MODULE 2: FOOD WASTE PREVENTION
Food Waste Quantities Across the European Union
Food waste is defined as food which has been disposed of as a waste (food defined as in General Food Law). It is important to outline that the definition of ‘food’ includes food as a whole, along the complete food supply chain from farm-to-fork (production until consumption). Besides edible parts, food includes inedible parts, not separated from the edible parts when the food was initially produced, such as animal bones attached to meat which is destined for human consumption. Therefore, food waste can comprise different items which include parts of food intended to be ingested and parts of food not intended to be ingested.
Food waste includes:
- Whole foods or parts of food that people could eat but are thrown away. (e.g. raw milk spilled in a dairy factory; surplus of unsold vegetables in a supermarket; excess food prepared at home and not eaten; or leftovers discarded after a restaurant meal.
- Elements associated with food – (fish bones, eggshells, or fruit pits/peels – that are not intended to be eaten. Definition and handling of “inedible parts” varies based on the geographical/ethnical/consumer groups. (e.g. some people peel apples while others will eat the whole fruit, including the core and seeds. In some places, chicken feet is considered as food, and in other places, chicken feet is thrown away). The generation of inedible fraction could be reduced, for instance by avoiding excessive peeling of vegetables, but cannot be entirely avoided. However, the way that such food waste is handled and recycled can be improved.
Under the EU legislation, materials not accounted as food are those which are lost before they become food, such as due to the losses occurring in primary production at the stage prior to crops being harvested or during the rearing of farmed animals (e.g. pre-harvest losses) or food which was not allowed to enter the food market, due to contamination, animals’ diseases, etc.
At the EU level, the total volume of food waste recorded in 2021 exceeded 58 million tonnes of fresh mass. Among this, household food waste accounted for over 31 million tonnes of fresh mass, representing a majority share of 54% of the total. The processing and manufacturing sector followed as the second-largest contributor, comprising 21% of the total, with a measured food waste volume surpassing 12 million tonnes of fresh mass.
The remaining portion of food waste was distributed across various sectors: primary production (5 million tonnes, contributing 9% to the total), restaurants and food services (more than 5 million tonnes, also 9% of the total), and retail and other food distribution sectors (slightly exceeding 4 million tonnes, making up 7% of the total). These statistics are shown in Figure 1.

Looking closely into the specific food groups, it is calculated that fruits (27%) and vegetables (20%) are the food groups that produce the largest amounts (in absolute terms) of food waste, followed by cereals (13%), potatoes (10%), meat (10%), diary (9%), fish and eggs (5%) and oil crops and sugar beets (each of 3%)(Figure 2).

However, the relationship between food available at the beginning of the food supply chain and food waste along the entire food supply chain, differs from the ratios of total amount of food waste. Given by food group in the EU: Meat 10%, Fish 25%, Dairy 3%, Eggs 20%, Cereals 8%, Fruit 23%, Vegetables 19%, Potatos 16%, Sugar beet and other industrial crops (5%).
Food waste contributes significantly to environmental degradation. Globally, food loss and waste represent 8 percent of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions (4.4 gigatons CO2e annually), offering an opportunity for meaningful reductions. When food is thrown away, all the resources used to produce, transport, and package that food are wasted as well. This includes water, land, energy, and chemicals. Additionally, rotting food in landfills produces methane, a potent greenhouse gas that contributes to climate change. Decreasing food waste can lessen the need for new food production, lowering projected deforestation, therefore decreasing biodiversity loss, cut down greenhouse gas emissions, water pollution, and water scarcity (Figure 3).
In order to maximize the environmental benefits of food loss and waste reduction plans and programs, three key points must be considered:
- The greatest environmental benefits can be achieved through prevention rather than recycling.
- The largest energy and greenhouse gas emissions benefits can be obtained by reducing food waste from households and restaurants.
- Focusing on reducing food waste of the most resource-intensive foods, such as animal products and fruits and vegetables, can yield the greatest environmental benefits.

