action:
Improved coordination
farmers insure their crops. Many
between food rescue
crop insurance claims do not relate All levels of government can work to
and donor
to a food safety hazard. Hail-damaged increase food industry awareness of
A patchwork system has evolved apples, for instance, look less appealing Food Donation and Good Samaritan
to rescue and redistribute food. but are still edible. However, claiming Act legislation that exist in every
This system lacks coordination crop insurance can prevent a province and territory in Canada,
to effectively communicate the farmer from donating a crop to protecting businesses from liability
opportunity to donate across the food programs, resulting in nutritious when donating in good faith.
food supply chain. Also, there is foods unnecessarily going to waste.
limited infrastructure in the charitable Crop insurance is complex, occurs
sector to take advantage of donations at a provincial level, and there is no
from larger institutional food donors. standardized process for determining
This leads to an excess of certain allowable claims and calculating the
commodities at certain times of the value of that claim. Exactly how the
year and leaves producers with limited claim process works also differs by
options for donating food that are cost- crop. Claims can be on an entire crop
effective and/or places a substantial during the growing cycle, or part of a
burden on those who are determined crop if frost or disease prevents the full
to donate. This situation is particularly crop from being harvested and/or sold.
acute in rural areas, where the majority Sending fruits and vegetables to a food
of crops are grown. rescue organization could constitute
supplying a market, hence it could
affect indemnity – even if the supplying
Proposed action: of that product to the “market” does
not constitute a revenue.
Strategic oversight and implementation
of lean enterprise practices. Explore
and implement online food donation
Proposed action:
platforms such as FoodRescue.ca
(see appendix). Remove clauses in crop insurance
policies that prevent the donation
of edible crops.10
processing
and manufacturing
whyand where
lossand waste
occur during
processing
Grading
Grading is the sorting of vegetables
and fruits into different categories
according to size, shape, appearance
and colour. If the tomato does not
meet exacting specifications it could
be rejected by the processor, and if
no secondary market exists to sell the
rejected tomatoes then waste occurs.
Inaccurate forecasts
A fear of shorting a customer and
incurring significant financial penalties
lead to over production and excess
inventories. If demand is lower than
forecast, processors are left with
excess stock; if demand is higher than
forecast, processors can be penalized
for not filling orders.
Processinefficiencies
Supply chain inefficiencies,
ineffective packing processes,
and order modifications can all
cause loss. For example, machines
being operated incorrectly can lead
to product falling onto the floor; orders
modified at the last minute can cause
packed product to be discarded or lost
during the process of repacking.11
03
whyand where
lossand waste
occur during
manufacturing
Packaging
Manufacturing is the process of taking Product shelf life can be extended –
edible raw materials and transforming often significantly – by packaging it or
them into food products that can be changing the design or the materials in
bought and sold. At this step, a tomato which products are packaged.
would be turned into canned tomatoes,
20%
tomato paste or tomato sauce.
Value chain inefficiencies caused
by poor communication and non
collaborative relationships, ineffective
manufacturing processes, or inventory
management issues can all cause loss.
of avoidable flw
during processing
Date coding/ labelling
2.25 M Tonnes
Manufacturers often implement
$9.78 B conservative date labels (e.g. use-by
dates, best before dates, etc.) to
protect their brand and manage
consumer perceptions of the
product’s quality. Date labels are
23%
set by each manufacturer and not
by governmental regulations.
If products are close to or past the date
label assigned to them, some retail and
foodservice customers have the
option to return the product to the
manufacturer at no cost to them. Even of avoidable flw
though a manufactured product’s date during manufacturing
code can be highly conservative and
the food perfectly safe to eat, some
2.57 M Tonnes
manufacturers will not donate this food. $11.17 B12
processing
and manufacturing
“In date coding
we have
created a
monster.”
