Research on quantification of food loss and waste in Europe: A systematic literature review and synthesis of methodological limitations

IF 6.4 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Raimonda Soloha , Elina Dace
{"title":"Research on quantification of food loss and waste in Europe: A systematic literature review and synthesis of methodological limitations","authors":"Raimonda Soloha ,&nbsp;Elina Dace","doi":"10.1016/j.rcradv.2025.200287","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Quantifying food loss and waste (FLW) is a priority on the international agenda, as it is essential to establish effective prevention and reduction measures for FLW generation. Nevertheless, FLW data remain inconsistent, making it challenging to compare data across sectors, monitor long-term trends and thus set attainable prevention targets, specifically aligning with SDG12.3 of the UN Sustainable Development Agenda. With the mandatory food waste accounting in the European Union (EU), accurate FLW quantification becomes relevant. In this study, a systematic literature review of FLW quantification research within the EU agri-food chain was done. The information was synthesised and coded to identify definitional and methodological differences across studies and common FLW quantification frameworks – the Food Loss and Waste Accounting and Reporting Standard and the EU delegated decision 2019/1597. In addition, limitations outlined in the studies were synthesised to identify aspects limiting the credibility of the quantification procedure and applicability of the FLW data. Our findings indicate significant variability in research methods, representativity and scope across studies. Results show that food service and households are the most studied stages of the food supply chain, with questionnaires being the most used method. Unrepresentative sample, lack of accurate data and self-reporting error emerged as major limitations in the analysed studies. Studies also highlight economic and environmental considerations beyond mass estimates of FLW, and consideration of the agricultural production (pre-harvest/pre-slaughter and harvest/slaughter) stage in FLW quantification. This study provides insights into overlooked aspects and potential advances in FLW quantification research for broader impact beyond mandatory reporting.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74689,"journal":{"name":"Resources, conservation & recycling advances","volume":"28 ","pages":"Article 200287"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Resources, conservation & recycling advances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667378925000446","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Quantifying food loss and waste (FLW) is a priority on the international agenda, as it is essential to establish effective prevention and reduction measures for FLW generation. Nevertheless, FLW data remain inconsistent, making it challenging to compare data across sectors, monitor long-term trends and thus set attainable prevention targets, specifically aligning with SDG12.3 of the UN Sustainable Development Agenda. With the mandatory food waste accounting in the European Union (EU), accurate FLW quantification becomes relevant. In this study, a systematic literature review of FLW quantification research within the EU agri-food chain was done. The information was synthesised and coded to identify definitional and methodological differences across studies and common FLW quantification frameworks – the Food Loss and Waste Accounting and Reporting Standard and the EU delegated decision 2019/1597. In addition, limitations outlined in the studies were synthesised to identify aspects limiting the credibility of the quantification procedure and applicability of the FLW data. Our findings indicate significant variability in research methods, representativity and scope across studies. Results show that food service and households are the most studied stages of the food supply chain, with questionnaires being the most used method. Unrepresentative sample, lack of accurate data and self-reporting error emerged as major limitations in the analysed studies. Studies also highlight economic and environmental considerations beyond mass estimates of FLW, and consideration of the agricultural production (pre-harvest/pre-slaughter and harvest/slaughter) stage in FLW quantification. This study provides insights into overlooked aspects and potential advances in FLW quantification research for broader impact beyond mandatory reporting.
欧洲食物损失和浪费的量化研究:系统的文献综述和方法局限性的综合
量化粮食损失和浪费(FLW)是国际议程上的一个优先事项,因为建立有效的预防和减少FLW产生的措施至关重要。然而,儿童死亡率数据仍然不一致,这使得比较各部门数据、监测长期趋势、从而制定可实现的预防目标(特别是与联合国可持续发展议程的可持续发展目标12.3相一致)具有挑战性。随着欧盟(EU)强制性的食物浪费核算,准确的FLW量化变得相关。本研究对欧盟农业食品链内FLW量化研究进行了系统的文献综述。对这些信息进行了综合和编码,以确定研究和常见FLW量化框架(粮食损失和浪费会计和报告标准以及欧盟授权决定2019/1597)之间的定义和方法差异。此外,综合了研究中概述的局限性,以确定限制量化程序可信度和FLW数据适用性的方面。我们的研究结果表明,研究方法、代表性和研究范围存在显著差异。结果表明,食品服务和家庭是食品供应链中研究最多的阶段,问卷调查是使用最多的方法。不具代表性的样本、缺乏准确的数据和自我报告错误成为分析研究的主要局限性。研究还强调了在FLW的大量估计之外的经济和环境考虑,以及在FLW量化中考虑农业生产(收获前/屠宰前和收获/屠宰)阶段。本研究提供了对FLW量化研究中被忽视的方面和潜在进展的见解,以产生比强制性报告更广泛的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Resources, conservation & recycling advances
Resources, conservation & recycling advances Environmental Science (General)
CiteScore
11.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
76 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信