When calculating savings, the supply chain stage at which the reduction was achieved and the category of food in which waste was prevented must be considered. The real environmental benefits can only be achieved through the prevention (i.e., source reduction) of food waste. Recycling food waste will not achieve these benefits. The consumption stage could be divided into three sectors: foodservice (restaurants), institutional food service (schools and hospitals), and households. Cutting food loss and waste at every stage of the supply chain could reduce the environmental footprint of the cradle-to-consumer food supply chain by 8 to 10 percent. However, more than 80% of corresponding reduction is referred to the food loss and waste generated in food processing, restaurants, and households. Particularly, the largest reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and energy use could be achieved by halving food loss and waste in restaurants!
Drivers and hotspots for food waste production can vary depending on the stage of the food supply chain. Four stages of are identified as important in the generation of food loss and waste: Primary production stage, processing and manufacturing stage, retail stage and consumer stage. As presented in Figure 4 it can be noticed that the share of specific stage significantly depends on the geographical region and the countries’ technological development. Food is wasted at the consumer level to a great extent in medium- and high-income countries compared with low-income countries while in contrast, in low-income countries, food loss occurs mainly due to specific technical limitations (harvesting techniques, storage and cooling facilities in difficult climatic conditions, infrastructure, packaging, and marketing systems).

Generation of food loss and waste in the primary production stage is largely influenced by three factors: overproduction, product aesthetic standards and environmental factor (weather and pests).
Several crucial steps can be introduced by stakeholders involved in the first two stages (primary production and processing and manufacturing stage) therefore reducing total food loss and waste:
Coordination of supply to the market: By coordinating production planning across farms and varying production and harvesting schedules in accordance with market demands, food producer organizations can assist smallholders in minimizing losses. This can address market price fluctuations related to seasonal variations in supply and demand, leading to fewer losses.
Coordination of financial service provision to avoid premature harvesting: Low-income farmers are frequently forced by financial constraints to harvest their crops early, which reduces the crop’s nutritional and commercial worth. Food producer associations may discover and coordinate financial services for homes and farms, hence reducing the need for farmers to harvest too soon.
Innovations for low-cost value addition: Food producer groups can play a significant role in adding value to and reducing losses of their organization members’ through organizational and management innovations, supporting activities such as production planning, sorting, grading and logistics.
Improved storage facilities, infrastructure and cold chains: In order to safely preserve fresh goods, such as fruits, vegetables, meat, and fish, food producer associations play a critical role in pushing the public and commercial sectors for investments in local food processing services, dry and cold transportation, and storage facilities.
Capacity building in food standards: Failure to comply with minimum food safety standards (regulation of naturally occurring toxins, testing of contaminated water, excess use of pesticides, veterinary drug residues, and unhygienic handling and storage conditions) can lead to food losses and, in extreme cases, impacts on health and countries’ food security status.
Food waste represents an important economic issue due to the potential loss of resources. Both consumers and businesses incur financial losses when food is wasted. For consumers, this means larger expenses spent on purchasing food that is never consumed. For businesses, it means lost revenue and decreased competitiveness and profitability. However, both consumers as well as producers are part of the current economic system and mutually interact. The consumer preferences are one of the strongest factors influencing the behavior of food producers and, consequently, generation of food waste. Food waste also affects pricing policy. Higher waste is directly associated with influencing product demand, which leads to an increase in the price level of available food stocks. As a final result, people with lower/minimum incomes, not able to afford to spend more money on food, are most at risk. Therefore, from an economic point of view, food waste impacts food security, as resources that could be used to feed those in need are wasted instead.
Steps toward reduced food waste:
1 Refuse: Reject what you don’t need. The most effective way to avoid waste is to start rejecting it. Start using the word “NO”.
2 Reduce: Reduce what you really need. Let us apply voluntary modesty to our lives. Let’s think before every purchase, whether we really need the thing. Let’s not forget that our purchase today is our tomorrow’s potential waste.
3 Donate: Not everything that is bought must fly to the trash immediately. Let’s try to collect and donate to those in need and therefore maximally use the initial resources
4 Rot: Compost the rest. Up to 90% of household food waste is biodegradable waste. This can be composted and the fertilizer can be used in the garden or on the balcony, instead of buying industrial fertilizer.
Measurement of food waste
When dealing with the issue of food waste (FW) measurement, it’s important to look at methods that fit different sectors, like Ho.Re.Ca. This comparison focuses on two main databases: EU Statistics and the Food Waste Index, and how they’re used in these sectors. It also explores methods in line with EU guidelines for measuring food waste across the supply chain. Understanding these methods helps us see how food waste is handled in these sectors, which is crucial for developing better waste reduction strategies and sustainable practices. Organizations like the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) face a challenge in standardizing practices worldwide. It’s unclear whether one-size-fits-all approaches will work in diverse cultural and economic settings.
