Cited by 136Food Waste Reduction and SustainabilityAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental ImpactWaste Management and Recycling

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 137 of the 141 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 191 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Progress towards Sustainable Utilisation and Management of Food Wastes in the Global Economy

Open access
Ghosh, Purabi R., Fawcett, Derek, Sharma, Shashi B., Poinern, Gerrard Eddy Jai·2016·International Journal of Food Science

Abstract

In recent years, the problem of food waste has attracted considerable interest from food producers, processors, retailers, and consumers alike. Food waste is considered not only a sustainability problem related to food security, but also an economic problem since it directly impacts the profitability of the whole food supply chain. In developed countries, consumers are one of the main contributors to food waste and ultimately pay for all wastes produced throughout the food supply chain. To secure food and reduce food waste, it is essential to have a comprehensive understanding of the various sources of food wastes throughout the food supply chain. The present review examines various reports currently in the literature and quantifies waste levels and examines the trends in wastage for various food sectors such as fruit and vegetable, fisheries, meat and poultry, grain, milk, and dairy. Factors contributing to food waste, effective cost/benefit food waste utilisation methods, sustainability and environment considerations, and public acceptance are identified as hurdles in preventing large-scale food waste processing. Thus, we highlight the need for further research to identify and report food waste so that government regulators and food supply chain stakeholders can actively develop effective waste utilisation practices.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This review synthesizes global literature on food waste across terrestrial and aquatic food supply chains, quantifying waste levels and examining utilisation and management options. It argues that food waste is a major sustainability, economic, and environmental problem, but that reliable data, cost-effective ecofriendly reprocessing, and public acceptance remain key barriers.

Key findings

  • Food waste occurs throughout the food supply chain; approximately one-third of all food produced today goes to landfill, and food lost or discarded each year accounts for 3.3 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions globally.
  • Fruits and vegetables are the most wasted food category. Examples include Switzerland, where around 47% of all vegetables produced are wasted; Germany, where fruits and vegetables account for 43% of household waste; the UK, where potatoes account for around 0.4 million tonnes (10%) of total annual waste; and Australia, where consumers throw away around AU$1.1 billion (US$0.84 billion) worth of fruits and vegetables yearly.
  • Grain waste varies widely: rice waste averages about 15% of global production; storage waste ranges from less than 1% in Malawi to 12–13% in Bangladesh and 3–6% in Malaysia; China’s grain supply chain waste is 19.0% ± 5.8%, with consumers accounting for 7.3% ± 4.8%; India loses around 20–30% of total grain production, costing about US$14 billion annually and potentially feeding at least 48 million people.
  • Animal and aquatic waste is also large: USA meat waste is valued at US$83,127 million and poultry waste at US$69,100 million, with consumers responsible for 35% and 37% respectively; UK meat processing accounts for 56% of all wastes; 14 European countries report meat processing wastes of 35–42%; fish waste is around 130 million tonnes yearly, with 17.9–39.5 million tonnes of whole fish discarded annually and up to 66% of processed fish thrown away; 59% of fish waste goes to landfill and only 39% is reused or incinerated; USA consumer fish waste rose from 16% in 1995 to 31% in 2010.

Methods

  • The paper is a review that examines reports in the literature and quantifies waste levels and trends for fruit and vegetable, fisheries, meat and poultry, grain, milk and dairy sectors.
  • It discusses factors contributing to food waste, cost/benefit utilisation methods, sustainability and environmental considerations, and public acceptance.
  • The analysis is a narrative synthesis supported by tables and figures; no primary data collection or formal meta-analysis is described.

Limitations

  • The paper states that reliable food waste data are lacking, studies are often not comparable because they assess different stages, waste types, and protocols, and business confidentiality limits detailed supply-chain information. It also notes that some data are almost 40 years old, that many reports do not give individual crop wastes, and that gaps exist for central/West Africa, developed-country grain waste, and aquatic plant food waste.
  • Evident from the text: as a narrative review, it does not describe a systematic search strategy, inclusion criteria, or quality appraisal, and many figures rely on secondary sources that may be outdated or regionally incomplete.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1155/2016/3563478

Cites

137 of 137 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 191 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 95 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 77
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 52
111 of 111
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Food lost or discarded each year accounts for 3.3 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions globally.

    “From an environmental perspective, food lost or discarded each year accounts for 3.3 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions globally.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There will always be a certain amount of waste produced in the food supply chain.

    “Unfortunately, there will always be a certain amount of waste produced in the food supply chain.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Companies involved in the food supply chain and the population at large will continue to waste food as long as they can afford to waste.

    “Companies involved in the food supply chain and the population at large will continue to waste food as long as they can afford to waste.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    In developed countries, consumers are one of the main contributors to food waste and ultimately pay for all wastes produced throughout the food supply chain.

    “In developed countries, consumers are one of the main contributors to food waste and ultimately pay for all wastes produced throughout the food supply chain.”
4 of 4

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

  • Australian seafood consumption did not almost triple

    Minor

    Consumption rose from 13.6 kg in 1975 to 25 kg in 2009, an increase to about 1.84 times the earlier level, not almost three times.

    Reported 3 · recomputed 1.838235

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 141 references

4 of the 141 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 18

  1. 2013, Food industry wastes
  2. 1997, Food Review, 20, 2
  3. 2012, International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 15, 119
  4. 1972, Review of Plant Pathology, 51, 751
  5. 1990, Postharvest News and Information, 1, 365
  6. 1986, Agricultural Situation in India, 41, 339
  7. 2008, Minimizing postharvest losses in yam (Dioscorea spp.): treatments and techniques
  8. 1993, Jingji Dili (Economic Geography), 1, 92
  9. 2007, Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, 5, 1203
  10. 2007, Songklanakarin Journal of Science and Technology, 29, 857
  11. 2014, International Journal of Science, Environment and Technology, 3, 672
  12. 2004, DIAS Report, Animal Husbandry, 61, 219
  13. 2012, SPC Fisheries Newsletter, 138, 44
  14. 2012, World Agriculture, 3, 11
  15. 2002, Fish Nutrition, 3, 505
  16. 2000, Feed International, 35
  17. 2009, African Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 3, 13
  18. 2005, Acta Horticulturae, 682, 2169

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Ghosh, P. R., Fawcett, D., Sharma, S. B., & Poinern, G. E. J.
Affiliations
  • Murdoch University (AU)
  • Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia (AU)
  • Murdoch Applied Nanotechnology Research Group, Department of Physics, Energy Studies and Nanotechnology, School of Engineering and Energy, Murdoch University, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia
Venue
International Journal of Food Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016
Volume
2016
Pages
1-22
ISSN
  • 2314-5765 (ISSN-L)
  • 2356-7015
OpenAlex
W2544525784
Cited by
136
References
141
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7
FWCI
0.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Food Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Murdoch University Research Portal (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Horticulture Innovation Australia Project (Al14003)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Waste Reduction and Sustainability
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Waste Management and Recycling
Keywords
food waste, food waste management, food supply chain, food waste prevention, food security, consumer food waste, fishery waste, fruit and vegetable waste, dairy waste, public acceptance, sustainability

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review