— Retail Executive13
03
BARRIERS TO RESCUING
AND DONATING FOOD
issue: issue:
Confusion between Expiry food labelling
and BestBefore Dates Proposed action:
In Canada, foods that do not meet
A best before date is not an expiry Federal, Provincial and Municipal legal labelling requirements are often
date and has little to do with food Health Departments can raise public destroyed and not donated. Labelling
safety. Consumers typically interpret awareness about when it is safe to issues are not always related to food
“best before” to mean “bad after.” consume and donate products past safety. Not meeting these requirements
The situation is further complicated by their best before dates. results in foods not being able to
manufacturers not donating food that be sold or donated, even if the
Expiration dates are required on a issue does not pertain to food safety.
is close to its best before date, and by
limited number of foods that have
differing criteria amongst community
strict compositional and nutritional
food organizations about what food they
specifications (see left).
will accept based on its date codes. Proposed action:
Food with best before dates are
In Canada, only five foods require Establish clear guidelines and legal
safe to eat past the date if they are
expiry dates: framework by the government for
unopened and stored at the proper
temperature. Foods past the best allowing the donation of mislabelled
• Nutritional supplements
before date can also be donated food products that do not represent
• Meal replacements a food safety hazard.
to food rescue programs, if Public
• Baby formula and other human Health guidelines are followed.
milk substitutes Check FoodRescue.ca
• Pharmacist-sold foods for very for more details: issue:
low-energy diets https://www.foodrescue.ca/docs/de- Vendor SupplyAgreements
• Formulated liquid diets fault-source/default-document-library/
best-before-timeline.pdf Vendor agreements between
manufacturers and retailers can
include a clause stating that excess
products must be destroyed, and
therefore cannot be donated.
Proposed action:
Review and revise vendor agreements
to enable donation of edible food.14
distribution
distribution: retail:
whyand where lossand whyand where lossand
waste occur during waste occur atretail
distribution
A tomato and a can of tomato bestbefore dates Excessstock
sauce are both on their way to
If food has not been sold by its best When distribution centres have excess
either a grocery store or an HRI
before date, or if it is unsold close inventory, products are unexpectedly
(hospital, restaurant or institution)
to, or past the best before date, pushed to retail stores. This leads
foodservice location.
retailers can send product back to the to loss occurring in the store and,
Food waste occurs at the distribution processor or manufacturer, and charge often, stores having insufficient time
level primarily because product is the supplier of the product accordingly. to arrange for these products to be
stored at the incorrect temperature, rescued before they spoil.
shipments are delayed, the product
is handled incorrectly, products Part-filled shelves
reach their best before or expiry
date, or there are issues such as not Consumers tend not to purchase a
keeping the right temperature when product when shelves or bins are only
transporting. This leads to products part-filled or nearing empty. A fear of
being rejected. Improper employee being penalized by their customers
training, human error and equipment if 100% on-shelf availability is not
malfunction can cause these issues. met drives suppliers to keep excess
Meat, dairy and produce are all time- and product on hand or ensure it is available
temperature-sensitive, and if not stored at short notice. This fear encourages
or handled correctly can spoil quickly. overproduction in primary production,
processing and manufacturing.
Produce aesthetics
5%
According to survey respondents,
consumers do not buy imperfect fruits
and vegetables and will sift through
bins, bruising the fruit with their touch
and only selecting what they deem
“perfect.” Produce can also be bruised
or spoiled by untrained or inattentive of avoidable flw
staff. Produce that is not sold is typically in distribution
sent to landfill, unless the retailer is
connected to a food rescue operation.
.55 M Tonnes
$2.41 B15
retail
04
BARRIERS TO RESCUING
AND DONATING FOOD
issue: issue:
Confusion aboutwhen Perceived or real costand
food issafe to donate complexityof donation
versuswaste management
Public health authorities commonly
12%
promote a “when in doubt, throw it out,” Reducing the cost of labour as a
philosophy towards food that could be percentage of overall sales has
donated. The lack of clear and robust been a priority for businesses in the
guidance surrounding the management competitive food sector. Margins
of excess safe-to-eat foods leads to are small, competition is fierce, and
current rules mandated by provincial customers are demanding low prices.
and municipal governments being Processes that are inefficient and/
of avoidable flw
interpreted and acted upon differently. or require additional staff time are in retail
This results in edible foods going to being eliminated. In order to prepare
landfill. There are no consistent public food for donation, resources need to 1.31 M Tonnes
health regulations across Canada: be dedicated to sort, package, store $5.70 B
regulations differ even within the same and process donations so they can
province, as it is up to municipalities to be picked up by recipient agencies.
execute them. The result is confusion This all takes staff time and costs issue:
among provincial or national food money; sending food that cannot be The perception of liability
businesses about when and how they sold to landfill is cheap and easy by
can donate excess product. The system comparison. As in other areas in the value chain,
is equally confusing for food rescue distribution and retail food businesses
organizations to navigate and to assure state liability concerns as one of the
food donors of the correct process. main reasons for not donating food.