Methodologies for food waste measurement in European Union
In the European Union (EU), there is an effort to establish a universally accepted method for measuring FW. The European Commission has taken steps to develop common guidelines and protocols for measuring FW across member states. The EU collects data on food waste through various channels, including national surveys, waste composition studies, and statistical reporting systems. EU statistics provide valuable insights into the amount and sources of food waste within member states.
EU Member States employ a standardized methodology, outlined in Annex III of Commission delegated decision (EU) 2019/1597 (Delegated decision – 2019/1597 – EN – EUR-Lex (europa.eu)), to quantify food waste across all stages of the food supply chain.
To ensure consistency, food waste is reported based on its fresh mass state. This is crucial due to seasonal variations in food waste weight, influenced by factors such as water loss through evaporation, particularly evident during warmer months or when waste collection is not daily. Thus, food waste data are reported in tonnes of fresh mass.
The Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC) (EUR-Lex – 02008L0098-20180705 – EN – EUR-Lex (europa.eu)) mandates annual reporting on food waste levels. Commission delegated decision (EU) 2019/1597 (Delegated decision – 2019/1597 – EN – EUR-Lex (europa.eu)) establishes a common methodology and quality standards for measuring food waste levels, while Commission implementing decision (EU) 2019/2000 (Implementing decision – 2019/2000 – EN – EUR-Lex (europa.eu) ) provides the reporting format.
The scope of measurement of FW is outlined in Article 1 of this document. In summary, the following is stated:
- FW quantities must be assessed and allocated separately for different stages of the food supply chain;
- Measurement should encompass FW categorized under specific waste codes. The examples of codes in Ho.Re.Ca. are 20 01 08 for biodegradable kitchen and canteen waste; 20 01 25 for edible oil and fat; 20 03 01 for mixed municipal waste.
European Union created a standardized reporting format for EU countries to track their progress over time. The overview of FW quantification is presented on Figure 5.

- Data collection:
Data collection can be conducted using either direct or indirect measurements. Direct measurements involve collecting primary data and are typically more resource-intensive. Consequently, they are often applied to specific stages of the supply chain, involving a limited number of participants in data collection, which can lead to a lack of representativeness. In contrast, indirect measurements gather secondary data, which can be more adaptable to broader analytical boundaries and provide a comprehensive overview at the country or regional level. Many studies in the literature primarily rely on indirect measurement approaches, particularly those based solely on literature data. In such cases, estimates are often interdependent on each other and are grounded on a limited number of publications.
The descriptions of direct methods are presented below:
- Waste composition analysis (WCA) – physically separating, weighing, and categorizing FW involves separating FW from a waste stream that contains other materials besides FW. This method helps to identify and understand the various components of FW, such as different types of food categories or the proportion of FW that consists of edible versus inedible parts.
- Weighting – the utilization of weighing scales to measure the weight of FW, w/wo WCA.
- Garbage collection – separate FW from other categories of residual waste containers to ascertain both the weight and proportion of FW, w/wo WCA
- Surveys – gather data on individuals’ or entities’ attitudes, beliefs, and self-reported behaviors regarding FW through the administration of questionnaires.
- Diaries – collect daily data on the quantity and type of FW over a specified period of time.
- Records – Calculate the quantity of FW based on collected information that was not initially intended for FW records, such as warehouse record books.
- Observation – evaluate the volume of FW by either counting or utilizing scales with multiple points to visually assess leftover food
The descriptions of indirect methods are following:
- Modelling – Estimate the quantity of FW using mathematical models that consider factors associated with its generation.
- Mass balance – Deduce FW by comparing inputs (such as ingredients at a factory site) and outputs (such as products made), while also considering changes in stock levels and alterations in food weight during processing (for instance, water evaporation during cooking).
- Use of proxy data – Utilize data from companies or statistical agencies, often employed for scaling data to generate aggregated FW estimates.
- Use of literature data – Utilize data directly from literature sources or calculate the quantity of FW based on information reported in other publications.
