Policy instruments to reduce food loss prior to retail - Perspectives of fruit and vegetable supply chain actors in Europe.

Food loss and waste burdens the food system with an unnecessary use of natural resources such as soil, land and water as well as with the avoidable generation of further climate-relevant emissions. These negative externalities may provide a rationale for public sector intervention where feasible and efficient. Semi-structured interviews with 22 experts (farmers, producer organisations and retailers) in Germany and a questionnaire survey with 215 suppliers of a retailing company from Germany, Spain and Italy were conducted. The material reveals the perspectives and claims of relevant actors in upstream fruit and vegetable supply chains on political intervention. Stakeholders identified policy instruments from four overarching thematic categories: (I) communicative and cooperative policies, (II) subsidisation and food prices, (III) regulation and political framework conditions and (IV) questioning of necessity and effectiveness of food loss interventions. Four further categories of private sector measures were identified: (I) mechanisation, innovation and process optimisation, (II) communication and cooperation, (III) reconditioning and repackaging and (IV) processing, alternative marketing and redistribution. Issues that should be addressed by policy include consumer education and awareness, supply chain cooperation and power relations, food prices, marketing standards, alternative marketing and processing and promotion of technologies, infrastructure and agronomic practices to reduce food loss. The study shows that additional leverage points for policy action are still unrecognised and that stakeholders should be more involved in tackling the root causes of food loss. These policies should be holistically embedded in the sustainability transformation of the food system.
Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: The mentioned retailing company supported the supplier survey, which serves as an additional data source of this paper besides the expert interviews, financially. At the time of the preparation of the paper draft, the respective project had already expired. The contents of the paper do not form part of the respective project and are unknown to the retailing company. The retailer is kept anonymous in this paper. No salaries of co-authors or other expenses related to the paper were funded by the retailer. All authors certify that the funding source had no influence on the contents of the paper.
(Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)