We waste, on average, more than a third of all the food produced in this country. Everyone agrees that this screams out for a solution. Reducing waste may be the best way to reduce the environmental impact of food production. How do you do this and what are the implications?
Here are my notes from a discussion with the writer Jonathan Bloom, David Allaway (DEQ), Steve Cohen, and others.
- Composting may be a good first step to deal with wasted food. But is there a risk that people might be satisfied with doing that and not venture into the core of the problem? In other words, could too much emphasis on what do with waste become an obstacle to reducing that waste?
- Packaging techniques and package sizes may need some rethinking. For example, purchasing food in smaller packages may be one way to cut down waste (food stays fresher longer; consumers buy in quantities that are closer to what they are likely to consume). The environmental impact of packaging is usually a small fraction of the overall life-cycle impact of most food products, so it might make sense to strategically increase the use of packaging materials for the greater good of reducing waste overall. As David pointed out, purchasing food commodities in bulk -- usually for reducing packaging impacts -- is turning out to be bad environmental advice.
- As individuals, restaurants and other food purchasers reduce waste, they save money -- which should be make it an easy sell. But this will affect sales and revenue in the upstream supply chain. Food producers, processors, distributors and retailers will have to adapt to a food landscape where consumer demand is lower.
- In the long run, if we manage to take a significant bite out of food waste, the economy will have to adjust by reallocating some of the surplus productive resources -- such as agricultural land, energy and water -- to other, better uses. Unless, of course, we also figure out how to reliably route the surplus food to those who really need it here and abroad.
Kumar Venkat