The selection of methods significantly impacts results and depends on the study’s objectives, including the desired level of depth, accuracy, reliability, and available resources (such as time and budget). Among direct methods, weighing and garbage collection yield precise, objective, and reliable data but are time-consuming and expensive. Conversely, observation or record-keeping requires less time and money, yet the data may be less accurate due to personal perceptions, data collection methods, and observer subjectivity. Surveys and diaries strike a balance between resource efficiency and robustness.
Indirect methods are commonly preferred due to their lower cost and time requirements compared to direct methods, but their accuracy hinges on the quality and representativeness of the initial data. Methodological gaps exist for liquid food disposal down drains and waste utilized for feeding, as these fractions can be challenging to measure using existing methods.
- Quantification approaches:
For European-level studies reporting FW, the following approaches have been observed:
- Waste statistics based on Eurostat data, which categorize waste according to the 3-digit European Waste Classification for statistical purposes (EWC-Stat) and the Statistical classification of economic activities in the European Community (NACE), reflecting where waste is generated.
- Food balance sheets and waste coefficients obtained from diverse origins.
- Analysis of data from national studies conducted in certain European Member States, then extrapolated to the European level while adhering to the FUSIONS framework.
- Integration of data from various sources such as FAO, Eurostat, EFSA, and scientific literature.
- Incorporation of net primary production (NPP) and waste coefficients based on literature data regarding global cropland and grassland NPP, as well as inefficiencies, losses, and waste coefficients. Specifically, referencing FAO’s coefficients for the consumption stage.
- Development of a multi-regional environmentally extended input-output model to create a multi-regional waste input-output model.
Food waste index
The Food Waste Index is a global initiative developed by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in collaboration with partners such as the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and WRAP (The Waste and Resources Action Programme). It aims to provide a standardized methodology for measuring food waste and tracking progress towards Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 12.3, which targets the halving of per capita food waste at the retail and consumer levels and reducing food losses along production and supply chains by 2030.
SDG 12.3 encompasses indicators that focus on food loss and waste within the supply chain. Indicator 12.3.1(a), known as the Food Loss Index, measures losses for key commodities within a country’s supply chain, excluding the retail stage. Indicator 12.3.1(b), referred to as the Food Waste Index, measures food waste occurring at the retail and consumer levels, including households and food service establishments. Unlike the Food Loss Index, the Food Waste Index assesses total food waste rather than specific commodity losses.
Key features of the Food Waste Index include:
- Standardized Methodology provides guidelines for data collection, analysis, and reporting, ensuring comparability and reliability of results.
- Multi-stakeholder Engagement involves collaboration between governments, businesses, civil society organizations, and research institutions which helps to build consensus, share best practices, and mobilize resources for addressing food waste effectively.
- Comprehensive Coverage by examining the entire food system, providing insights into the drivers and impacts of food waste and identifies opportunities for intervention.
- Global Perspective is essential for addressing food waste as a transboundary issue requiring coordinated action.
The Food Waste Index employs a three-level methodology, each level representing an escalation in the accuracy and utility of the data collected (Figure 6).

- Level 1 (initial) employs modeling techniques to estimate food waste for countries that have not yet conducted their own measurements involving extrapolated data from other countries to estimate food waste within each sector for a given country. Level 1 serves as short-term support until capacity for national measurement is developed.
- Level 2 (recommended) entails the direct measurement of food waste within countries conducted by national governments or derived from other national studies aligned with the prescribed framework.
- Level 3 (advanced) provides additional insights to inform policy and interventions aimed at reducing food waste generation (disaggregation by destination, differentiation between edible and inedible parts, gender considerations, etc). Additionally, Level 3 extends to include additional destinations for food waste (e.g. sewers, home composting, and non-waste animal feed).
Table 1 represents appropriate methods of FW measurement for different sectors.

In addressing the FW problem, measurement is crucial for understanding the extent and dynamics of food waste and identifying effective reduction strategies. Comparing EU statistics and the Food Waste Index provides deeper insights into various aspects of the issue. Additionally, there are opportunities for synergies between EU statistics and the Food Waste Index, such as sharing best practices, harmonizing measurement methodologies, and supporting evidence-based policymaking at both national and international levels.
Food waste prevention and management
While the European Union’s efforts under the Circular Economy Action Plan have primarily focused on reducing food waste, it also extends to both food loss and food waste prevention, in line with the global SDG 12.3. The practical application of the waste hierarchy for food Source is presented on Figure 7, presenting the prevention of FW as the most preferable option.