Proposed action:
Develop standardized operating
Proposed action: procedures across food rescue Proposed action:
landscape to reduce the cost and
Develop clear testing protocols complexity of donating, and build All levels of government can work
to assess safety of food for awareness of best practices that to increase food industry awareness
circumstances where businesses reduce complexity. that Food Donation and Good
are in a position to donate i.e. after Samaritan Act legislation exists
a refrigeration/freezer malfunction. in every province and territory
in Canada, protecting businesses
from liability when donating food
in good faith.16
hotels,
restaurantsand institutions(hri
)
W hyand where lossand waste occur in hri
plate waste preparation waste menu design
Food that has been served to a Prep waste includes food scraps In situations where you do not choose
customer and left uneaten is called and inventory casualties (when food the type or quantity of food you receive,
“plate waste,” which cannot be spoils before getting used). Waste food waste increases. This includes
repurposed: an uneaten tomato side can happen at the prep stage if staff hospitals, where patients do not
salad will be thrown out, since public are not trained on proper techniques typically order from a menu and where
health regulations will prevent its for preparing food, or do not have an dieticians’ requirements dictate what
rescue and donation. Plate waste is option to cross-utilize the ingredient in must be served. Portion size is also
particularly an issue in buffets where other dishes, like the chopped tomato an issue, with some restaurants and
both staff and diners play a role in used for omelet filling at breakfast caterers providing more than the 1.2lbs*
creating avoidable waste: staff by re-purposed as bruschetta topping per meal that diners typically consume.
over-preparing food to give the at lunch. Other causes of preparation Source: https://furtherwithfood.org/wp-content/uploads/
impression of variety and abundance, waste include poor forecasting and 2017/11/HotelKitchen_Final_Final_11102017.pdf
and diners by overfilling plates to demand that does not materialize.
take advantage of this abundance.
“In hospitals, 19% to 20% of served
solid food is uneaten and it can be as
much (or more) in other venues such as
mining camps.
Universities are engaged in ‘food ethics’
but have a sense of entitlement over
how much food they take.”
— Foodservice Respondent
13%
of avoidable flw in hotels
,
restaurantsand institutions
1.44 M Tonnes
$7.14 B17
04
BARRIERS TO RESCUING AND DONATING FOOD
issue: issue: issue:
High levelsof food waste, the perception thatitis The perception of liability
particularlyatbuffets costlyand time-consuming
to donate to food rescue Food businesses state liability
The abundance of a buffet is short- organizations concerns as one of the main
lived: most uneaten food cannot be reasons for not donating food.
rescued and redistributed due to Food businesses perceive donating
public health guidelines for safe food food to be an added cost, either
handling. In many cases, it cannot financially or in time. This could be
Proposed action:
even be re-used by the caterer or due to a lack of infrastructure and/or
restaurant for those same reasons. ineffective communication between All levels of government can work
potential donors and recipient to increase food industry awareness
agencies, or logistical capacity that Food Donation and Good
including transport, storage and Samaritan Act legislation exists
Proposed action:
cold chain (keeping product cold in every province and territory
Monitor sales and what customers or frozen until pick-up). in Canada, protecting businesses
most commonly leave on the plate from liability when donating food
to adjust the menu. In the case of in good faith.
catering and buffet, plate only what Proposed action:
is needed and keep the rest properly
stored so that unsold food can be Government to support food rescue
donated to food rescue organizations. network and capacity building to
decrease the barriers of logistics
and storage.18
targeting food waste
at home
“We live in an environment
where food is cheap and
plentiful and few people have
experienced hunger or food
insecurity. Therefore societal
attitudes do not support
avoiding food waste.”
— Survey Respondent19
05
A recent survey of consumers by the Canadian Centre
for Food Integrity reported that households contribute
21%
to waste by throwing out leftovers, discarding food that
has reached its best before date, and by purchasing too
much food, which is then thrown away.
Quantifying household food loss and Learning to shop sustainably is
waste is beyond the scope of this another area where consumer of avoidable flw
athome
report, and donation of home-cooked education is needed.
meals to food rescue organizations is
Ideally, we would purchase a few days’ 2.38 M Tonnes
not possible for food safety reasons.
