food-waste-cities-policy-toolkit-report.pdf

FEBRUARY 2019

R: 19-01-B

AUTHORS

Yerina Mugica, Natural Resources Defense Council Terra Rose, independent consultant

CONTRIBUTING EDITOR

Darby Hoover, Natural Resources Defense Council

REPORT

TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES:

A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT

With generous support from:

About NRDC The Natural Resources Defense Council is an international nonprofit environmental organization with more than 3 million members and online activists. Since 1970, our lawyers, scientists, and other environmental specialists have worked to protect the world’s natural resources, public health, and the environment. NRDC has offices in New York City, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Montana, and Beijing.

Visit us at nrdc.org.

NRDC Chief Communications Officer: Michelle Egan NRDC Managing Directors of Communications: Lisa Goffredi and Jenny Powers NRDC Publications Director: Mary Annaïse Heglar NRDC Policy Publications Editor: Leah Stecher

Cover image © Meredith Danberg-Ficarelli Design and Production: www.suerossi.com © Natural Resources Defense Council 2019

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This guide was created as part of the Food Matters project, an initiative developed by the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Thank you to The Rockefeller Foundation whose financial support and thought partnership has made this project possible.

Yerina Mugica of NRDC and Terra Rose (independent consultant) are the primary authors. Critical support and input were also provided by Darby Hoover. The guide also reflects the original ideas and contributions of Jason Babbie, Elizabeth Balkan, JoAnne Berkenkamp, Margaret Brown, Yvette Cabrera, Catherine Cox-Blair, Dana Gunders, Maddie Keating, Andrea Spacht, and Sarah McKinstry-Wu from NRDC and Monica Munn from The Rockefeller Foundation.

Nationwide, cities are seeking game-changing strategies to improve quality of life and achieve equitable outcomes. Few issues are more fundamental to how we live than the food we eat. When food goes to waste, so does everything it takes to get it to our plates.

The environmental impacts are staggering—from massive amounts of water and farm land, to unnecessary climate pollution. At the same time, 41 million Americans lack consistent access to adequate and nutritious food.

The good news is, cities nationwide are uniquely positioned to tackle this problem. In 2017, NRDC, with support from The Rockefeller Foundation, released a duo of Food Matters reports that looked at what we waste and how we can expand the amount of food we rescue in three U.S. cities—Denver, Nashville, and New York City.

In June and September, 2018, we announced partnerships with the cities of Denver and Baltimore respectively as part of phase two of Food Matters. Each of these two cities has made ambitious commitments to slash food waste by at least 50 percent and, in the case of Denver, reduce the number of food insecure households by 55 percent. Both Baltimore and Denver, along with a growing group of cities throughout the country are stepping up: integrating multiple strategies to prevent food from going to waste, rescue surplus food for those in need, and recycle food scraps.

These important goals require a tangible framework, concrete action steps, and flexibility to incorporate continued learning and success. We’re excited to present this Policy and Program Toolkit to policymakers and implementing partners to support informed decision making about what strategies can be most feasible and effective in their communities. While there is no “one size fits all” for all cities, we believe a holistic approach is needed.

Our goal is to provide a set of resources that offer a starting point and a path toward continued progress and impact. Taking relatively small steps can have a big impact, and help achieve more resilient, economically vibrant and equitable communities. With this toolkit, we look forward to supporting cities in their journey to tackle food waste at the city level.

Best, Elizabeth Balkan

Food Waste Director

Letter from the Director

Page 4 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC

Table of contents

A Guide to NRDC’s Policy & Program Toolkit for Wasting Less Food in Cities How to Use the Toolkit

Introduction

The Problem and The Opportunity

An Overview of 10 Strategies to Reduce Wasted Food

Rethink

of food going to waste and develop a plan for ongoing measurement � Strategy #4: Lay groundwork for broader food waste prevention, food donation and recycling efforts through changes in waste system collection and financing Strategy #5: Lead by example

Reduce

for how households can prevent food from being wasted in the first place Strategy #7: Engage businesses and institutions to prevent food from being wasted

Rescue

Recycle

Page 4 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC Page 5 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC

A GUIDE TO NRDC’S POLICY & PROGRAM TOOLKIT

FOR TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES

RECYCLE STRATEGIES

RESCUE STRATEGIES

REDUCE STR

AT

EG

IES

RETHINK STRATEGIES

Set short term and long term food waste reduction targets and develop a plan for ongoing measure-ment