The main objective of food waste prevention should be to intervene at the point of origin by reducing the production of excess food at every stage of the food supply chain (including production, processing, distribution, and consumption). If surplus food does occur, efforts should be made to recover it and ensure its optimal utilization, following the waste prevention hierarchy.
- Primary Production – farmers should adopt precision agriculture techniques and utilize advanced monitoring systems to optimize crop management, minimize losses during cultivation, and reduce the generation of surplus food. Timely and selective harvesting, along with proper training for farmworkers, can minimize crop damage and losses, ensuring that only high-quality produce reaches the market. Investing in suitable storage facilities equipped with temperature and humidity controls can extend the shelf life of produce and reduce spoilage. Best practices for post-harvest handling, sorting, and packaging should be implemented to minimize physical damage and losses.
- Manufacturing Stage – manufacturers should implement lean manufacturing principles, adopt effective inventory tracking systems and just-in-time inventory practices to minimize excess inventory and identify surplus ingredients. Stringent quality control measures should be introduced, reducing the likelihood of product rejections and minimizing waste.
- Retail Stage – retailers should implement efficient inventory management systems to minimize overstocking and reduce the likelihood of perishable products reaching their expiration dates before sale. Additionally, retailers can educate consumers about the value of imperfect produce and offer discounts or promotions on cosmetically imperfect fruits and vegetables to prevent them from being discarded.
- Ho.Re.Ca. – several steps can be taken to prevent and minimize food waste:
- Raise awareness among both customers and staff about the importance of food waste prevention.
- Proper storage and freezing techniques (extend the shelf life of food items).
- Adopting smart shopping practices and offering flexible menus (align food purchases with actual demand, minimizing overstocking perishable items)
- Prioritize freshness over quantity by avoiding purchasing excessive quantities of short-lived ingredients.
- Utilize food trimmings and bones immediately for preparing broths and sauces instead of discarding them, maximizing resource utilization.
- Implement portion control measures and optimize inventory management to minimize excess food production and waste.
- Enhance meal quality to ensure customer satisfaction and reduce plate waste (by quality control measures, staff training, investments in high-quality kitchen equipment)
Additionally, digital solutions can be explored to tackle food waste in Ho.Re.Ca. settings. For instance: Too Good to Go is a mobile application developed by a Danish startup that functions as a marketplace for retailers and catering businesses to sell surplus food items at discounted prices towards the end of the day.
- Consumer Level – educational campaigns to raise awareness about the impacts of food waste and provide consumers with practical tips for reducing waste at home focusing on proper storage techniques, meal planning, and utilizing leftovers. Additionally, consumers should be encouraged to practice smart shopping habits (shopping lists, quantity vs expiration dates).
- Food Donation – supportive legislation and incentives for food donation efforts to encourage businesses to donate surplus food rather than disposing of it (e.g. tax incentives or liability protections for food donors, establishing partnerships with food banks and charitable organizations).
Developing an effective FW disposal strategy for your workplace includes creating a food waste disposal plan. It’s crucial to consider various options and tailor them to fit your workplace’s specific requirements:
- Start by analyzing the types and amounts of waste your workplace generates. This assessment will help determine the most appropriate disposal methods.
- Consider different approaches, including composting, anaerobic digestion, donation programs, and waste-to-energy conversion.
- Establish clear objectives for your disposal strategy, taking into account factors such as environmental impact, cost-effectiveness, and social responsibility.
Developing Your Optimal Disposal Scheme:
- Goal Alignment – align your disposal strategy with your workplace’s overarching goals and values. For example, if sustainability is a priority, focus on methods that minimize environmental impact and promote resource conservation.
- Customization – tailor your disposal plan to suit the unique needs of your workplace. Consider factors such as waste volume, available infrastructure, regulatory requirements, and community engagement opportunities.
- Implementation – once you’ve selected the most suitable disposal methods, put your plan into action. This may involve investing in equipment or infrastructure, training staff on proper waste management practices, and establishing partnerships with external organizations.
- Monitoring and Adaptation – regularly monitor the performance of your disposal scheme and make adjustments as needed. Track key metrics such as waste diversion rates, cost savings, and community impact to ensure ongoing success.