But, as discussed earlier, there is a role
worth of perishable food at a time, $10.37 B
eat what we buy, then re-stock fresh
for consumers to play in reducing FLW.
items as needed, while filling the gaps
More awareness and education about with frozen fruits and vegetables and
best before dates is needed, ideally shelf-stable items like legumes and
starting with public health departments pastas. The frenetic pace of modern
who have inadvertently exacerbated life has made this “old world” method
the problem by promoting a “when in challenging to maintain, and in rural the annual costof
doubt, throw it out” food safety message. or remote communities this is not avoidable food loss
pragmatic or even achievable. and waste in canada is
Given the friction between corporate
brand standards and actual food
safety, it could be time for this default
message to become more nuanced
and targeted so safe, nutritious food
While change needs to occur across the
food industry, the industry exists to feed
us, so we all need to reconsider how we
see food’s value in nutritional, human
$1,766per household*
doesn’t end up in the garbage or resource and environmental terms.
compost bin.
*Based on calculations using data from The Avoidable
Crisis of Food Waste and Statistics Canada.20
“The average
consumer is
not aware of
the staggering
and depressing
extent of
food loss
and waste.”
— Food Retailer21
why
waste has become standard operating procedure
There are four key reasons why the true cost of food waste is not accurately calculated.
1
. Insufficientmeasurement
The lack of a standardized approach
for measuring, valuing, monitoring,
benchmarking and consequently
benefiting from the reduction of
FLW has limited the broader adoption
of FLW reduction initiatives among
food businesses. For example, there
is no consistency by which retailers
categorize and monitor FLW, and no
uniform definition of how and why
foods and beverages are categorized.
The cost of FLW is typically seen as
the cost of disposal. Excess food
sent to animal feed is viewed as 3
. Sending to landfill
revenue, while the cost of having iseasy
produced that excess is ignored.
This lack of consistency in It is often easier for staff to throw food These factors have negatively impacted
measurement, valuation and in the garbage rather than take the the motivation and ability to implement
reporting limits the ability to time to separate it so that it can be the fundamental changes in behaviour
benchmark FLW and associated donated. To sort and separate food within businesses, across value chains,
factors to identify opportunities and from waste requires time, a change in and among consumers that are
evaluate the comparative impact of business practices and could require required to sustainably reduce
FLW solutions. additional, costly infrastructure. food loss and waste.
2
. lack of collaboration 4
. Landfill/ tipping
feesare low
The competitive landscape often
creates an obstacle to share data, Low landfill/tipping fees can make any
plan and execute collaboratively. other management option for edible
This transpires within and between and inedible food financially unviable.
businesses, leading to many root This is particularly the case where the
causes of avoidable FLW occurring population density is low and there
at the interface between different is no infrastructure in place that can
functions (e.g. procurement and accommodate regular large scale food
operations) and business partners. donations. In such cases, excess food
This lack of collaboration results in and beverages invariably continue to
ineffective forecasting, planning and be sent to landfill.
replenishment and consequently
overproduction throughout the
value chain.22
what
sustains the status quo of waste
The true costsof waste are There isa lack of we have created a culture
notinternalized leadership to reduce FLW of accepting waste
The true costs of food loss and waste This analysis identified that FLW When asked about current levels of
– especially the environmental impacts initiatives are often not adopted food waste, industry executives from
– are not being internalized by industry by the entire organization, meaning across the supply chain often say that
and consumers. Not internalizing their full potential is not achieved. they are “the cost of doing business.”
the true costs of FLW can lead, for The leadership that exists is hampered There is a lack of accountability to
example, to businesses choosing to by the macroeconomic environment reduce food waste. A direct correlation
send it to landfill rather than partnering within which the Canadian food can be drawn between some business
with a food rescue organization. It can industry and its international and governmental decisions and the
also lead to consumers apportioning stakeholders operate. This can creation of avoidable FLW.
less value and care to the foods that be true with food rescue efforts too,
they choose to purchase. where only certain locations of the
business are donating excess product.
To see universal adoption by all levels
of the organization, strong and clear
leadership with proper employee
training will be required.
Food rescue needs champions.
(See Appendix: FoodRescue.ca)
“The current system makes it too easy to blame
other departments or cite excuses for why
change should not occur. The common mantra
is ‘We have industry average shrink so there’s
not a problem and no need to change.’”