Assess potential to increase food rescue

Estimate local baseline level of food waste

Create and expand infrastructure for organics recycling

Address policy barriers to safe donation of food Assess and expand food rescue system capacity

Engage businesses and institutions to prevent food from being wasted

Increase public awareness and provide concrete strategies for how households can prevent food from being wasted in the first place

Lead by example

Lay groundwork for broader food waste prevention and reduction e�orts through changes in waste system collection and financing

PLANNING POLICY PROGRAM PARTNERSHIPS FUNDING

STRATEGY #1

STRATEGY #10

STRATEGY #9

STRATEGY #8

STRATEGY #7

STRATEGY #6

STRATEGY #2

STRATEGY #3

STRATEGY #4

STRATEGY #5

Up to 40 percent of all food in the United States is wasted. Producing food that we don’t consume also swallows up roughly 20 percent of America’s cropland, fertilizers, and agricultural water— and generates greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to 37 million passenger vehicles each year.

Yet, 41 million Americans lack consistent access to adequate and nutritious food.

https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-us/definitions-of-food-security.aspx

Page 6 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC

* �U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: 2015 Fact Sheet, available at https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-materials-waste-and-recycling/advancing-sustainable-materials-management-0.

More food is landfilled than plastic, paper, metal, glass, or any other material, making food waste the single largest component of disposed municipal solid waste in the United States.*

Cities are uniquely positioned to lead the fight against food waste. Cities can be nimble in their policy development and program implementation, and have direct regulatory control over solid waste and many public health issues that dovetail with food waste. By reducing wasted food, cities can stabilize municipal waste management costs and meet climate and sustainability goals. By rescuing surplus food, cities can address food gaps. And by recycling food scraps, cities can minimize what ends up in landfills.

NRDC’s Food Matters’ Initiative partners with cities to strive to achieve a sector-wide 15 percent reduction in food waste within five years through a comprehensive set of innovative policies and programs. Food Matters is piloting comprehensive, cutting-edge models for preventing food waste and improving efficiency in food systems with strategies that can be shared and easily replicated through a knowledge-sharing network for peer-to-peer learning. NRDC has also prepared this comprehensive policy and program toolkit to help cities and other partners develop and implement strategies to reduce food waste.

WHY THIS TOOLKIT

This toolkit is aimed at city policymakers and agency staff nationwide that are seeking to start a program or implement policies to prevent food from being wasted in the first place, increase donation of surplus food, and recycle food scraps. This guide is intended to provide policymakers with an understanding of the range of policy and program options that may be employed and to support informed decision making about what strategies can be most feasible and effective in their community. It is also intended to provide ideas for expansion in municipalities with existing programs.

Given the variation in how cities manage waste and the number and variety of food waste generators, there is no silver bullet for curbing food waste in cities. A holistic approach is needed.

This guide presents a curated set of approaches to tackle food waste at the local level. Examples illustrate the numerous successful programs and policies that are operating in a variety of different cities around the country. Given that comprehensive food waste policies are still relatively new, this toolkit is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to highlight strategies that balance impact with feasibility in the near term and help cities succeed in cutting down the amount of food going to waste. We recognize that not all cities will approach each issue in the same way. Our goal is to provide a set of resources that offer a starting point and a path toward continued progress and impact.

HOW TO USE THE TOOLKIT

The toolkit is divided into four different sections:

rethink, reduce, rescue and recycle. Rethink contains foundational strategies that span across all the sections and aim (1) to understand the scale and nature of the problem and (2) to inform future policy and program development. Reduce involves preventing food from being wasted in the first place. Rescue suggests how to redirect surplus food to those in need. Recycle explains how to capture food scraps as a resource through composting and anaerobic digestion.

Each section identifies one or more strategies, which can be thought of as “what” a city can do. Within each strategy are one or more actions, which can be thought of as “how” a city can accomplish it. As cities vary widely in terms of their needs and resources, multiple actions are included in each strategy where possible. In strategies with more than one possible action, actions are accompanied by a best-better-good designation, where best represents the most important and impactful actions among those listed in this guide. Some strategies contain multiple actions with the best designations to show that there are several important actions.

Each strategy discusses the actions in detail, provides examples of where it has previously been done, identifies under what conditions the policy/program change is more likely to be successful, explores the potential benefits to stakeholders, and suggests some best practices. We also note how these different strategies can work together, including which should be done in sequence and which can be used in parallel.

Using the toolkit, and other resources, NRDC is working with and supporting cities across the United States to execute these strategies as they best fit their city. We consider this toolkit to be a living document and hope to update it periodically with new strategies and lessons learned from cities around the United States. We welcome your feedback.

