UBC Wiki - User contributions [en]

Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned

2020-12-15T05:59:37Z

ThomasLawson:

The Williams Lake Community Forest (WLCF) is a 50/50 partnership between the Williams Lake First Nation (WLFN) and the City of Williams Lake, finalized in 2015. Through the partnership, the community forest is allowed to remove 40,000 m3 of timber / year, this allowance is known as their Annual Allowable Cut (AAC).

== Description ==
[[File:WLCF_Location.jpg|thumb|Map of the Williams Lake area, showing the location of the two parcels (Green) under the management of the Williams Lake Community Forest.|331x331px]]

[[File:South BC-NW USA-relief CaribooRoad.png|thumb|Route of the Cariboo Road (Red), from modern-day Victoria to Barkerville. Steamboat travel (Blue)]]
The community forest is comprised of two separate land parcels; the ‘Flat Rock’ / ‘Ne Sextine’ Parcel, and the ‘Big Lake’ / ‘Potato Mountain’ / ‘Peskwenkwinem’ Parcel. Although these parcels are geographically separated, they share the same partnership, and AAC.

Although younger than coastal forestry within British Columbia (B.C.), the Cariboo region, where the Community Forest is located, has a rich forestry history itself. Development of the Cariboo region began in the 1860's, as the creation of the ‘Cariboo Wagon Road’, and simultaneous gold-rushes brought people north, from southern areas along the coast<ref name=":7">{{Cite book|title=The True Story of the Cariboo Wagon Road|last=Bouvette|first=W.S.|publisher=|year=1980|isbn=|location=|pages=}}</ref>. The gold-rushes brought many hopefuls to find riches, and while some did, plenty did not. Of the unsuccessful, some continued on north to the Yukon, other returned to their homes, but some stayed in the Cariboo and created new communities<ref name=":7" />. The new inhabitants of the Cariboo found an area teaming with natural resources and began reaping the rewards. In regard to forestry and timber operations, the local ‘industry’ initially consisted of many small, independently owned mills. The industry today is considerably different.

To many in the community, the forest industry in the area has changed significantly in their lifetime. Williams Lake now has just two primary mills, both operated by multi-billion-dollar companies. The trend of fewer, but larger mills, continued to the point we have reached today. Having such large companies in town can be seen as a good thing as they provide some stability to an industry that has seen some drastic economic fluctuation over the years. However, a drawback of having such large companies in charge of the local industry is the lack of a ‘social contract’, a commitment to the community from the business. In the days of many small mills, there was a strong connection between the businesses and their communities, because they were a part of the town. The lack of community participation contributed to the desire for the people of Williams Lake and the WLFN to create a community forest. Not to displace the large, industrial operators, but to reclaim some of the commitment to local communities that may have been lost in recent years.

== Tenure arrangements ==

'''Unceded land'''

In British Columbia, 95 percent of the land is considered to be crown land. This is a property designation which means crown land belongs to the government, in our case, the provincial government. The provincial government is elected by the common people of British Columbia in a democratic process. Crown land is synonymous with public land. Unfortunately, 95 percent of British Columbia is also on unceded First Nation land. B.C. is unceded because westerners who colonized British Columbia never legally signed agreements with the First Nation people who have been present since time immemorial. This is important to note because British Columbia’s infrastructure, government and title system occurs on unceded, ancestral and traditional territories of countless First Nations.

There is a provincial ministry devoted to demarcating boundaries and property rights in BC to various forestry companies and other resource extraction operations. The property distribution is determined with minimal inclusion of Indigenous people and often leaves them with less access to BC’s resources.

'''How does tenure work in BC?'''

In 1998, the province of British Columbia launched the Community Forest program. Between 1998 and 2005 the province offered temporary licensees for communities to manage and operate small-scale local forestry operations<ref name=":4">{{Cite web|last=SIABC|first=|date=2017|title=COMMUNITY FORESTS – COMMUNITY BENEFITS: The Economic Contributions of Community Forests to Rural BC Communities|url=https://www.bcruralcentre.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/SIBAC-Community-Forests-Community-Benefits-Final-Report-1.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. After 2005, the province began formalizing tenure agreements which were coined Community Forestry Agreements, or CFA’s. CFA’s are invaluable to rural communities offering a vast range of ecological, social and economic benefits. Yet, Communities Forests account for a very small proportion of the total annual timber harvest in BC averaging around 2.4% or 1.9 million cubic meters <ref name=":4" />. Community Forest applications must include crown land but may also incorporate municipal land, Indian Reserve land, or private land <ref>{{Cite web|last=Ministry of Forests|first=|date=2020, November 27|title=Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development.|url=https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/governments/organizational-structure/ministries-organizations/ministries/forests-lands-natural-resource-operations-and-rural-development|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. Freehold land included in applications must receive approval by the sole proprietor of that land, acknowledging that their land will be managed under the CFA forest management plan.

'''Williams Lake Community Forest tenure'''

In 2013, the final application for the Williams Lake Community Forest was delivered for review. It was a joint partnership between the City of Williams Lake and the Williams Lake Indian Band. The application manifested from the invitation to apply in 2011. The invitation was received from Minister Thomson and Acting Regional Executive Director, Madeline Maley. The application boundary for this community forest is located within the traditional territory of the Williams Lake Indian Band <ref>{{Cite web|last=Partnering with First Nations|first=|date=n.d.|title=PARTNERING WITH FIRST NATIONS|url=https://www.williamslake.ca/DocumentCenter/View/282/4-8-PARTNERING-WITH-FIRST-NATIONS?bidId=|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. The indigenous people of the WL Indian band have welcomed the city of WL to be a partner in this joint agreement. This relationship has resulted in a Limited Partnership Agreement which allows both parties to hold and administer decisions of the outlined boundary. This agreement is known as the WL Community Forest LP. Their agreement is bounded by a 25-year term<ref>{{Cite web|last=Ministry of FLNRORD|first=|date=June, 2011|title=New community forest for Williams Lake|url=https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2011FOR0077-000667#:~:text=The%20community%20forest%20will%20have,initial%20term%20of%2025%20years.&text=This%20community%20forest%20agreement%20can,the%20Williams%20Lake%20Indian%20Band|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. It is an area-based tenure that allows the bounded parties to operate within a specified area. This is a fixed area that will not change unless an application is completed following the provincial mandate for expansion. The WL joint tenure operates 40,000 cubic meters of annual allowable cut.

'''Limited Partnership Agreement'''

The WLCF is run by a Limited Partnership Agreement (LPA). An LPA will have at least one general partner but potentially more, as well as at least one limited partner <ref>{{Cite web|last=Province of British Columbia.|first=|date=n.d.|title=Proprietorships & Partnerships|url=https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/employment-business/business/managing-a-business/permits-licences/businesses-incorporated-companies/proprietorships-partnerships|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. Limited partners typically offer investment capital but are not involved in many decision-making or hold a high degree of liability <ref name=":5">{{Cite web|last=British Columbia Community Forest Asscocation.|first=|date=2012|title=The Community Forest Guidebook 2.|url=https://bccfa.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/FS30_web-proof.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. The general partner on the other hand holds much more liability. They are seen as the manager and main stronghold for management, furthermore, they retain utmost liability for the community forest <ref name=":5" />. In our case, there are two limited partners: The City of Williams Lake and the Williams Lake Indian Band. The general partner is made up of six individuals. Three of the six individuals are considered directors who are appointed from each of the limited parties<ref name=":6">{{Cite web|last=Williams Lake Community Forest|first=2013|date=|title=Application Packaged. Community Forest Agreement.|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/20140310wlcommforapplicationapproved.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>.

== Administrative arrangements ==
The WLCF operates under two main players in the form of a limited partnership which holds the Community Forest Agreement in tandem. The two players in the limited partnership are the Williams Lake Indian Band and the City of Williams Lake. In addition, the limited partnership has formed a designated group responsible for the execution of business decisions which is called the “WLCF General Partnership”. The structure of the WLCF General Partnership contains a Board of Directors. The Board of Directors is made up of a total of six members. Each main player has the opportunity to choose three members to make up the Board of Directors. The purpose of the Board of Directors is to make recommendations to the current active manager of the WLCF. Also, the WLCF General Partnership has elected an additional 11 members to the Standing Committee which has been put in place to make recommendations to the Board of Directors. The standing committee is composed of community members. Having community members making recommendations to the Board of Directors ensures that the “interests of adjacent or neighbouring communities and licensed resource users”, will be taken into consideration[[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]]. Other responsibilities of the standing committee are providing opinions on “strategic and operational planning and implementation” to the Board of Directors <ref name=":0" />. The standing committee is also responsible for providing reflection on how management strategies impact the land base, as well as making sure there is a fair distribution of revenue into programs such as grant funds. Lastly, a community forest manager is appointed by the Board of Directors to make detailed decisions for the forest management. The community forest manager is responsible for the ‘day to day’ decisions and operational planning. They are the ones who are intimately connected to the activities happening in the WLCF and know the fine details. Currently, there are two active managers in the WLCF.