– Retailer23
Overarching rootcauses
Why differences exist between organizations’ desire to reduce FLW reflects how a combination of the three factors that shape
individuals’ behaviour (culture; personal ideas; and ideals, values and beliefs). The most effective FLW reduction efforts and
resulting benefits will be achieved by individuals belonging to Group 1; the least effective FLW will be achieved by individuals
belonging to Group 4. The ability of individuals in Group 1 to implement programs that result in reduced FLW through
prevention, donation, reuse or recycle is determined by seniority. The desire to combat FLW starts (or falters) at the top.
Measure do notMeasure
group 1 group 2 group 3 group 4
Intermittent improvement within current system
Driven by Driven by Driven by Driven by
informed defensive, CSR defensive,
strategic constrained and constrained
Improvement, system redesign
decision-making thinking intuition thinking
Effectiveness
Use lack of
Effective Ineffective of response
measurement to
measurement measurement limited by lack of
own advantage
measurement
Effective Ineffective Defensive
Isolated response
response response response
Short-term
Root cause(s) Symptom(s)
unsustainable Status quo
addressed addressed
improvements24
whatmustbe done
the three
to succeed
The proposed solutions and actions reflected in the three approaches below will
result in reduced food loss and waste and assist in achieving the targets contained in
UN Sustainable Development Goal 12, to which Canada is a signatory. Together they
address the root causes of FLW.
1 Measure
• Standardized FLW measurement, evaluation and reporting
The first two approaches (Measure
• Improve forecasting, communication and collaboration and Lead) are proven means of
• Drive innovation in packaging and products that reducing FLW in industry and
reduce waste at home. We believe that they
also have a role in reducing FLW,
by encouraging the rescue and
redistribution of edible food, and
2 Lead improving the performance of
redistribution systems.
• Mentorship and capacity building
• Drive changes in business practices
• Engage employees in constructive reasoning
and response
The third approach (Enable)
3
is about creating an enabling
Enable environment for motivating and
supporting industry, consumers,
• Addressing policies, legislation and regulations
food rescue organizations and
that are incongruent to reducing FLW
community food programs to
• Government and industry committing to reduce FLW wherever possible;
constructive, outcome-driven collaboration and reducing FLW going to landfill
through reuse and recycling.25
The proposed solutions and actions for change are summarized below in matrices contained in the following three tables.
The timelines for implementing these actions are presented as “Do now (2019),” “Do soon (2020-2021)” and “Build a plan
(2022 onwards).” Together, the three matrices form the roadmap for reducing FLW in Canada. Many of the same actions
could be applied worldwide in developed and developing nations to reduce FLW on a global scale. The Technical Report
describes each of the proposed solutions and actions in greater detail.
do now (201
9)
preventatsource redistribution waste management
industry • Start measuring FLW • Identify solutions to increase • Identify reuse and recycle solutions
• Set FLW reduction targets redistribution of excess food to reduce non-rescuable edible and
from along value chain inedible FLW from along food value
• Value benefits of meeting FLW targets
• Engage employees in redistribution chain going to landfill
• Understand FLW root causes and work
initiatives • Engage employees in reuse and
to improve
• Review date code policies relating to recycle solutions
• Deliver lean-thinking awareness
food donation, to ensure that they do • Identify opportunities to expand and
training to staff
not prevent the donation of safe food improve upon current solutions to
• Communicate date labelling meaning transform inedible FLW into edible
• Food rescue and community
to consumers foods and ingredients
food programs deliver lean
• Cease using best before dates where it thinking awareness training
does not constitute a food safety issue to staff and volunteers
• Review menu design to ensure • Improve strategic and operational
unnecessary plate waste collaboration between food rescue and
community food programs at all levels
(federal down to local)
industry • Establish collaborative FLW agreement • Establish standardized communication • Publish guidance on collaborative
organizations with members in conjunction with system and processes for donors and means to increase industry’s use of
voluntary FLW reduction agreement redistributors reuse and recycling options
with government • Publish guidance on collaborative • Publish case studies on exemplary/
• Produce common FLW reporting means to expand distribution options leading edge reuse and recycling
framework • Review Good Samaritan Act legislation initiatives
• Publish guidance on collaboratively to identify potential weaknesses and • Encourage and support the
addressing FLW recommend standardized framework development of new business
• Set FLW reduction targets to government models by waste management
• Encourage public participation in haulers
• Publish best practice date
coding policies volunteer gleaner programs • Promote proven solutions for