Page 6 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC Page 7 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC

Introduction In the United States, up to 40 percent of the U.S. food supply is never consumed.1 At the same time, more than 41 million Americans are food insecure.2 Food represents the single largest component of disposed municipal solid waste across the nation; more food is landfilled than plastic, paper, metal, glass, or any other material.3 In fact, the United States throws away enough food to fill the 90,000-seat Rose Bowl stadium every single day.4

Wasting food wastes everything. After all, an uneaten apple that is thrown away isn’t just a loss in calories and economic resources, but a waste of water, energy, land, labor and the other materials that went into the growing, transportation, and storage of the apple. What is more, as that apple decomposes in landfills, it creates methane, a greenhouse gas that is capable of trapping 86 times more heat than carbon dioxide in the short term.5 Because most uneaten food ends up in landfills and because of the climate impacts associated with growing, processing, transporting, and storing the food that isn’t eaten, food waste represents a major contributor to climate change.

This dynamic of excess and insufficiency is one of the many paradoxes of the food system, and one that comes with tremendous human and environmental costs. However, there is a better way forward. Many food businesses are recognizing that preventing food waste benefits their bottom lines. Consumers are increasingly aware of waste in their homes and are adopting practices to prevent it. Food donations by businesses and institutions such as schools, colleges, and hotels are increasing dramatically, channeling surplus foods to people in need across the country. In only three decades, the United States more than tripled its overall recycling rate from less than 10 percent to 35 percent, suggesting that similar strides are possible with food given the right incentives and opportunities.6

As the main entities responsible for waste collection and disposal in the United States, cities are uniquely poised to address these issues and stand to realize significant benefits. Food donation programs can help cities address the scourge of food insecurity. Even small reductions in the amount of food wasted can extend the life of existing landfills, saving cities and counties from the difficult and costly process of siting new landfills. Keeping good food from going to waste can also lead to more sustainable resource use, and lower greenhouse gas emissions.7 Wasted food is a major contributor to climate change, producing more greenhouse gas emissions annually than 37 million cars.8

WHAT IS THIS TOOLKIT?

This toolkit is aimed at city policymakers and agency staff nationwide that are seeking to start a program or implement policies to prevent food from being wasted in the first place, increase donation of surplus food, and recycle food scraps.

This guide is intended to provide policymakers with an understanding of the range of policy and program options that may be employed and to support informed decision making about what strategies can be most feasible and effective in their community. It is also intended to provide ideas for expansion in municipalities with existing programs. Given the variation in how cities manage waste and the number and variety of food waste generators, there is no silver bullet for curbing food waste in cities. A holistic approach is needed.

This guide presents a curated set of approaches to tackle food waste at the local level. Examples illustrate the numerous successful programs and policies that are operating in a variety of different cities around the country. Given that comprehensive food waste policies are still relatively new, this toolkit is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to highlight strategies that balance impact with feasibility in the near term and help cities succeed in cutting down the amount of food going to waste. We recognize that not all cities will approach each issue in the same way. Our goal is to provide a set of resources that offer a starting point and a path toward continued progress and impact.

WHY CITIES?

Governments at all levels have a role to play in preventing wasted food, facilitating donation of surplus food, and recycling food scraps. However, cities are in a prime position to lead on this issue because they are often responsible for waste management, land use, and local health and food regulations. Each of these policy areas presents opportunities for cities to help residents, businesses, and institutions to waste less food.

Wasted food is a major contributor to climate change, producing more greenhouse gas emissions annually than 37 million cars.

Page 8 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC

Cities also stand to realize many of the economic, environmental, and social benefits that result from addressing food waste. Some potential benefits include reduced disposal costs, lowering food insecurity among city residents, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and job creation, among many others. Through actions identified in this toolkit, significant reductions in wasted food can lead to healthier and more sustainable communities.

A NOTE ON FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS

Given the constraints facing many city budgets, funding may be limited or unavailable. Several of the actions in this toolkit involve providing funding for specific purposes such as helping hunger relief organizations invest in needed infrastructure and grants to areas businesses. In response, some cities have created new revenue streams, such as a surcharge on garbage service to support waste prevention and reduction efforts. New revenue undoubtedly poses challenges and is not suitable in all cities.

To this end, each recommendation for funding also includes alternative suggestions. These alternatives may not yield as large an impact, but they still offer a way to achieve some of the intended benefits. Additionally, cities can consider county and state funding options, partner with philanthropic organizations, and explore other creative funding opportunities.