An understanding on management goals was agreed upon by the limited partnership in the form of an Letter of Understanding (LOU) that was signed back on January 13, 2009 [[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]]. The limited partnership meets social, economic, and ecological values through management plans and Forest Stewardship Plans (FSPs) that are required by the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations, and Rural Development, also known as MoFLNRORD. These management plans and FSPs must be reviewed by “First Nations, resource tenure holders, community members and local governments, soliciting comments”, before the documents are given to the District Manager of MoFLNRORD for final approval [[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]]. The WLCF must also adhere to the Cariboo Chilcotin Land Use Plan [[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]].

The WLCF is obligated to share annual statistics on their financial state and timber harvest volumes to ensure a level of transparency to the community is met. These statistics come in the form of an ‘Annual Report’ and also includes the “activities and accomplishments” throughout the year <ref name=":0">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Management and Administrative Intentions|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/about/history/management-and-administrative-intentions/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=November 29, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>. The WLCF also holds an ‘in person’ community forest day to showcase and give tours to the local peoples to help them understand what is happening in their community forest. Having a transparent reporting system is a crucial component of running an equitable community forest. This eliminates any unknown aspects to the community of Williams Lake. Net income is divided equally to the two members of the limited partnership. Each partner in the limited partnership then decides on how they will use the net revenue to benefit their communities. Often, the money is directed into program funding and grants. According to the annual report for 2019 released by the WLCF, there is "$45,000...available for local projects" in 2020 through the grant application program and "$5,000 is available for local graduates" in 2020 through the bursary application program <ref>{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=November 30, 2020|title=2019 WLCF Annual Report / Virtual Community Meeting PowerPoint|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/20201130_PublicVirtualMeetingPPT.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref> .

== Affected Stakeholders ==

The two key affected stakeholders are the two parties that comprise the Williams Lake community forest agreement. First is the Williams Lake Indian Band, the other is the City of Williams Lake. Both parties have equal power as both groups have 3 appointed directors for the community forest to sit on a board of 6 members. A power analysis would place both groups under high influence and high importance as they share equal power and retain equal property rights to the legal title of the Community Forest.

The document which outlines the agreement of both parties is called the Williams Lake Community Forest Limited partnership<ref name=":6" />. In this agreement, there is a general partner and a limited partner. The limited partner company was formed by the partners to act as the managing general partner for the partnership. To maintain structure and due process only one director can not be present from each party. When it comes to decision making, a quorum is 4 directors, 2 directors representing each partner. The general party has the full power and authority to manage the business affairs of the partnership. Financials are incurred in the name of the partnership, meaning both parties are tied to each other regardless of the financial outcomes the community forest bestows on the shareholders.

== Interested Outside Stakeholders ==

There are many interested stakeholders in this case study as the community forest provides a bountiful range of benefits to its shareholders. Many of these stakeholders are offered various outlets to voice their opinions. For example, before the establishment of the Community Forest, many community meetings were held. Additionally, ongoing platforms are available for the public, neighbouring first nations and other communities to join and share their opinions. In this situation though, we are focussed on the interested stakeholders who also hold a significant portion of power. This is Tolko Industries and West Fraser Mills. Both of these stakeholders are necessary for this community forest to operate as much of the fiber is sold to their mills in Williams Lake. In a power analysis, these groups would be placed in low importance and high influence. In our case study, 98% of wood harvested went to the open market in the Cariboo <ref>{{Cite web|last=Stirling, J.|first=|date=n.d.|title=Protecting a Community (Forestry) Asset. Logging and Sawmilling Journal.|url=https://forestnet.com/LSJissues/2019-may/protecting-a-community-forestry-asset.php|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. This means that the community forest is a price taker as they will receive payment based on the going market price for lumber. Timber from the community forest is harvested by local contractors and log haulers and the CFA attempts to hire local workers within the community.

== Discussion ==
=== Aims and Intentions ===
The WLCF has a clear 6 point general goal objective as well as a 5 point strategic planning regime. The 6 point general goal objectives are the following: “to reflect community values and respect the land; to sustainably manage for all forest resources; to enhance local partnerships that support forest education and an increased public understanding of forestry; to operate the community forest as a viable forestry enterprise; to realize socio-economic benefits such as local employment and economic activity associated with milling and manufacturing; to generate revenue for economic development and community stability” <ref name=":1">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Goals and Strategic Planning Pillars|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/about/goals/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=November 29, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>. The 5 point strategic planning regime utilizes the following criteria: “strong positive partnership: sustainable forest management; respect for culture and heritage resources; community engagement and education; and long term financial sustainability” <ref name=":1" />. It is crucial to have clear objectives and goals set out to have a successful and sustainable community forestry. These goals all reflect aspects of social, economic, and ecological ideas.

The WLCF has been agreed on to be a ‘working forest’, meaning that it will be managed to generate economic activity from primarily timber but also other sources. A good definition of a working forest that aligns with the ideas of the WLCF is given by Peter Schleifenbaum, who states: "A working forest is a forest where the sustainable production of timber is balanced with other consumptive and non-consumptive uses while contributing to the non-quantifiable benefits received by society" <ref>{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=2013|title=What is a Working Forest?|url=http://www.silviculturemagazine.com/articles/spring-2013/what-working-forest|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Silviculture Magazine}}</ref>.

In recent years, the WLCF has set their aims and intentions to address issues on the land base around the community of Williams Lake. These issues include the recent wildfires of 2018, Douglas-fir bark beetle infestations, and decreasing mule deer winter range habitat. The management of Douglas-fir bark beetle is done through logging the infested Douglas-fir trees, which is known as sanitation logging. The Douglas-fir bark beetle has been a problem for the WLCF because it kills and degrades the value of Douglas-fir trees, which are one of the main merchantable species for timber harvest. This issue has been increasingly important due to rising populations of the bark beetle because of recent warm, dry winters and severe wildfire seasons in 2017 and 2018 <ref name=":3" />. The WLCF is making progress with the sanitation logging of infected Douglas-fir and state that the Fall 2020 sanitation harvest will be much lower than past years due to decreasing bark beetle attack <ref name=":3">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Operations|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/operations/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>. In order to mitigate wildfire risk, the WLCF has been working towards hand fuel treatments which is a type of forest thinning that decreases the risk of high severity wildfire. Additionally, the WLCF has established fire breaks near the community, which act as impassible barriers for wildfire. These barriers are created by removing organic materials that will burn in a fire. Lastly, the concern over mule deer winter range habitat has been address through forest thinning treatments which creates mores suitable habitat for mule deer in the winter months <ref>{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Hand Fuel-Treatment & Mule Deer Habitat enhancements funded by FESBC|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/news/fesbc-20190814-press-release/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>.

The WLCF has done an excellent job at displaying transparent goals that are easily accessible for the public to obtain and understand. Establishing goals gives the community forest in Williams Lake a sense of direction. Updates on these goals are often presented in the annual reports given by the WLCF.
[[File:20180423 FuelTreatmentAfter-600x450.jpg|thumb|Hand fuel treatment in the Williams Lake Community Forest. This type of treatment lowers the risk of high severity wildfire and improves mule deer winter range habitat.]]

=== Governance ===
The governance structure of the WLCF operates through the limited partnership which holds the Community Forest Agreement in tandem. Governance is also conducted through the WLCF General Partnership and the Standing committee. Under the Community Forest Agreement, the members of the WLCF have the decision-making power for their designated tenure area. The decisions made by the WLCF must comply with the Forest Range and Practice Act, which is laid out by the provincial government to meet 11 resource values. Unlike other tenure arrangements in British Columbia, the WLCF encourages public input to ensure the governance of the CFA is not only being operated by a select few decision makers. This is a key component to successful community forestry in British Columbia. It seems that the WLCF tries to balance economic, social, and ecological values through their governance structure to ensure all stakeholders are satisfied.