• Improve strategic oversight of food transforming inedible FLW into
• Develop a lean food enterprise
rescue and community food programs edible foods and ingredients
methodology with training and
implementation support at all levels (federal down to local)
• Communicate the importance
of menu design to HRI
government • Map where FLW reduction by • Produce a standardized framework for • Launch review of reuse and recycling
category can contribute to specific the Good Samaritan Act and produce infrastructure needs in conjunction
government objectives a national awareness campaign with cost benefit analysis
• Invest in strategic voluntary FLW • Identify best practice redistribution • Identify best practice redistribution
agreement with industry processes and publicly funded means processes
• Review landfill policies, regulations, to enable improved redistribution • Identify infrastructure gaps preventing
legislation and fees • Identify infrastructure gaps preventing reuse and recycling
• Increase fees for dumping organics redistribution and potential means • Fund national study of actual
in landfill to address household FLW
• Communicate responsible • Establish clear, robust rules • Increase funding available for the
purchasing and food handling surrounding the management of development and commercialization
behaviours to consumers potentially donatable food by public of innovative solutions for transforming
health institutions, to address the inedible FLW into edible foods
• Address prescriptive nature
current “when in doubt, throw it out” and ingredients
of seasonal and temporary
philosophy
worker programs
• Provide the resources required to
• Provide funding for current and future
implement the above rules
lean, continual improvement training
and implementation initiatives26
do soon (2020- 2021
)
preventatsource redistribution waste management
industry • Implement systems that enable • Establish industry standard on • Invest savings and revenues from
increases in minimum date code life date code protocols regarding FLW reduction initiatives into
of products on receipt food donations individual or shared reuse and
• Establish collaborative planning, • Review and revise vendor agreements recycling infrastructure
forecasting and replenishment to enable donation of edible food
programs • In conjunction with the training of food
• Reduce consumer FLW through pack rescue and community food programs
size optimization, packaging design staff and volunteers, implement lean
and labelling enterprise training and mentorship
• In conjunction with employee training to utilize current infrastructure and
and mentorship, implement lean systems more effectively
enterprise to reduce FLW and • Remove any clauses in crop insurance
associated costs policies that prevent the donation of
• Adopt new date code formats, edible crops
e.g. Julian codes (see Technical
Report for explanation)
industry • Assist members to quantify true • Support implementation of • Support implementation of
organizations cost of FLW foundational redistribution system, foundational reuse and recycling
• Provide CFO and executive with guidance on modifying to suit systems, with guidance on modifying
mentorship in total cost accounting, local conditions to suit local conditions
FLW reduction best practices • Establish and communicate best • Identify best practice reuse and
• Publish case studies on industry practice standardized guidelines recycling practices for packaged foods
collaboration to reduce FLW on date code policies regarding • Publish improvements in reuse and
donated food recycling, including amount diverted
• Commence publishing FLW
reduction figures • Work with industry and government from landfill
to eliminate date codes from being
• Promote optimized packaging
abused for competitive advantage
to consumers
• Publish food rescue,
• Provide food packaging
redistribution figures
optimization advice
• Standardize language around the
• Standardize what a portion should
descriptions used to determine
be to reduce plate waste
whether unsold food is donated
• Create official protocols for serving or destroyed
systems (e.g. buffet process) to
• Identify and publish best practice
encourage donation of excess food
models for implementation by food
rescue and community food programs
government • Tie food procurement by public • Invest in the development of • Invest revenue from increased
institutions to the reporting of FLW innovative redistribution infrastructure landfill and emissions taxes in the
• Commence investment in and initiatives, including the development of innovative reuse and
infrastructure required to enable implementation of lean by food banks recycling infrastructure and initiatives
room service meal preparation and and other hunger relief agencies • Establish standardized reuse and
delivery in publicly funded HRI • Collaborate with industry, food rescue recycling polices, regulations and
• Review impact of business and community food programs on legislation
relationships on FLW levels redistribution initiatives to ensure • Establish national ban to prevent FLW
and destinations best practices wherever possible going to landfill with firm timelines for
• Legislate mandatory reporting of FLW • Publish best practice food rescue, its implementation
redistribution and community food • Establish national ban to prevent
• When issuing RFPs, include need for
