Federal reduction targets for food waste will remain “out of reach” in the United States unless states change their current strategies, according to a new study led by the University of California, Davis and based on data on food waste strategies from nonprofit ReFED.
The federal government has a goal to cut food waste in half by 2030 compared to 2016 levels, to about 164 pounds per person annually. However, per capita food waste has only increased during that time. Meanwhile, state-level tactics for fighting this are disproportionately focused on food waste recycling, which is limited in its effectiveness.
At a glance: food waste
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change estimates that 19% of global food production is wasted at retail, foodservice and residential levels. This food waste (as opposed to food loss, which happens earlier in the supply chain) is estimated to account for 8–10% of greenhouse gas emissions produced by food systems worldwide. In the US, food waste accounts for more than half of methane emissions from municipal landfills.
As part of its Sustainable Development Goals framework, the UN has a target to halve per capita global food waste and reduce food loss by 2030. The United States’ 2030 Food Loss and Waste Reduction Goal sets targets in line with that framework.
The US is the world’s third-largest food waste generator trailing China and India.
‘Disproportionate’ focus on recycling strategies
The UC Davis study finds that though many states have policies in place around food waste, the US is “unlikely to meet its 2030 goal, based on state policies alone.”
A major reason for this is a “misalignment” between those policies and federal targets (i.e., the Food Loss and Waste Reduction goal).
Policies at the state level tend to focus on food waste recycling strategies such as composting and anaerobic digestion, which neither stops food waste at the source (aka “prevention”) nor redistributes it via food bank donations or repurposing for animal feed.
“We have a huge portion of the American population that is suffering from food insecurity yet we waste more than a third of the food we produce,” Sarah Kakadellis, a postdoctoral researcher at UC Davis and the study’s first author says. “Instead of recycling our excess food, we should be redirecting as much as we can to populations that need it.”
Moreover, in 2021, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) altered its definition of food waste to exclude recycling as a potential strategy for diverting waste.
This impacts states’ scores in the UC Davis study, note the researchers: “Of the nine states that have enacted organic waste bans and/or waste recycling laws, six scored considerably worse once recycling solutions were excluded from the model, suggesting that strong recycling policies do not guarantee parallel legislation on food waste prevention, rescue and repurposing and may even come into competition between targets.”
Vermont is a prime example. It was the first state to introduce a ban on disposal of food scraps in landfills, and originally ranked second highest among states successfully fighting food waste. When taking the EPA’s revised definition into account, Vermont drops to 45th place, underscoring the overemphasis on recycling programs.
In contrast, California and Washington take “a more comprehensive approach” that includes surplus prevention and distribution in addition to recycling. California also offers some of the most robust liability protection regulations and tax incentives for food donations.
Washington and California remain in first and second places, respectively, even after factoring in the EPA’s 2021 revision.
Time to confront the status quo?
The study notes that this emphasis on recycling is “expected, given that policies prioritizing food waste recycling strategies are perceived as compatible with current economic paradigms without confronting the status quo and questioning current production and consumption patterns.”
It’s a narrative in line with many discussions around climate change that call for major changes to both consumer lifestyles and national policies, not to mention how supply chains are structured.
According to the study’s authors, “The current prioritization of food waste recycling policies calls for a more holistic reframing of wasted food policies to anchor them within a whole-systems approach. This would mean capturing (and later mitigating) the impacts of wasted food throughout its life cycle to build truly sustainable and resilient food systems.”
“When state policies focus on recycling, it’s very easy to think we’re addressing the food waste problem,” says Kakadellis. “Recycling food waste is important but not the only solution, nor should it be the first.”