The WLCF shares their land base with diverse tenures and stakeholders for other specific resources. The WLCF respects and works with the other stakeholders to ensure they are both getting their desired outcomes from the land base. The community forest in Williams Lake allows people to access the public land within the community forest and use it within their legal rights.

Ultimately, the overarching level of governance for the WLCF is the provincial government in the form of MoFLNRORD. The purpose of MoFLNRORD is to ensure the “stewardship of provincial Crown land and ensures the sustainable management of forest, wildlife, water and other land-based resources” <ref name=":2">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=November 27, 2020|title=Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development|url=https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/governments/organizational-structure/ministries-organizations/ministries/forests-lands-natural-resource-operations-and-rural-development|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=November 29, 2020|website=}}</ref>. Additionally, MoFLRORD takes the opportunity to work with “Indigenous and rural communities to strengthen and diversify their economies<nowiki>''</nowiki> <ref name=":2" />.

== Assessment ==
Your assessment of the relative power of each group of social actors, and how that power is being used

== Recommendations ==
The WLCF has been in operation for just over 5 years. It is a relatively new agreement, with the context that forestry has been happening in the area for over a century. While it could be viewed that having an operation this new could have drawbacks due to the lack of operational experience. However, in practice, the WLCF is operating extremely well. They’ve taken many concerns that are traditionally associated with large-scale and industrial forestry and worked to prevent the creation of those issues in their operation. The manager and other members of the community forest give significant credit to their success to their in-depth shareholder agreement. The document allowed the community forest to operate like it’s intended to; an equal partnership between the WLFN and the City of Williams Lake. Because of the strong framework they set going in, the two groups do an excellent job of accommodating each other’s desired goals to create uniform objectives.

An area that forestry operations, in B.C., are traditionally weak in is their forest stewardship plans (FSP). The WLCF’s FSP is inconsistent in its strength. Certain areas, like Recreation Values, Grazing, and Visual Quality, are quite descriptive, while other sections, like management objectives around large mammals, and watershed hydrology objectives, receive less attention, are less specifically defined.

A possible recommendation for the WLCF could be becoming more active in advocacy for community forests in BC and abroad. This could be done from the point of view of a consultant, or from within the BCCFA. In British Columbia there are still lots of communities without a community forest agreement, with the exemplary example the WLCF sets, they could help communicate to other communities the benefits that come from the forest.

== References ==
<references />

{{Projectbox FRST370|names=|share=}}

Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned

2020-12-14T06:03:49Z

ThomasLawson:

Add your summary here

== Description ==
Description of the community forestry case study – Where located; history; national or regional context (if appropriate)

== Tenure arrangements ==

'''Unceded land'''

In British Columbia, 95 percent of the land is considered to be crown land. This is a property designation which means crown land belongs to the government, in our case, the provincial government. The provincial government is elected by the common people of British Columbia in a democratic process. Crown land is synonymous with public land. Unfortunately, 95 percent of British Columbia is also on unceded First Nation land. B.C. is unceded because westerners who colonized British Columbia never legally signed agreements with the First Nation people who have been present since time immemorial. This is important to note because British Columbia’s infrastructure, government and title system occurs on unceded, ancestral and traditional territories of countless First Nations.

There is a provincial ministry devoted to demarcating boundaries and property rights in BC to various forestry companies and other resource extraction operations. The property distribution is determined with minimal inclusion of Indigenous people and often leaves them with less access to BC’s resources.

'''How does tenure work in BC?'''

In 1998, the province of British Columbia launched the Community Forest program. Between 1998 and 2005 the province offered temporary licensees for communities to manage and operate small scale local forestry operations<ref name=":4">{{Cite web|last=SIABC|first=|date=2017|title=COMMUNITY FORESTS – COMMUNITY BENEFITS: The Economic Contributions of Community Forests to Rural BC Communities|url=https://www.bcruralcentre.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/SIBAC-Community-Forests-Community-Benefits-Final-Report-1.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. After 2005, the province began formalizing tenure agreements which were coined Community Forestry Agreements, or CFA’s. CFA’s are invaluable to rural communities offering a vast range of ecological, social and economic benefits. Yet, Communities Forests account for a very small proportion of the total annual timber harvest in BC averaging around 2.4% or 1.9 million cubic meters <ref name=":4" />. Community Forest applications must include crown land but may also incorporate municipal land, Indian Reserve land, or private land <ref>{{Cite web|last=Ministry of Forests|first=|date=2020, November 27|title=Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development.|url=https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/governments/organizational-structure/ministries-organizations/ministries/forests-lands-natural-resource-operations-and-rural-development|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. Free hold land included in applications must receive approval by the sole proprietor of that land, acknowledging that their land will be managed under the CFA forest management plan.

'''Williams Lake Community Forest tenure'''

In 2013, the final application for the Williams Lake Community Forest was delivered for review. It was a joint partnership between the City of Williams Lake and the Williams Lake Indian Band. The application manifested from the invitation to apply in 2011. The invitation was received from Minister Thomson and Acting Regional Executive Director, Madeline Maley. The application boundary for this community forest is located within the traditional territory of the Williams Lake Indian Band <ref>{{Cite web|last=Partnering with First Nations|first=|date=n.d.|title=PARTNERING WITH FIRST NATIONS|url=https://www.williamslake.ca/DocumentCenter/View/282/4-8-PARTNERING-WITH-FIRST-NATIONS?bidId=|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. The indigenous people of the WL Indian band have welcomed the city of WL to be a partner in this joint agreement. This relationship has resulted in a Limited Partnership Agreement which allows both parties to hold and administer decisions of the outlined boundary. This agreement is known as the WL Community Forest LP. Their agreement is bounded by a 25-year term<ref>{{Cite web|last=Ministry of FLNRORD|first=|date=June, 2011|title=New community forest for Williams Lake|url=https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2011FOR0077-000667#:~:text=The%20community%20forest%20will%20have,initial%20term%20of%2025%20years.&text=This%20community%20forest%20agreement%20can,the%20Williams%20Lake%20Indian%20Band|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. It is an area-based tenure which allows the bounded parties to operate within a specified area. This is a fixed area that will not change unless an application is completed following the provincial mandate for expansion. The WL joint tenure operates 40,000 cubic meters of annual allowable cut.

'''Limited Partnership Agreement'''

The WLCF is run by a Limited Partnership Agreement (LPA). An LPA will have at least one general partner but potentially more, as well as at least one limited partner <ref>{{Cite web|last=Province of British Columbia.|first=|date=n.d.|title=Proprietorships & Partnerships|url=https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/employment-business/business/managing-a-business/permits-licences/businesses-incorporated-companies/proprietorships-partnerships|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. Limited partners typically offer an investment capital but are not involved in many decision-making or hold a high degree of liability <ref name=":5">{{Cite web|last=British Columbia Community Forest Asscocation.|first=|date=2012|title=The Community Forest Guidebook 2.|url=https://bccfa.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/FS30_web-proof.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. The general partner on the other hand holds much more liability. They are seen as the manager and main stronghold for management, furthermore, they retain utmost liability for the community forest <ref name=":5" />. In our case there are two limited partners: The City of Williams Lake and the Williams Lake Indian Band. The general partner is made up by six individuals. Three of the six individuals are considered directors who are appointed from each of the limited parties<ref name=":6">{{Cite web|last=Williams Lake Community Forest|first=2013|date=|title=Application Packaged. Community Forest Agreement.|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/20140310wlcommforapplicationapproved.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>.