Maximizing Efficiency and Sustainability:
- Integrated Approach – consider combining multiple disposal methods to maximize efficiency and sustainability. For example, you could implement composting for organic waste while also participating in donation programs for surplus food.
- Continuous Improvement – emphasize a culture of continuous improvement, where feedback is solicited from staff and stakeholders, and lessons learned are applied to refine your disposal strategy over time.
- Promotion and Education – educate staff and customers about the importance of food waste reduction and the role they play in the process. Encourage behavior changes such as meal planning, portion control, and responsible purchasing practices.
Literature
- Food waste index report, 2021. United Nations Environment Programme. (https://www.unep.org/resources/report/unep-food-waste-index-report-2021)
- UNEP Food Waste Index Report, 2022. (https://www.oneplanetnetwork.org/knowledge-centre/resources/unep-food-waste-index-report)
- How is food waste measured, and why does it matter? 2020. Academia, FAO, methods, quantity, studies, WRAP (https://foodwastestories.com/2020/09/29/how-is-food-waste-measured-and-why-does-it-matter/)
- Daniel Hoehn, Ian Vázquez-Rowe, Ramzy Kahhat, María Margallo, Jara Laso, Ana Fernández-Ríos, Israel Ruiz-Salmón, Rubén Aldaco (2023). A critical review on food loss and waste quantification approaches: Is there a need to develop alternatives beyond the currently widespread pathways? Resources, Conservation and Recycling. (188): 106671. ISSN 0921-3449 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106671)
- FW measurement – European Commission (europa.eu)
- Supplementing Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards a common methodology and minimum quality requirements for the uniform measurement of levels of food waste, 2019. (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dec_del/2019/1597/oj)
- Caldeira C., Corrado S., Sala S. (2017): Food waste accounting: Methodologies, challenges and opportunities, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. (https://refreshcoe.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/JRC-technical-report_-food-waste_REV_2_online-final.pdf )
- Caldeira C., Vlysidis A., Fiore G., De Laurentiis V., Vignali G., Sala, S. (2020). Sustainability of food wast biorefinery: A review on valorisation pathways, techno-economic constraints, and environmental assessment. Bioresource Technology. 312: 123575. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2020.123575).
- Food waste and food waste prevention – estimates (Food waste and food waste prevention – estimates – Statistics Explained (europa.eu))
- https://food.ec.europa.eu/document/download/7143f94e-600f-4df5-acef-5b332e7e44ec_en?filename=fs_eu-actions_action_platform_key-rcmnd_en.pdf
- https://food.ec.europa.eu/safety/food-waste/eu-actions-against-food-waste/food-waste-measurement_en
- https://pereto.kg/libraries/113?language=en
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) (http://www.fao.org/home/en/)
- Ellen MacArthur Foundation (https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/)
- European Commison Food Safety, Resources library https://food.ec.europa.eu/safety/food-waste/resources-library_en
- United States Environmental Protection Agency https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2021-11/from-farm-to-kitchen-the-environmental-impacts-of-u.s.-food-waste_508-tagged.pdf
- Selvam, A., Ilamathi, P. M. K., Udayakumar, M., Murugesan, K., Banu, J. R., Khanna, Y., & Wong, J. (2021). Food waste properties. In Current Developments in Biotechnology and Bioengineering (pp. 11-41). Elsevier.
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2011) Study conducted for the International Congress. Interpack2011, Germany https://www.fao.org/3/mb060e/mb060e00.pdf
- Casonato, C., Garcia-Herrero, L., Caldeira, C., & Sala, S. (2023). What a waste! Evidence of consumer food waste prevention and its effectiveness. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 41, 305-319.
- Oria, M., Schneeman, B. O., & National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2020). Drivers of Food Waste at the Consumer Level and Implications for Intervention Design. In A National Strategy to Reduce Food Waste at the Consumer Level. National Academies Press (US).
- National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Committee on a Systems Approach to Reducing Consumer Food Waste; Oria M, Schneeman BO, editors. A National Strategy to Reduce Food Waste at the Consumer Level. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2020 Aug 21. 5, Strategy for Reducing Food Waste at the Consumer Level. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK564030/
Presentation
Congratulations on completing Module 2 of the ReS-Food Training Course. Don’t forget to share your achievement with your friends!