HOW TO USE THE TOOLKIT

The toolkit is divided into four different sections:

1. � RETHINK contains “foundational” strategies that often span across the categories of Reduce, Rescue, and Recycle and are aimed at understanding the scale and nature of the problem and informing future policy and program development.

2. �REDUCE involves preventing food from being wasted in the first place.

3. �RESCUE suggests how to redirect surplus food to those in need (or advance commercial strategies for surplus food).

4. �RECYCLE explains how to capture food scraps as a resource through composting and anaerobic digestion.

Each section identifies one or more strategies—these can be thought of as “what” a city can do. Within each strategy are one or more actions—these can be thought of as “how” a city can accomplish it.

WHY COMPOSTING ISN’T THE ONLY—OR BEST—SOLUTION FOR REDUCING WASTED FOOD

In NRDC research at the city level, we found that approximately 68 percent of the average amount of food wasted by households was edible.

If composting is the only solution in the mix for keeping food from going to waste, we miss the potential to prevent food that can be eaten from going to waste in the first place.

The Problem and The Opportunity Cities vary widely in terms of their needs and resources. To accommodate this, multiple actions are included in each strategy where possible. In strategies with more than one possible action, actions are accompanied by a BEST-BETTER- GOOD designation, where BEST represents the most important and impactful actions among those listed in this guide.

Some strategies contain multiple actions with the BEST designations to show that there are multiple important and impactful actions. Where there is a recommended sequence, these are denoted by BEST 1, BEST 2, and BEST 3. Where there are only two actions provided, a BEST-GOOD convention is used.

Recognizing that different types of strategies will have different implications at the city level in terms of which agencies are involved and how relatively simple or challenging implementing the change may be, we have labeled each strategy with a designation of the type of measure it involves. The strategies are identified as:

n �POLICY: usually requires legislative or regulatory authority and thus often can require more extensive time and resource commitment to implement.

n �PLANNING: helps cities gain the information needed to take effective follow up action.

Page 8 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC Page 9 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC n �PROGRAM: can often be implemented by city agencies or the mayor’s offices without the need for new legislation.

n �FUNDING: involves providing financial resources to organizations that are addressing food waste.

n �PARTNERSHIPS: involves supporting nonprofits, for-profits and government entities to work amongst themselves or together to advance food waste prevention, food surplus rescue and/or food scrap recycling.

Each strategy discusses the actions in detail, provides examples of where it has previously been done, identifies under what conditions the policy/program change is more likely to be successful, explores the potential benefits to stakeholders, and suggests some best practices. We also note how these different strategies can work together, including which should be done in sequence and which can be deployed in parallel.

THE PROBLEM OF FOOD WASTE

Few people plan to waste food, yet as much as 40 percent of our food supply goes to waste each year9. Massive amounts of food are discarded daily by consumers, restaurants, and grocery stores as well as in other parts of our complex food system. Most of that wasted food ends up in landfills, with more than 37 million tons of food landfilled or incinerated annually.10 All told, America wastes more than 400 pounds of food per person per year.11 This results in economic losses to consumers, businesses, and municipalities, depletes natural resources, contributes to climate change, and squanders the opportunity to re-direct food surpluses to address food insecurity.

Given the serious consequences, how did we get to this point? Many factors have contributed to this predicament. The relative cost of food has declined for decades and landfilling is typically low -cost, making wasting food relatively cheap and easy. Throwing away food also largely occurs in our homes and businesses, a little bit at a time, and often by more than one person.12 Wasted food is generally mixed with other materials and taken away on a frequent basis.13 These factors make gauging how much food is wasted at home and by businesses difficult and obscures the resulting costs and impacts.14

This is exacerbated by limited availability of localized data. Many municipalities conduct waste stream characterizations where they sample and assess the makeup of their municipal solid waste, but this is not a universal practice. Additionally, municipal waste characterizations often do not include specific data on how much food waste is generated (often food is measured in combination with other organics), nor any of the characteristics of that food, such as whether discarded food could have been eaten. In general, this fosters a lack of awareness and data that makes the problem of wasted food easy to ignore.

Further, although food is relatively cheap and abundant across the United States, too many Americans do not have regular access to affordable healthful food. This contributes to the undervaluing of food15 and makes it easy and economical to throw food away. The typical family of four spends at least $1,800 per year on food that lands in the trash or down the in-sink disposer. Similarly, many food businesses have accepted food waste as a part of doing business and have not evaluated how food waste impacts their bottom line. Garbage services provided through a flat rate regardless of the amount of waste generated (or through mechanisms such as general fund expenditures that hide the cost from customers) send the signal that any amount of waste is acceptable, including food waste, and obscure the broader economic and environmental costs.