== Administrative arrangements ==
The WLCF operates under two main players in the form of a limited partnership which holds the Community Forest Agreement in tandem. The two players in the limited partnership are the Williams Lake Indian Band and the City of Williams Lake. In addition, the limited partnership has formed a designated group responsible for the execution of business decisions which is called the “WLCF General Partnership”. The structure of the WLCF General Partnership contains a Board of Directors. The Board of Directors is made up of a total of six members. Each main player has the opportunity to choose three members to make up the Board of Directors. The purpose of the Board of Directors is to make recommendations to the current active manager of the WLCF. Also, the WLCF General Partnership has elected an additional 11 members to the Standing Committee which has been put in place to make recommendations to the Board of Directors. The standing committee is composed of community members. Having community members making recommendations to the Board of Directors ensures that the “interests of adjacent or neighbouring communities and licensed resource users”, will be taken into consideration[[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]]. Other responsibilities of the standing committee are providing opinions on “strategic and operational planning and implementation” to the Board of Directors <ref name=":0" />. The standing committee is also responsible for providing reflection on how management strategies from the community forest have had on the land base, as well as making sure there is a fair distribution of revenue into programs such as grant funds. Lastly, a community forest manager is appointed by the Board of Directors to make detailed decisions for the forest management. The community forest manager is responsible for the ‘day to day’ decisions and operational planning. They are the ones who are intimately connected to the activities happening in the WLCF and know the fine details. Currently, there are two active managers in the WLCF.

An understanding on management goals was agreed upon by the limited partnership in the form of an Letter of Understanding (LOU) that was signed back on January 13, 2009 [[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]]. The limited partnership meets social, economic, and ecological values through management plans and Forest Stewardship Plans (FSPs) that are required by the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations, and Rural Development, also known as MoFLNRORD. These management plans and FSPs must be reviewed by “First Nations, resource tenure holders, community members and local governments, soliciting comments”, before the documents are given to the District Manager of MoFLNRORD for final approval [[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]]. The WLCF must also adhere to the Cariboo Chilcotin Land Use Plan [[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]].

The WLCF is obligated to share annual statistics on their financial state and timber harvest volumes to ensure a level of transparency to the community is met. These statistics come in the form of an ‘Annual Report’ and also includes the “activities and accomplishments” throughout the year <ref name=":0">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Management and Administrative Intentions|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/about/history/management-and-administrative-intentions/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=November 29, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>. The WLCF also holds an ‘in person’ community forest day to showcase and give tours to the local peoples to help them understand what is happening in their community forest. Having a transparent reporting system is a crucial component of running an equitable community forest. This eliminates any unknown aspects to the community of Williams Lake. Net income is divided equally to the two members of the limited partnership. Each partner in the limited partnership then decides on how they will use the net revenue to benefit their communities. Often the money is directed into program funding and grants. According to the annual report for 2019 released by the WLCF, there is "$45,000...available for local projects" in 2020 through the grant application program and "$5,000 is available for local graduates" in 2020 through the bursary application program <ref>{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=November 30, 2020|title=2019 WLCF Annual Report / Virtual Community Meeting PowerPoint|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/20201130_PublicVirtualMeetingPPT.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref> .

== Affected Stakeholders ==

The two key affected stakeholders are the two parties that comprise the Williams Lake community forest agreement. First is the Williams Lake Indian Band, the other is the City of Williams lake. Both parties have equal power as both groups have 3 appointed directors for the community forest to sit on a board of 6 members. A power analysis would place both groups under high influence and high importance as they share equal power and retain equal property rights to legal title of the Community Forest.

The document which outlines the agreement of both parties is called the Williams Lake Community Forest Limited partnership<ref name=":6" />. In this agreement there is a general partner and a limited partner. The limited partner company formed by the partners to act as the managing general partner for the partnership. In order to maintain structure and due process only one director can not be present from each party. When it comes to decision making, quorum is 4 directors, 2 directors representing each partner. The general party has the full power and authority to manage the business affairs of the partnership. Financials are incurred in the name of the partnership, meaning both parties are tied to each other regardless of the financial outcomes the community forest bestows on the shareholders.

== Interested Outside Stakeholders ==

There are tons of interested stakeholders in this case study as the community forest provides a bountiful range of benefits to its shareholders. Many of these stakeholders are offered various outlets to voice their opinions. For example, prior to establishment of the Community Forest, many community meetings were held. Additionally, ongoing platforms are available for the public, neighbouring first nations and other communities to join and share their opinions. In this situation though, we are focussed on the interested stakeholders who also hold a significant portion of power. This is Tolko industries and West Fraser Mills. Both of these stakeholders are absolutely necessary for this community forest to operate as much of the fiber is sold to their mills in Williams Lake. In a power analysis these groups would be placed in low importance and high influence. In our case study 98% of wood harvested went to the open market in the Cariboo <ref>{{Cite web|last=Stirling, J.|first=|date=n.d.|title=Protecting a Community (Forestry) Asset. Logging and Sawmilling Journal.|url=https://forestnet.com/LSJissues/2019-may/protecting-a-community-forestry-asset.php|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. This means that the community forest is a price taker as they will receive payment based on the going market price for lumber. Timber from the community forest was harvested by local contractors and log haulers and the CFA attempts to hire local workers within the community.

== Discussion ==
A discussion of the aims and intentions of the community forestry project and your assessment of relative successes or failures. You should also include a discussion of critical issues or conflicts in this community and how they are being managed

=== Aims and Intentions ===
The WLCF has a clear 6 point general goal objective as well as a 5 point strategic planning regime. The 6 point general goal objectives are the following “to reflect community values and respect the land; to sustainably manage for all forest resources; to enhance local partnerships that support forest education and an increased public understanding of forestry; to operate the community forest as a viable forestry enterprise; to realize socio-economic benefits such as local employment and economic activity associated with milling and manufacturing; to generate revenue for economic development and community stability” <ref name=":1">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Goals and Strategic Planning Pillars|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/about/goals/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=November 29, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>. The 5 point strategic planning regime utilizes the following criteria: “strong positive partnership: sustainable forest management; respect for culture and heritage resources; community engagement and education; and long term financial sustainability” <ref name=":1" />. It is crucial to have clear objectives and goals set out to have a successful and sustainable community forestry. These goals all reflect aspects of social, economic, and ecological ideas.

The WLCF has been agreed on to be a ‘working forest’, meaning that it will be managed to generate economic activity from primarily timber but also other sources. A good definition of a working forest that aligns with the ideas of the WLCF is given by Peter Schleifenbaum, who states: "A working forest is a forest where the sustainable production of timber is balanced with other consumptive and non-consumptive uses while contributing to the non-quantifiable benefits received by society" <ref>{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=2013|title=What is a Working Forest?|url=http://www.silviculturemagazine.com/articles/spring-2013/what-working-forest|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Silviculture Magazine}}</ref>.

In recent years, the WLCF has set their aims and intentions to address issues on the land base around the community of Williams Lake. These issues include the recent wildfires of 2018, Douglas-fir bark beetle infestations, and decreasing mule deer winter range habitat. The management of Douglas-fir bark beetle is done through logging the infested Douglas-fir tree, which is known as sanitation logging. The Douglas-fir bark beetle has been a problem for the WLCF because it kills and degrades the value of Douglas-fir trees which are one of the main merchantable species for timber harvest. This issue has been increasingly important due to rising populations of the bark beetle because of recent warm, dry winters and sever wildfires seasons in 2017 and 2018 <ref name=":3" />. The WLCF forest is making progress with the sanitation logging of infected Douglas-fir and state that the Fall 2020 sanitation harvest will be much lower than past years due to decreasing bark beetle attack <ref name=":3">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Operations|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/operations/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>. In order to mitigate wildfire risk, the WLCF has been working towards hand fuel treatments which is a type of forest thinning that decreases the risk of high severity wildfire. Additionally, the WLCF has established fire breaks near the community, which act as impassible barriers for wildfire. These barriers are created by removing organic materials that will burn in a fire. Lastly, the concern over mule deer winter range habitat has been address through forest thinning treatments which creates mores suitable habitat for mule deer in the winter months <ref>{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Hand Fuel-Treatment & Mule Deer Habitat enhancements funded by FESBC|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/news/fesbc-20190814-press-release/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>.

The WLCF has done an excellent job at displaying transparent goals that are easily accessible for the public to obtain and understand. Establishing goals gives the community forest in Williams Lake a sense of direction. Updates on these goals are often presented in the annual reports given by the WLCF.
[[File:20180423 FuelTreatmentAfter-600x450.jpg|thumb|Hand fuel treatment in the Williams Lake Community Forest. This type of treatment lowers the risk of high severity wildfire and improves mule deer winter range habitat.]]

