Food waste drivers in Europe, from identification to possible interventions

201

Unfair Trading Practice Regulation and Voluntary Agreements targeting food waste: A policy assessment in select EU Member States

This report provides a qualitative assessment of Voluntary Agreements (VAs) and Unfair Trading Practices (UTPs) as two typologies of policy interventions having an impact on food loss and waste. To carry out this assessment, two sets of country-based comparative case studies were developed, namely in the UK and Italy for regulations against UTPs, and in the UK and the Netherlands for VAs. The report found that, for both VAs and regulations against UTPs, a preliminary assessment of underlying food supply chain market structure is important to identify the most appropriate policy measures for a specific EU MS (e.g. the size and number of actors at each level of the food supply chain, the level of market concentration and power imbalance among actors, etc.). Specifically concerning UTPs, the following was identified: - Food supply chains are particularly susceptible to UTPs in MS where market power is concentrated within a few large retailers interacting with many suppliers. Perishable products, such as fresh fruits and vegetables supplied direct from primary producers to retailers are particularly at risk due to the time constraints in finding alternate outlets; - It is important to identify solutions for food surplus generated by UTPs (ex: redistributing surplus that results from order cancellations linked to UTPs or ensuring that the \u201cwrongdoer\u201d assumes the responsibility of the food product resulting from the UTPs); - To tackle UTPs, it was found that an effective approach would be the creation of an independent authority to investigate any infringement of good trading practices, (ex: through an industry code of practice, and, if needed, the introduction of sanctions on actors who are found to have not met the standard required by the industry code; - Other recommendations identified include adopting a common EU-level definition of UTPs in relation to grocery supply to avoid unequal treatment of comparable situations across EU, and to allow the judgement of cases based on the principle of equity. Furthermore, indirect and foreign suppliers also need to be protected against UTPs. Specifically concerning VAs the following was identified: - The level and the nature of funding has a significant impact on their lifetime and agendas (a mix of public and private is optimal); - To ensure a VA\u2019s relevance, signatories must benefit from their participating, either financially or in terms of heightened visibility; - VAs should establish ambitious yet realistic targets, achievable by their signatories, and robustness and transparency of data reporting should be forefront to ensure the credibility of the initiatives; - VAs can be implemented alongside compulsory legislation or provide an alternative to it. An advantage of them, compared to legislation, is that they can be designed and adapted relatively quickly depending on political goals related to food waste; - The role of a third party is crucial in managing a VA, notably to facilitate actor accession to it, ensure confidentiality of data, supervise and eventually nudge compliance with the agreement. The report ultimately shows that VAs and UTPs interlinked as VAs can be an effective tool to explore the effects of regulation against UTPs and assess actors\u2019 readiness to avoid market power abuse

Systems maps and analytical framework. Mapping food waste drivers across the food supply chain

This report generated 17 systems maps for five contrasting product types that were investigated along their supply chains. The system maps identify: (1) Product specific drivers: drivers specific to the selected food products at a specific stage of the supply chain); (2) Generic drivers: drivers which concern two or more selected products (e.g. labelling errors, limited shelf life etc.); (3) Systemic drivers: drivers that are interlinked with more than one step of the supply chain (e.g. minimum orders, last minute cancellation, lack of data and communication, minimum life on receipt criteria etc.). The cross cutting systemic drivers emphasized supply chain issues, e.g. regarding notably the interactions between the different businesses and unfair trading practices. The systems map approach also shed light on two key factors that impact drivers according to the product specificity: (1) Impacts of food waste drivers highly depend on the level of perishability and microbiological risk of food products. For example, less perishable food products such as frozen and canned products are more likely to be wasted because of product damage, labelling errors and/or equipment breakdown. More perishable and higher risk food products are more likely to be wasted when approaching the \u201cbest before\u201d date or because of supply and demand imbalances and poor information sharing along the supply chain. (2) Lack of communication and cooperation is a central drivers of food waste. The impacts of these are higher in more complex products/supply chains where trouble with one ingredient affects the whole product (e.g. prepared meals). Finally, the systems mapping shed light on drivers which were \u201chiding\u201d behind other drivers. For example, the question of date labelling is a well-known cause of waste for perishable products, but very often there are further drivers behind it (e.g. overstocking in the retail sector)

Review of EU legislation and policies with implications on food waste

This report is a deliverable of the FP7 Project "FUSIONS" (Food Use for Social Innovation by Optimising Waste Prevention Strategies). The report aims to inventory and analyze legislation and policies impacting food waste generation at the European level by drawing on existing literature and publicly available information

Systems maps and analytical framework. Mapping food waste drivers across the food supply chain

This report generated 17 systems maps for five contrasting product types that were investigated along their supply chains. The system maps identify: (1) Product specific drivers: drivers specific to the selected food products at a specific stage of the supply chain); (2) Generic drivers: drivers which concern two or more selected products (e.g. labelling errors, limited shelf life etc.); (3) Systemic drivers: drivers that are interlinked with more than one step of the supply chain (e.g. minimum orders, last minute cancellation, lack of data and communication, minimum life on receipt criteria etc.). The cross cutting systemic drivers emphasized supply chain issues, e.g. regarding notably the interactions between the different businesses and unfair trading practices. The systems map approach also shed light on two key factors that impact drivers according to the product specificity: (1) Impacts of food waste drivers highly depend on the level of perishability and microbiological risk of food products. For example, less perishable food products such as frozen and canned products are more likely to be wasted because of product damage, labelling errors and/or equipment breakdown. More perishable and higher risk food products are more likely to be wasted when approaching the “best before” date or because of supply and demand imbalances and poor information sharing along the supply chain. (2) Lack of communication and cooperation is a central drivers of food waste. The impacts of these are higher in more complex products/supply chains where trouble with one ingredient affects the whole product (e.g. prepared meals). Finally, the systems mapping shed light on drivers which were “hiding” behind other drivers. For example, the question of date labelling is a well-known cause of waste for perishable products, but very often there are further drivers behind it (e.g. overstocking in the retail sector)