These factors and many others have contributed to high rates of food waste in cities across the country.

THE OPPORTUNITY TO WASTE LESS FOOD AND SAVE COSTS, NATURAL RESOURCES

It is sometimes said that “waste is a resource out of place,” and this is certainly applicable to food waste. Nationwide assessments indicate that food waste, at more than one-fifth of all waste by weight, is the single largest component of municipal solid waste disposed in landfills or incinerators.16 For individual municipalities that have analyzed their waste stream, this trend tends to hold true, often pegging food waste generated at 18 percent to 35 percent of their municipal waste.17,18,19 Minimizing food waste thus offers a major opportunity to reduce overall disposal burdens, including financial and logistical costs borne by municipalities, as well as providing other environmental, social, and financial benefits.

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established the Food Recovery Hierarchy (see Figure 1) to help guide priorities for managing excess food.20 The hierarchy essentially applies the “reduce, reuse, recycle” approach used in materials recycling, with a bit more robustness and detail. Prioritizing action at the top of the Food Recovery Hierarchy is essential because food waste prevention efforts have much greater environmental benefits than do strategies lower on the hierarchy.

In 2015, only 5.3 percent of all food waste generated was recycled through composting and other means, which is among the lowest recycling rates for all materials in municipal solid waste (MSW) tracked by the EPA. However, there are strong examples from other materials that show a significant increase in recycling rates resulting from effective policies and

Page 10 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC strategies. For example, the recycling rate for yard trimmings increased from 22.9 percent in 1995 to 61.3 percent in 2015.

Paper has seen similar gains to yard trimmings. These increases did not occur by accident and instead are the result of strong policy action.

In contrast, municipal food scrap recycling only increased from 2.4 percent to 5.3 percent in the same period.21 With dedicated effort from cities with assistance from the NRDC Food Matters Project, similar strides are possible with wasted food.

That said, not all policies and programs to address food waste provide equal economic and environmental benefits.

Actions higher on the Food Recovery Hierarchy pyramid—namely food waste prevention and then food rescue—should be prioritized because they maximize environmental benefits through prevention and, where that is not possible, ensure that food is used for human consumption. Although recycling efforts are sometimes simpler to measure and track, recycling should be the last option after prevention and rescue options.

Throughout this toolkit we provide examples of strategies that have been implemented by cities across the country that are reducing the amount of food going into landfills each year.

SOURCE REDUCTION

Reduce the volume of surplus food generated

FEED HUNGRY PEOPLE

Donate extra food to food banks, soup kitchens, and shelters

FEED ANIMALS

Divert food scraps to animal feed

INDUSTRIAL USES

Provide waste oils for rendering and fuel conversion and food scraps for digestion to recover energy

COMPOSTING

Create a nutrient-rich soil amendment

LANDFILL/INCINERATION

Last resort to disposal

FOOD RECOVERY HIERARCHY

MOST

PREFERRED

LEAST

PREFERRED

FIGURE 1: EPA’S FOOD RECOVERY HIERARCHY

Nationwide assessments indicate that food waste, at more than one-fifth of all waste by weight, is the single largest component of municipal solid waste disposed in landfills or incinerators.

Page 10 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC Page 11 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC

An Overview of 10 Strategies to Reduce Food Waste This toolkit highlights 10 strategies across the categories of rethink, reduce, rescue, and recycle. These strategies are listed below and described in more detail, including recommended actions, in subsequent sections of this toolkit.

RECYCLE STRATEGIES

RESCUE STRATEGIES

REDUCE STR

AT

EG

IES

RETHINK STRATEGIES

Set short term and long term food waste reduction targets and develop a plan for ongoing measure-ment

Assess potential to increase food rescue

Estimate local baseline level of food waste

Create and expand infrastructure for organics recycling

Address policy barriers to safe donation of food Assess and expand food rescue system capacity

Engage businesses and institutions to prevent food from being wasted

Increase public awareness and provide concrete strategies for how households can prevent food from being wasted in the first place

Lay groundwork for broader food waste prevention and reduction e�orts through changes in waste system collection and financing Lead by example

STRATEGY #5

PLANNING POLICY PROGRAM PARTNERSHIPS FUNDING

STRATEGY #1

STRATEGY #10

STRATEGY #9

STRATEGY #8

STRATEGY #7

STRATEGY #6

STRATEGY #2

STRATEGY #3

STRATEGY #4

Page 12 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC

Rethink

WHAT DO WE MEAN BY RETHINK?