=== Governance ===
The governance structure of the WLCF operates through the limited partnership which holds the Community Forest Agreement in tandem. Governance is also conducted through the WLCF General Partnership and the Standing committee. Under the Community Forest Agreement, the members of the WLCF have the decision-making power for their designated tenure area. The decisions made by the WLCF must comply with the Forest Range and Practice Act, which is laid out by the provincial government to meet 11 resource values. Unlike other tenure arrangements in British Columbia, the WLCF encourages public input to ensure the governance of the CFA is not only being operated by a select few decision makers. This is a key component to successful community forestry in British Columbia. It seems that the WLCF tries to balance economic, social, and ecological values through their governance structure to ensure all stakeholders are satisfied.

The WLCF shares their land base with diverse tenures and stakeholders for other specific resources. The WLCF respects and works with the other stakeholders to ensure they are both getting their desired outcomes from the land base. The community forest in Williams Lake allows people to access the public land and use it within their legal rights.

Ultimately, the overarching level of governance for the WLCF is the provincial government in the form of MoFLNRORD. The purpose of MoFLNRORD is to ensure the “stewardship of provincial Crown land and ensures the sustainable management of forest, wildlife, water and other land-based resources” <ref name=":2">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=November 27, 2020|title=Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development|url=https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/governments/organizational-structure/ministries-organizations/ministries/forests-lands-natural-resource-operations-and-rural-development|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=November 29, 2020|website=}}</ref>. Additionally, MoFLRORD takes the opportunity to work with “Indigenous and rural communities to strengthen and diversify their economies<nowiki>''</nowiki> <ref name=":2" />.

== Assessment ==
Your assessment of the relative power of each group of social actors, and how that power is being used

== Recommendations ==
Your recommendations about this community forestry project

== References ==
<references />

{{Projectbox FRST370|names=|share=}}

Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned

2020-12-14T06:00:39Z

ThomasLawson:

Add your summary here

== Description ==
Description of the community forestry case study – Where located; history; national or regional context (if appropriate)

== Tenure arrangements ==

'''Unceded land'''

In British Columbia, 95 percent of the land is considered to be crown land. This is a property designation which means crown land belongs to the government, in our case, the provincial government. The provincial government is elected by the common people of British Columbia in a democratic process. Crown land is synonymous with public land. Unfortunately, 95 percent of British Columbia is also on unceded First Nation land. B.C. is unceded because westerners who colonized British Columbia never legally signed agreements with the First Nation people who have been present since time immemorial. This is important to note because British Columbia’s infrastructure, government and title system occurs on unceded, ancestral and traditional territories of countless First Nations.

There is a provincial ministry devoted to demarcating boundaries and property rights in BC to various forestry companies and other resource extraction operations. The property distribution is determined with minimal inclusion of Indigenous people and often leaves them with less access to BC’s resources.

'''How does tenure work in BC?'''In 1998, the province of British Columbia launched the Community Forest program. Between 1998 and 2005 the province offered temporary licensees for communities to manage and operate small scale local forestry operations<ref name=":4">{{Cite web|last=SIABC|first=|date=2017|title=COMMUNITY FORESTS – COMMUNITY BENEFITS: The Economic Contributions of Community Forests to Rural BC Communities|url=https://www.bcruralcentre.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/SIBAC-Community-Forests-Community-Benefits-Final-Report-1.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. After 2005, the province began formalizing tenure agreements which were coined Community Forestry Agreements, or CFA’s. CFA’s are invaluable to rural communities offering a vast range of ecological, social and economic benefits. Yet, Communities Forests account for a very small proportion of the total annual timber harvest in BC averaging around 2.4% or 1.9 million cubic meters <ref name=":4" />. Community Forest applications must include crown land but may also incorporate municipal land, Indian Reserve land, or private land <ref>{{Cite web|last=Ministry of Forests|first=|date=2020, November 27|title=Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development.|url=https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/governments/organizational-structure/ministries-organizations/ministries/forests-lands-natural-resource-operations-and-rural-development|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. Free hold land included in applications must receive approval by the sole proprietor of that land, acknowledging that their land will be managed under the CFA forest management plan.

'''Williams Lake Community Forest tenure'''

In 2013, the final application for the Williams Lake Community Forest was delivered for review. It was a joint partnership between the City of Williams Lake and the Williams Lake Indian Band. The application manifested from the invitation to apply in 2011. The invitation was received from Minister Thomson and Acting Regional Executive Director, Madeline Maley. The application boundary for this community forest is located within the traditional territory of the Williams Lake Indian Band <ref>{{Cite web|last=Partnering with First Nations|first=|date=n.d.|title=PARTNERING WITH FIRST NATIONS|url=https://www.williamslake.ca/DocumentCenter/View/282/4-8-PARTNERING-WITH-FIRST-NATIONS?bidId=|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. The indigenous people of the WL Indian band have welcomed the city of WL to be a partner in this joint agreement. This relationship has resulted in a Limited Partnership Agreement which allows both parties to hold and administer decisions of the outlined boundary. This agreement is known as the WL Community Forest LP. Their agreement is bounded by a 25-year term<ref>{{Cite web|last=Ministry of FLNRORD|first=|date=June, 2011|title=New community forest for Williams Lake|url=https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2011FOR0077-000667#:~:text=The%20community%20forest%20will%20have,initial%20term%20of%2025%20years.&text=This%20community%20forest%20agreement%20can,the%20Williams%20Lake%20Indian%20Band|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. It is an area-based tenure which allows the bounded parties to operate within a specified area. This is a fixed area that will not change unless an application is completed following the provincial mandate for expansion. The WL joint tenure operates 40,000 cubic meters of annual allowable cut.

'''Limited Partnership Agreement'''

The WLCF is run by a Limited Partnership Agreement (LPA). An LPA will have at least one general partner but potentially more, as well as at least one limited partner <ref>{{Cite web|last=Province of British Columbia.|first=|date=n.d.|title=Proprietorships & Partnerships|url=https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/employment-business/business/managing-a-business/permits-licences/businesses-incorporated-companies/proprietorships-partnerships|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. Limited partners typically offer an investment capital but are not involved in many decision-making or hold a high degree of liability <ref name=":5">{{Cite web|last=British Columbia Community Forest Asscocation.|first=|date=2012|title=The Community Forest Guidebook 2.|url=https://bccfa.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/FS30_web-proof.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. The general partner on the other hand holds much more liability. They are seen as the manager and main stronghold for management, furthermore, they retain utmost liability for the community forest <ref name=":5" />. In our case there are two limited partners: The City of Williams Lake and the Williams Lake Indian Band. The general partner is made up by six individuals. Three of the six individuals are considered directors who are appointed from each of the limited parties<ref name=":6">{{Cite web|last=Williams Lake Community Forest|first=2013|date=|title=Application Packaged. Community Forest Agreement.|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/20140310wlcommforapplicationapproved.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>.

== Administrative arrangements ==
The WLCF operates under two main players in the form of a limited partnership which holds the Community Forest Agreement in tandem. The two players in the limited partnership are the Williams Lake Indian Band and the City of Williams Lake. In addition, the limited partnership has formed a designated group responsible for the execution of business decisions which is called the “WLCF General Partnership”. The structure of the WLCF General Partnership contains a Board of Directors. The Board of Directors is made up of a total of six members. Each main player has the opportunity to choose three members to make up the Board of Directors. The purpose of the Board of Directors is to make recommendations to the current active manager of the WLCF. Also, the WLCF General Partnership has elected an additional 11 members to the Standing Committee which has been put in place to make recommendations to the Board of Directors. The standing committee is composed of community members. Having community members making recommendations to the Board of Directors ensures that the “interests of adjacent or neighbouring communities and licensed resource users”, will be taken into consideration[[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]]. Other responsibilities of the standing committee are providing opinions on “strategic and operational planning and implementation” to the Board of Directors <ref name=":0" />. The standing committee is also responsible for providing reflection on how management strategies from the community forest have had on the land base, as well as making sure there is a fair distribution of revenue into programs such as grant funds. Lastly, a community forest manager is appointed by the Board of Directors to make detailed decisions for the forest management. The community forest manager is responsible for the ‘day to day’ decisions and operational planning. They are the ones who are intimately connected to the activities happening in the WLCF and know the fine details. Currently, there are two active managers in the WLCF.

An understanding on management goals was agreed upon by the limited partnership in the form of an Letter of Understanding (LOU) that was signed back on January 13, 2009 [[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]]. The limited partnership meets social, economic, and ecological values through management plans and Forest Stewardship Plans (FSPs) that are required by the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations, and Rural Development, also known as MoFLNRORD. These management plans and FSPs must be reviewed by “First Nations, resource tenure holders, community members and local governments, soliciting comments”, before the documents are given to the District Manager of MoFLNRORD for final approval [[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]]. The WLCF must also adhere to the Cariboo Chilcotin Land Use Plan [[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]].