program models FLW being dumped at sea with firm
respondents to measure and reduce
the amount of food going to waste • Establish clear guidelines and legal timelines for its implementation
framework for allowing mislabelled
• Establish clear national enforceable
food products that do not represent
date coding regulations and legislation
a food safety hazard to be donated
• Establish standardized emissions
• Ensure removal of any clauses in crop
polices, regulations and legislation
insurance policies that prevent the
donation of edible crops27
build a plan (2022onwards)
preventatsource redistribution waste management
industry • Invest savings from FLW reduction • Expand scope and scale of • Expand scope and scale of
initiatives into infrastructure and collaborative rescue, redistribution collaborative reuse and
technology upgrades required to and community food initiatives recycling initiatives
enable further reductions in FLW • Establish formal collaborative
agreements between multi-regional
food redistribution and community
food programs
industry • Assist businesses to individually • Assist businesses to individually • Assist businesses to individually and
organizations and jointly evaluate long-term and jointly evaluate long-term jointly evaluate long-term investment
investment options to reduce FLW investment options to reduce FLW options to reduce FLW through reuse
through prevention through redistribution and recycling
• Benchmark FLW reductions by • Benchmark FLW reductions by • Benchmark FLW reductions by
industry through prevention industry through redistribution industry through reuse and recycling
government • Minimize incongruences in policies, • Collaborative investment in • Collaborative investment in and
regulations and legislation relating and operation of redistribution operation of reuse and recycling
to food packaging design, materials infrastructure and community food infrastructure and initiatives
and recycling programs initiatives • Establish mandatory reuse and
• Invest in infrastructure required to • Tie support for expansion of recycling polices, regulations and
enable room service meal preparation collaborative and innovative food legislation (differentiated by rural,
and delivery in publicly owned HRI rescue, redistribution and community urban and semi-urban)
• Tie implementation of pragmatic food models to performance
lean process improvement courses
to public owned of tertiary business,
management and commerce
related courses
• Reintroduce food handing and
preparation studies into schools28
appendix
foodrescue.ca
Second Harvest heard How FoodRescue.ca works The benefitsfor social
from businesses that Food businesses and not-for-profits
service organizations
they’re willing to donate apply to become rescuing partners at • Food programs receive greater
FoodRescue.ca and confirm they will access to fresh, nutritious food
their surplus product, they comply with Second Harvest’s safe
• Fosters local awareness of the
just needed a system to food handling guidelines as prescribed
need and creates connections in
by federal, provincial and municipal
make it easy and safe to health departments.
the community
connect with social service When a business has surplus food
• Positive environmental impacts by
rescuing good food
programs in their own available for donation, they create a
post on FoodRescue.ca indicating the • Social service organizations
communities. type and amount of food they have and gain access to safe food
its time window for pick up. handling resources
To make an efficient food donation
system that allows the donation of A notification is sent by text or email
food to registered not-for-profits and to all not-for-profits who have the
capacity to retrieve and store that The benefitsfor food
charities across Canada, Second
donation. An interested organization businesses
Harvest developed FoodRescue.ca,
an online platform that connects can claim the donation and go
• Analytic functionality and
food donors with non-profit partners. directly to the donor for pickup.
detailed reporting
There is also an option to create a
recurring donation, where donors can • People expect businesses to do
pre-schedule pickups. Donors enter the right thing and it is never the
information into FoodRescue.ca once, right thing to throw away good,
and the system manages everything safe food
from there.
• Lower waste disposal fees
• Thanks to the Ontario Donations
of Food Act, donors don’t require
any special insurance
To get more information about scaling
this for your community, contact:
info@SecondHarvest.ca
“Through FoodRescue.ca we can access items
like yoghurt and juice that we usually don’t have
the budget to provide. Our clients and cooks
are loving it!”
— CEO, Monarch Recovery Services29 How you can help Every donation helps Second Harvest achieve our dual mission: to rescue nutritious food for people experiencing hunger, and to protect our environment by keeping surplus food out of landfill. Second Harvest is a registered Canadian charitable organization. Learn more about becoming a donor at SecondHarvest.ca/Donate.
30
Second Harvest
1450 Lodestar Road, Unit 18, Toronto, ON, M3J 3C1
SecondHarvest.ca
Charitable Registration # 13386 5477 RR0001
Value Chain ManagementInternational Inc.
1155 North Service Rd. West, Suite 11, Oakville, ON, L6M 3E3
VCM-International.comYou can also read