The strategies identified in this section represent foundational efforts that help a city to understand the scale and nature of the problem and inform future policy and program development. They also represent strategies that span across the categories of reduce, rescue, and/or recycle.

BACKGROUND

Most cities do not know how much food is thrown away by residents and businesses. Yet, cities that studied their waste stream found that the amount of wasted food is significant and often represents the single largest component of what is sent to landfills and incinerators. Even fewer cities know how much edible food goes to waste that may be appropriate for human consumption. Existing food rescue efforts capture some of this food, but the untapped potential for increased donation often goes unrecognized in city planning efforts. This lack of localized data makes the environmental, social, and economic consequences of food waste easy to ignore, and can make identifying specific opportunities for preventing the wasting of food difficult. Thus, the first two strategies in this section involve gaining a better understanding of the amounts and sources of wasted food, as well as the amounts and sources of surplus food that potentially could be rescued.

Once a city has estimated its baseline food waste generation and has an estimate of the rescue potential, it can set short term and long term targets for food waste reduction. Cities are increasingly data driven, so setting meaningful targets has the potential to drive action over time. In general, cities that set some type of waste targets as a part of their overall waste management program are more successful in reduction and recycling efforts.

Additionally, this section lays out opportunities for cities to rethink their existing waste system policies to support prevention and reduction. The financing and structure of waste management systems vary widely among cities. Because cities are often responsible for collection, financing, and/or contracting with private waste haulers, they are well positioned to influence these policies to send better signals about waste generation.

Finally, cities have a significant opportunity to lead by example by making operational changes at city facilities, educating employees about food waste, and building markets for compost through use in city projects.

STRATEGY #1: ESTIMATE LOCAL BASELINE LEVEL OF FOOD WASTE

WHAT � Estimating a local baseline level of food waste involves developing an approximation of the total amount of food wasted by sector. This information helps cities more appropriately tailor future interventions, as well as raise awareness on the scale of the problem.

RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:

BEST � Use NRDC measurement templates to conduct residential baseline measurement project in city, and NRDC calculator to estimate industrial, commercial, and institutional (ICI) measurement [Planning].

BETTER � Use NRDC calculator to estimate city’s residential and ICI baseline food waste, and supplement NRDC baseline food waste calculator estimates with more specific and localized information [Planning].

GOOD � Use NRDC calculator to estimate city’s residential and ICI baseline food waste, or the EPA’s Excess Food Opportunities Map to estimate baseline food waste in selected ICI sectors [Planning].

RETHINK STRATEGIES

STRATEGY #1 Estimate local baseline level of food waste

STRATEGY #2 Assess potential to increase food rescue

STRATEGY #3 � Set short term and long term food waste reduction targets and develop a plan for ongoing measurement

STRATEGY #4 � Lay groundwork for broader food waste prevention and reduction efforts through changes in waste system collection and financing

STRATEGY #5 Lead by example

Page 12 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC Page 13 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC

BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW

Estimating a local baseline involves understanding the total amount of food waste generated, broken out by sector (e.g., residential, restaurants, grocers, hotels, education), which allows a city to better understand the problem as well as develop properly scaled and targeted programs. In Nashville, for example, estimates show that restaurants generate approximately half of the food waste among businesses engaged in food service, processing, or distributing. On the other hand, there are more restaurants in the city than entities such as universities, hospitals, or hotels. Cities should adopt strategies to address specific sectors that consider not only how much waste is produced by each sector, but also the number of actors in each sector as well as any overlap with existing initiatives or goals.

In addition to total amount of food waste by sector, local baseline data should also include more specific metrics where feasible, such as:

n �the types of food wasted (see NRDC report “Estimating Quantities and Types of Food Waste at the City Level”22 for sample categories, e.g. fruits/vegetables, prepared foods/leftovers, liquids, etc.)

n �where the food ends up (e.g., composting, landfill, donated) n �what portion was potentially edible versus inedible (bones as inedible, for example) n �what portion of surplus food potentially could have been rescued and donated

This detailed information helps a city to identify behavioral interventions based on the attitudes, knowledge, and behavior of the city’s residents and businesses. An important thing to note is that estimating the baseline is intended to enable sector targeting and inform the development of realistic goals, but that it is not geared for ongoing measurement and comparison over time (except the residential baseline study). Ongoing measurement is discussed in Strategy #3.