The WLCF is obligated to share annual statistics on their financial state and timber harvest volumes to ensure a level of transparency to the community is met. These statistics come in the form of an ‘Annual Report’ and also includes the “activities and accomplishments” throughout the year <ref name=":0">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Management and Administrative Intentions|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/about/history/management-and-administrative-intentions/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=November 29, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>. The WLCF also holds an ‘in person’ community forest day to showcase and give tours to the local peoples to help them understand what is happening in their community forest. Having a transparent reporting system is a crucial component of running an equitable community forest. This eliminates any unknown aspects to the community of Williams Lake. Net income is divided equally to the two members of the limited partnership. Each partner in the limited partnership then decides on how they will use the net revenue to benefit their communities. Often the money is directed into program funding and grants. According to the annual report for 2019 released by the WLCF, there is "$45,000...available for local projects" in 2020 through the grant application program and "$5,000 is available for local graduates" in 2020 through the bursary application program <ref>{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=November 30, 2020|title=2019 WLCF Annual Report / Virtual Community Meeting PowerPoint|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/20201130_PublicVirtualMeetingPPT.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref> .

== Affected Stakeholders ==

The two key affected stakeholders are the two parties that comprise the Williams Lake community forest agreement. First is the Williams Lake Indian Band, the other is the City of Williams lake. Both parties have equal power as both groups have 3 appointed directors for the community forest to sit on a board of 6 members. A power analysis would place both groups under high influence and high importance as they share equal power and retain equal property rights to legal title of the Community Forest.

The document which outlines the agreement of both parties is called the Williams Lake Community Forest Limited partnership<ref name=":6" />. In this agreement there is a general partner and a limited partner. The limited partner company formed by the partners to act as the managing general partner for the partnership. In order to maintain structure and due process only one director can not be present from each party. When it comes to decision making, quorum is 4 directors, 2 directors representing each partner. The general party has the full power and authority to manage the business affairs of the partnership. Financials are incurred in the name of the partnership, meaning both parties are tied to each other regardless of the financial outcomes the community forest bestows on the shareholders.

== Interested Outside Stakeholders ==

There are tons of interested stakeholders in this case study as the community forest provides a bountiful range of benefits to its shareholders. Many of these stakeholders are offered various outlets to voice their opinions. For example, prior to establishment of the Community Forest, many community meetings were held. Additionally, ongoing platforms are available for the public, neighbouring first nations and other communities to join and share their opinions. In this situation though, we are focussed on the interested stakeholders who also hold a significant portion of power. This is Tolko industries and West Fraser Mills. Both of these stakeholders are absolutely necessary for this community forest to operate as much of the fiber is sold to their mills in Williams Lake. In a power analysis these groups would be placed in low importance and high influence. In our case study 98% of wood harvested went to the open market in the Cariboo <ref>{{Cite web|last=Stirling, J.|first=|date=n.d.|title=Protecting a Community (Forestry) Asset. Logging and Sawmilling Journal.|url=https://forestnet.com/LSJissues/2019-may/protecting-a-community-forestry-asset.php|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>. This means that the community forest is a price taker as they will receive payment based on the going market price for lumber. Timber from the community forest was harvested by local contractors and log haulers and the CFA attempts to hire local workers within the community.

== Discussion ==
A discussion of the aims and intentions of the community forestry project and your assessment of relative successes or failures. You should also include a discussion of critical issues or conflicts in this community and how they are being managed

=== Aims and Intentions ===
The WLCF has a clear 6 point general goal objective as well as a 5 point strategic planning regime. The 6 point general goal objectives are the following “to reflect community values and respect the land; to sustainably manage for all forest resources; to enhance local partnerships that support forest education and an increased public understanding of forestry; to operate the community forest as a viable forestry enterprise; to realize socio-economic benefits such as local employment and economic activity associated with milling and manufacturing; to generate revenue for economic development and community stability” <ref name=":1">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Goals and Strategic Planning Pillars|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/about/goals/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=November 29, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>. The 5 point strategic planning regime utilizes the following criteria: “strong positive partnership: sustainable forest management; respect for culture and heritage resources; community engagement and education; and long term financial sustainability” <ref name=":1" />. It is crucial to have clear objectives and goals set out to have a successful and sustainable community forestry. These goals all reflect aspects of social, economic, and ecological ideas.

The WLCF has been agreed on to be a ‘working forest’, meaning that it will be managed to generate economic activity from primarily timber but also other sources. A good definition of a working forest that aligns with the ideas of the WLCF is given by Peter Schleifenbaum, who states: "A working forest is a forest where the sustainable production of timber is balanced with other consumptive and non-consumptive uses while contributing to the non-quantifiable benefits received by society" <ref>{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=2013|title=What is a Working Forest?|url=http://www.silviculturemagazine.com/articles/spring-2013/what-working-forest|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Silviculture Magazine}}</ref>.

In recent years, the WLCF has set their aims and intentions to address issues on the land base around the community of Williams Lake. These issues include the recent wildfires of 2018, Douglas-fir bark beetle infestations, and decreasing mule deer winter range habitat. The management of Douglas-fir bark beetle is done through logging the infested Douglas-fir tree, which is known as sanitation logging. The Douglas-fir bark beetle has been a problem for the WLCF because it kills and degrades the value of Douglas-fir trees which are one of the main merchantable species for timber harvest. This issue has been increasingly important due to rising populations of the bark beetle because of recent warm, dry winters and sever wildfires seasons in 2017 and 2018 <ref name=":3" />. The WLCF forest is making progress with the sanitation logging of infected Douglas-fir and state that the Fall 2020 sanitation harvest will be much lower than past years due to decreasing bark beetle attack <ref name=":3">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Operations|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/operations/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>. In order to mitigate wildfire risk, the WLCF has been working towards hand fuel treatments which is a type of forest thinning that decreases the risk of high severity wildfire. Additionally, the WLCF has established fire breaks near the community, which act as impassible barriers for wildfire. These barriers are created by removing organic materials that will burn in a fire. Lastly, the concern over mule deer winter range habitat has been address through forest thinning treatments which creates mores suitable habitat for mule deer in the winter months <ref>{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Hand Fuel-Treatment & Mule Deer Habitat enhancements funded by FESBC|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/news/fesbc-20190814-press-release/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>.

The WLCF has done an excellent job at displaying transparent goals that are easily accessible for the public to obtain and understand. Establishing goals gives the community forest in Williams Lake a sense of direction. Updates on these goals are often presented in the annual reports given by the WLCF.
[[File:20180423 FuelTreatmentAfter-600x450.jpg|thumb|Hand fuel treatment in the Williams Lake Community Forest. This type of treatment lowers the risk of high severity wildfire and improves mule deer winter range habitat.]]

=== Governance ===
The governance structure of the WLCF operates through the limited partnership which holds the Community Forest Agreement in tandem. Governance is also conducted through the WLCF General Partnership and the Standing committee. Under the Community Forest Agreement, the members of the WLCF have the decision-making power for their designated tenure area. The decisions made by the WLCF must comply with the Forest Range and Practice Act, which is laid out by the provincial government to meet 11 resource values. Unlike other tenure arrangements in British Columbia, the WLCF encourages public input to ensure the governance of the CFA is not only being operated by a select few decision makers. This is a key component to successful community forestry in British Columbia. It seems that the WLCF tries to balance economic, social, and ecological values through their governance structure to ensure all stakeholders are satisfied.

The WLCF shares their land base with diverse tenures and stakeholders for other specific resources. The WLCF respects and works with the other stakeholders to ensure they are both getting their desired outcomes from the land base. The community forest in Williams Lake allows people to access the public land and use it within their legal rights.

Ultimately, the overarching level of governance for the WLCF is the provincial government in the form of MoFLNRORD. The purpose of MoFLNRORD is to ensure the “stewardship of provincial Crown land and ensures the sustainable management of forest, wildlife, water and other land-based resources” <ref name=":2">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=November 27, 2020|title=Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development|url=https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/governments/organizational-structure/ministries-organizations/ministries/forests-lands-natural-resource-operations-and-rural-development|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=November 29, 2020|website=}}</ref>. Additionally, MoFLRORD takes the opportunity to work with “Indigenous and rural communities to strengthen and diversify their economies<nowiki>''</nowiki> <ref name=":2" />.