RECOMMENDED ACTIONS

BEST: Use NRDC measurement templates to conduct residential baseline measurement project in city and NRDC baseline food waste calculator to estimate ICI (industrial, commercial, and institutional) measurement [Planning].

For the residential sector, NRDC templates are available to conduct a food waste baseline assessment study. These templates are based on the NRDC study (“Estimating Quantities and Types of Food Waste at the City Level”) conducted in 2016-2017 in Nashville, Denver, and New York City, in which participating households completed one-week-long kitchen diaries that tracked food wasted by type, weight, loss reason, and disposal destination. Additionally, each participating household was asked to complete two surveys (once before and once after participating in the kitchen diary) that collected basic demographic information as well as information on attitudes and behavior related to food. From the participating households, a subset was randomly selected to have their trash collected, sorted, and categorized once during the study.

Data collected through kitchen diaries, surveys, and bin digs can be used to estimate the amount and types of food wasted in households in cities as well as to identify and describe individual and household behaviors related to wasting food.

Templates available include a kitchen diary and instruction handbook for tracking food waste at the household level, two surveys for household study participants, categories of food waste to use when sorting food from bin digs, and other materials which can be used to conduct an on-ground residential food waste assessment23. (For ICI baseline estimates using the NRDC calculator, see “BETTER” description below.)

BETTER: Use NRDC calculator to estimate city’s residential and ICI baseline food waste, and supplement NRDC baseline food waste calculator estimates with more specific and localized information [Planning].

For the ICI and residential sectors, NRDC has developed a Food Matters calculator to help cities estimate sources and quantities of food waste generated in their municipality. The calculations are based on estimated food waste generation for various sectors from previous studies which are combined with demographic information for the relevant organizations in a city. To use the calculator, users enter information on sales, number of students, number of employees, number of beds, G O O D

B E T T E R B E S T

G O O D

B E T T E R B E S T

Page 14 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC or similar factors for food-related facilities within the city. The amount of food wasted in the residential sector is estimated using city population. The calculator estimates tons of food wasted in each sector. This information will enable the city not only to estimate total food waste produced, but also to identify the relative contribution of each sector to food waste.

For example, a city inputs it has 1,500 residential university students and 5,000 nonresidential university students, and the food manufacturing and processing businesses have total revenues of $800,000. The calculator will report that approximately 200 tons of food is likely wasted from the university sector, compared to an estimated 21 tons of food wasted from the manufacturing and processing sector.

The NRDC Food Matters calculator does not provide information about the attitudes, behaviors, and patterns of wasting food at the household level, though, unlike the residential measurement project described earlier. The formulas used in these estimates are based on sector-specific averages of food waste generation so cannot be used to determine accurately an individual facility’s food waste generation. As these formulas do not change, they can only be used to generate a baseline estimate, not to measure progress.

Cities may opt to supplement use of the calculator by conducting surveys or interviews of households and individuals on their attitudes, behaviors, and patterns, using NRDC’s measurement templates. Understanding specifically why households are wasting food is useful in tailoring effective interventions. Available research in this area has identified some common reasons for wasting food, but it is still unknown what sorts of regional and local variations exist.

Cities may also further refine the estimates on the amount of food wasted by sector using new or existing waste characterization studies. Waste characterization studies assess what types of materials that are discarded and at what quantities across the municipal waste stream. These are discussed in more detail in Strategy #3.24 Where information on specific amounts is known, these figures could be substituted into the calculator to provide more accurate estimates.

GOOD: Use NRDC baseline food waste calculator to estimate city’s residential and ICI baseline food waste, or the EPA’s Excess Food Opportunities Map to estimate baseline food waste in selected ICI sectors. [Planning].

For a description of the NRDC Food Matters calculator, see “BETTER” description above. The EPA’s Excess Food Opportunities Map25 displays the locations and estimated excess food generation of more than 500,000 industrial, commercial and institutional establishments. Note that estimates for the foodservice sector (including restaurants) and residential sector are not available through the EPA resource.

DISCUSSION

To determine which action is most appropriate, a city should consider the following:

n �WHAT ARE CITY’S PRIMARY GOALS IN ADDRESSING FOOD WASTE?

�Since food is wasted by virtually all people and businesses along the food supply chain, and ends up in a variety of destinations, acquiring granular data is the best way to gain information that can help cities target action where it will be most applicable and effective. Understanding what food is wasted, how much, why, and where it goes is critical to understanding behavior, designing interventions, and tracking improvement. The BEST action is recommended because it allows for greater precision in understanding the characteristics of residential food that is wasted. Some of this information can be captured via the BETTER action, as well.

n �WHAT RESOURCES ARE AVAILABLE FOR ESTABLISHING A BASELINE AND HOW SOON IS THE DATA NEEDED?