== Assessment ==
Your assessment of the relative power of each group of social actors, and how that power is being used

== Recommendations ==
Your recommendations about this community forestry project

== References ==
<references />

{{Projectbox FRST370|names=|share=}}

Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned

2020-12-14T05:19:39Z

ThomasLawson:

Add your summary here

== Description ==
Description of the community forestry case study – Where located; history; national or regional context (if appropriate)

== Tenure arrangements ==

'''Unceded land'''

In British Columbia, 95 percent of the land is considered to be crown land. This is a property designation which means crown land belongs to the government, in our case, the provincial government. The provincial government is elected by the common people of British Columbia in a democratic process. Crown land is synonymous with public land. Unfortunately, 95 percent of British Columbia is also on unceded First Nation land. B.C. is unceded because westerners who colonized British Columbia never legally signed agreements with the First Nation people who have been present since time immemorial. This is important to note because British Columbia’s infrastructure, government and title system occurs on unceded, ancestral and traditional territories of countless First Nations.

There is a provincial ministry devoted to demarcating boundaries and property rights in BC to various forestry companies and other resource extraction operations. The property distribution is determined with minimal inclusion of Indigenous people and often leaves them with less access to BC’s resources.

'''How does tenure work in BC?'''In 1998, the province of British Columbia launched the Community Forest program. Between 1998 and 2005 the province offered temporary licensees for communities to manage and operate small scale local forestry operations (SIABC, 2017). After 2005, the province began formalizing tenure agreements which were coined Community Forestry Agreements, or CFA’s. CFA’s are invaluable to rural communities offering a vast range of ecological, social and economic benefits. Yet, Communities Forests account for a very small proportion of the total annual timber harvest in BC averaging around 2.4% or 1.9 million cubic meters (SIABC, 2017). Community Forest applications must include crown land but may also incorporate municipal land, Indian Reserve land, or private land (MofFLNRORD, 2017). Free hold land included in applications must receive approval by the sole proprietor of that land, acknowledging that their land will be managed under the CFA forest management plan.

'''Williams Lake Community Forest tenure'''

In 2013, the final application for the Williams Lake Community Forest was delivered for review. It was a joint partnership between the City of Williams Lake and the Williams Lake Indian Band. The application manifested from the invitation to apply in 2011. The invitation was received from Minister Thomson and Acting Regional Executive Director, Madeline Maley. The application boundary for this community forest is located within the traditional territory of the Williams Lake Indian Band (PwFN, n.d.). The indigenous people of the WL Indian band have welcomed the city of WL to be a partner in this joint agreement. This relationship has resulted in a Limited Partnership Agreement which allows both parties to hold and administer decisions of the outlined boundary. This agreement is known as the WL Community Forest LP. Their agreement is bounded by a 25-year term (MofFLRORD, 2011). It is an area-based tenure which allows the bounded parties to operate within a specified area. This is a fixed area that will not change unless an application is completed following the provincial mandate for expansion. The WL joint tenure operates 40,000 cubic meters of annual allowable cut.

'''Limited Partnership Agreement'''

The WLCF is run by a Limited Partnership Agreement (LPA). An LPA will have at least one general partner but potentially more, as well as at least one limited partner (PofBC, n.d.). Limited partners typically offer an investment capital but are not involved in many decision-making or hold a high degree of liability(BCCFA, 2012). The general partner on the other hand holds much more liability. They are seen as the manager and main stronghold for management, furthermore, they retain utmost liability for the community forest (BCCFA, 2012). In our case there are two limited partners: The City of Williams Lake and the Williams Lake Indian Band. The general partner is made up by six individuals. Three of the six individuals are considered directors who are appointed from each of the limited parties (WLCF, 2013).

== Administrative arrangements ==
The WLCF operates under two main players in the form of a limited partnership which holds the Community Forest Agreement in tandem. The two players in the limited partnership are the Williams Lake Indian Band and the City of Williams Lake. In addition, the limited partnership has formed a designated group responsible for the execution of business decisions which is called the “WLCF General Partnership”. The structure of the WLCF General Partnership contains a Board of Directors. The Board of Directors is made up of a total of six members. Each main player has the opportunity to choose three members to make up the Board of Directors. The purpose of the Board of Directors is to make recommendations to the current active manager of the WLCF. Also, the WLCF General Partnership has elected an additional 11 members to the Standing Committee which has been put in place to make recommendations to the Board of Directors. The standing committee is composed of community members. Having community members making recommendations to the Board of Directors ensures that the “interests of adjacent or neighbouring communities and licensed resource users”, will be taken into consideration[[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]]. Other responsibilities of the standing committee are providing opinions on “strategic and operational planning and implementation” to the Board of Directors <ref name=":0" />. The standing committee is also responsible for providing reflection on how management strategies from the community forest have had on the land base, as well as making sure there is a fair distribution of revenue into programs such as grant funds. Lastly, a community forest manager is appointed by the Board of Directors to make detailed decisions for the forest management. The community forest manager is responsible for the ‘day to day’ decisions and operational planning. They are the ones who are intimately connected to the activities happening in the WLCF and know the fine details. Currently, there are two active managers in the WLCF.

An understanding on management goals was agreed upon by the limited partnership in the form of an Letter of Understanding (LOU) that was signed back on January 13, 2009 [[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]]. The limited partnership meets social, economic, and ecological values through management plans and Forest Stewardship Plans (FSPs) that are required by the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations, and Rural Development, also known as MoFLNRORD. These management plans and FSPs must be reviewed by “First Nations, resource tenure holders, community members and local governments, soliciting comments”, before the documents are given to the District Manager of MoFLNRORD for final approval [[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]]. The WLCF must also adhere to the Cariboo Chilcotin Land Use Plan [[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]].

The WLCF is obligated to share annual statistics on their financial state and timber harvest volumes to ensure a level of transparency to the community is met. These statistics come in the form of an ‘Annual Report’ and also includes the “activities and accomplishments” throughout the year <ref name=":0">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Management and Administrative Intentions|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/about/history/management-and-administrative-intentions/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=November 29, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>. The WLCF also holds an ‘in person’ community forest day to showcase and give tours to the local peoples to help them understand what is happening in their community forest. Having a transparent reporting system is a crucial component of running an equitable community forest. This eliminates any unknown aspects to the community of Williams Lake. Net income is divided equally to the two members of the limited partnership. Each partner in the limited partnership then decides on how they will use the net revenue to benefit their communities. Often the money is directed into program funding and grants. According to the annual report for 2019 released by the WLCF, there is "$45,000...available for local projects" in 2020 through the grant application program and "$5,000 is available for local graduates" in 2020 through the bursary application program <ref>{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=November 30, 2020|title=2019 WLCF Annual Report / Virtual Community Meeting PowerPoint|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/20201130_PublicVirtualMeetingPPT.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref> .

== Affected Stakeholders ==

The two key affected stakeholders are the two parties that comprise the Williams Lake community forest agreement. First is the Williams Lake Indian Band, the other is the City of Williams lake. Both parties have equal power as both groups have 3 appointed directors for the community forest to sit on a board of 6 members. A power analysis would place both groups under high influence and high importance as they share equal power and retain equal property rights to legal title of the Community Forest.

The document which outlines the agreement of both parties is called the Williams Lake Community Forest Limited partnership (WLCFLP, 2017). In this agreement there is a general partner and a limited partner. The limited partner company formed by the partners to act as the managing general partner for the partnership. In order to maintain structure and due process only one director can not be present from each party. When it comes to decision making, quorum is 4 directors, 2 directors representing each partner. The general party has the full power and authority to manage the business affairs of the partnership. Financials are incurred in the name of the partnership, meaning both parties are tied to each other regardless of the financial outcomes the community forest bestows on the shareholders.