�Both the BEST and the BETTER actions will require more resources than using the Food Matters calculator, both in terms of staff and equipment. For example, in the three cities where NRDC conducted baseline food waste assessment studies, consultants were hired to perform on-ground research and supervise a range of temporary staff who assisted with recruiting study participants and conducting bin digs. Additional consultants were needed to enter data from handwritten waste diaries, bin dig logs, and other sources into digital spreadsheets and other formats. It can take many months to design study parameters, conduct the research, and analyze the data. It also can be somewhat costly, though costs may be able to be reduced by using volunteers, partnering with universities on research and data acquisition, finding data sources already available to the city at no or low cost, etc. In addition to the costs of staff time and consultants required to conduct and analyze research, other costs may include providing monetary incentives and scales for residents to participate in the study; trucks, bins, scales, and other equipment needed to conduct bin digs; access to a location where waste from bin digs can be sorted and logged; and other equipment. In contrast, the baseline food waste

Page 14 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC Page 15 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC calculator can yield baseline data as soon as the business demographic information is cleaned up and imported into the tool, though depending on your access to resources, some data for the calculator may need to be purchased.

� The alternative approach is the GOOD action, which uses the NRDC Food Matters calculator to estimate baseline residential and ICI food waste levels. To use the calculator, a city will potentially need to purchase business demographic data by sector if it is not available in existing city records. Still, the cost of the demographic information is likely to be significantly less than what is required for the measurement project.

BENEFITS

CITY GOVERNMENT: Baseline data exposes the amount of food that is wasted in a given city and in what sectors it is most likely occurring. Not only is this information useful in raising awareness, but also it helps to inform program and policy planning, including where a city can achieve the greatest “bang for the buck.” This information can also be used to help cities determine where to allocate grant funding where available or to help build a case for seeking external funding for city initiatives.

BUSINESS/PRIVATE SECTOR: Making baseline data publicly available provides useful information for businesses and the private sector, as well. Understanding the bigger picture of where food waste is generated might encourage individual businesses to look at their own waste generation and think of how they can reduce their contribution. It may also expose opportunities for new businesses and entrepreneurial responses to food waste.

INTERACTIONS WITH OTHER POLICIES AND PROGRAMS

Establishing a baseline provides useful planning information for virtually all programs and policies identified in the remaining strategies and thus, ideally should be the first step in the development of a comprehensive plan to reduce wasted food and better manage food scraps.

In terms of sequencing, establishing a baseline should ideally happen before setting food waste targets (Strategy #3) because it allows for the development of more realistic and targeted goals.

KEYS TO SUCCESS

Describes the key elements of a successful program or policy design and implementation strategy n �ESTIMATES NEED TO BE REASONABLE, NOT PERFECT. Food is wasted by virtually all people and businesses, occurs throughout the food supply chain, and ends up in a variety of destinations. This diffuse quality of most waste management systems makes “true” and “perfect” measurement all but impossible. The goal should be to reasonably estimate current levels of food waste.

FURTHER READING AND TOOLS

“Estimating Quantities and Types of Food Waste at the City Level,” NRDC:

https://www.nrdc.org/resources/food-matters-what-we-waste-and-how-we-can-expand-amount-food-we-rescue

STRATEGY #2: ASSESS POTENTIAL TO INCREASE FOOD RESCUE

WHAT � Assessing the potential to increase food rescue involves identifying how much surplus food may be available.

This information helps cities identify currently untapped opportunities to bolster rescue efforts so that more food becomes available for hunger relief organizations and those in need.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

� Use NRDC rescue calculator or full assessment methodology to estimate the scale of under-tapped sources of surplus food that could potentially be donated [Planning].

https://www.nrdc.org/resources/food-matters-what-we-waste-and-how-we-can-expand-amount-food-we-rescue

Page 16 TACKLING FOOD WASTE IN CITIES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM TOOLKIT NRDC

Most cities have some level of food rescue activity taking place but have not systematically explored how much additional food currently discarded could be redirected for human consumption. As a result, little is often known about how big a “dent” could be made in meeting their city’s “meals gap”—the number of meals being missed per year by needy residents—if that potential was more fully realized. Similarly, efforts to focus on expanding food donation may have largely been focused on individual rescue organizations or specific types of food donors.