== Interested Outside Stakeholders ==

There are tons of interested stakeholders in this case study as the community forest provides a bountiful range of benefits to its shareholders. Many of these stakeholders are offered various outlets to voice their opinions. For example, prior to establishment of the Community Forest, many community meetings were held. Additionally, ongoing platforms are available for the public, neighbouring first nations and other communities to join and share their opinions. In this situation though, we are focussed on the interested stakeholders who also hold a significant portion of power. This is Tolko industries and West Fraser Mills. Both of these stakeholders are absolutely necessary for this community forest to operate as much of the fiber is sold to their mills in Williams Lake. In a power analysis these groups would be placed in low importance and high influence. In our case study 98% of wood harvested went to the open market in the Cariboo (Stirling, J. n.d.). This means that the community forest is a price taker as they will receive payment based on the going market price for lumber. Timber from the community forest was harvested by local contractors and log haulers and the CFA attempts to hire local workers within the community.

== Discussion ==
A discussion of the aims and intentions of the community forestry project and your assessment of relative successes or failures. You should also include a discussion of critical issues or conflicts in this community and how they are being managed

=== Aims and Intentions ===
The WLCF has a clear 6 point general goal objective as well as a 5 point strategic planning regime. The 6 point general goal objectives are the following “to reflect community values and respect the land; to sustainably manage for all forest resources; to enhance local partnerships that support forest education and an increased public understanding of forestry; to operate the community forest as a viable forestry enterprise; to realize socio-economic benefits such as local employment and economic activity associated with milling and manufacturing; to generate revenue for economic development and community stability” <ref name=":1">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Goals and Strategic Planning Pillars|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/about/goals/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=November 29, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>. The 5 point strategic planning regime utilizes the following criteria: “strong positive partnership: sustainable forest management; respect for culture and heritage resources; community engagement and education; and long term financial sustainability” <ref name=":1" />. It is crucial to have clear objectives and goals set out to have a successful and sustainable community forestry. These goals all reflect aspects of social, economic, and ecological ideas.

The WLCF has been agreed on to be a ‘working forest’, meaning that it will be managed to generate economic activity from primarily timber but also other sources. A good definition of a working forest that aligns with the ideas of the WLCF is given by Peter Schleifenbaum, who states: "A working forest is a forest where the sustainable production of timber is balanced with other consumptive and non-consumptive uses while contributing to the non-quantifiable benefits received by society" <ref>{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=2013|title=What is a Working Forest?|url=http://www.silviculturemagazine.com/articles/spring-2013/what-working-forest|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Silviculture Magazine}}</ref>.

In recent years, the WLCF has set their aims and intentions to address issues on the land base around the community of Williams Lake. These issues include the recent wildfires of 2018, Douglas-fir bark beetle infestations, and decreasing mule deer winter range habitat. The management of Douglas-fir bark beetle is done through logging the infested Douglas-fir tree, which is known as sanitation logging. The Douglas-fir bark beetle has been a problem for the WLCF because it kills and degrades the value of Douglas-fir trees which are one of the main merchantable species for timber harvest. This issue has been increasingly important due to rising populations of the bark beetle because of recent warm, dry winters and sever wildfires seasons in 2017 and 2018 <ref name=":3" />. The WLCF forest is making progress with the sanitation logging of infected Douglas-fir and state that the Fall 2020 sanitation harvest will be much lower than past years due to decreasing bark beetle attack <ref name=":3">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Operations|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/operations/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>. In order to mitigate wildfire risk, the WLCF has been working towards hand fuel treatments which is a type of forest thinning that decreases the risk of high severity wildfire. Additionally, the WLCF has established fire breaks near the community, which act as impassible barriers for wildfire. These barriers are created by removing organic materials that will burn in a fire. Lastly, the concern over mule deer winter range habitat has been address through forest thinning treatments which creates mores suitable habitat for mule deer in the winter months <ref>{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Hand Fuel-Treatment & Mule Deer Habitat enhancements funded by FESBC|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/news/fesbc-20190814-press-release/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>.

The WLCF has done an excellent job at displaying transparent goals that are easily accessible for the public to obtain and understand. Establishing goals gives the community forest in Williams Lake a sense of direction. Updates on these goals are often presented in the annual reports given by the WLCF.
[[File:20180423 FuelTreatmentAfter-600x450.jpg|thumb|Hand fuel treatment in the Williams Lake Community Forest. This type of treatment lowers the risk of high severity wildfire and improves mule deer winter range habitat.]]

=== Governance ===
The governance structure of the WLCF operates through the limited partnership which holds the Community Forest Agreement in tandem. Governance is also conducted through the WLCF General Partnership and the Standing committee. Under the Community Forest Agreement, the members of the WLCF have the decision-making power for their designated tenure area. The decisions made by the WLCF must comply with the Forest Range and Practice Act, which is laid out by the provincial government to meet 11 resource values. Unlike other tenure arrangements in British Columbia, the WLCF encourages public input to ensure the governance of the CFA is not only being operated by a select few decision makers. This is a key component to successful community forestry in British Columbia. It seems that the WLCF tries to balance economic, social, and ecological values through their governance structure to ensure all stakeholders are satisfied.

The WLCF shares their land base with diverse tenures and stakeholders for other specific resources. The WLCF respects and works with the other stakeholders to ensure they are both getting their desired outcomes from the land base. The community forest in Williams Lake allows people to access the public land and use it within their legal rights.

Ultimately, the overarching level of governance for the WLCF is the provincial government in the form of MoFLNRORD. The purpose of MoFLNRORD is to ensure the “stewardship of provincial Crown land and ensures the sustainable management of forest, wildlife, water and other land-based resources” <ref name=":2">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=November 27, 2020|title=Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development|url=https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/governments/organizational-structure/ministries-organizations/ministries/forests-lands-natural-resource-operations-and-rural-development|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=November 29, 2020|website=}}</ref>. Additionally, MoFLRORD takes the opportunity to work with “Indigenous and rural communities to strengthen and diversify their economies<nowiki>''</nowiki> <ref name=":2" />.

== Assessment ==
Your assessment of the relative power of each group of social actors, and how that power is being used

== Recommendations ==
Your recommendations about this community forestry project

== References ==
<references />

{{Projectbox FRST370|names=|share=}}

Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned

2020-12-14T05:15:53Z

ThomasLawson: /* Affected Stakeholders */

Add your summary here

== Description ==
Description of the community forestry case study – Where located; history; national or regional context (if appropriate)

== Tenure arrangements ==

'''Unceded land'''

In British Columbia, 95 percent of the land is considered to be crown land. This is a property designation which means crown land belongs to the government, in our case, the provincial government. The provincial government is elected by the common people of British Columbia in a democratic process. Crown land is synonymous with public land. Unfortunately, 95 percent of British Columbia is also on unceded First Nation land. B.C. is unceded because westerners who colonized British Columbia never legally signed agreements with the First Nation people who have been present since time immemorial. This is important to note because British Columbia’s infrastructure, government and title system occurs on unceded, ancestral and traditional territories of countless First Nations.

There is a provincial ministry devoted to demarcating boundaries and property rights in BC to various forestry companies and other resource extraction operations. The property distribution is determined with minimal inclusion of Indigenous people and often leaves them with less access to BC’s resources.

'''How does tenure work in BC?'''In 1998, the province of British Columbia launched the Community Forest program. Between 1998 and 2005 the province offered temporary licencees for communities to manage and operate small scale local forestry operations (SIABC, 2017). After 2005, the province began formalizing tenure agreements which were coined Community Forestry Agreements, or CFA’s. CFA’s are invaluable to rural communities offering a vast range of ecological, social and economic benefits. Yet, Communities Forests account for a very small proportion of the total annual timber harvest in BC averaging around 2.4% or 1.9 million cubic meters (SIABC, 2017). Community Forest applications must include crown land but may also incorporate municipal land, Indian Reserve land, or private land (MofFLNRORD, 2017). Free hold land included in applications must receive approval by the sole proprietor of that land, acknowledging that their land will be managed under the CFA forest management plan.

'''Williams Lake Community Forest tenure'''

In 2013, the final application for the Williams Lake Community Forest was delivered for review. It was a joint partnership between the City of Williams Lake and the Williams Lake Indian Band. The application manifested from the invitation to apply in 2011. The invitation was received from Minister Thomson and Acting Regional Executive Director, Madeline Maley. The application boundary for this community forest is located within the traditional territory of the Williams Lake Indian Band (PwFN, n.d.). The indigenous people of the WL Indian band have welcomed the city of WL to be a partner in this joint agreement. This relationship has resulted in a Limited Partnership Agreement which allows both parties to hold and administer decisions of the outlined boundary. This agreement is known as the WL Community Forest LP. Their agreement is bounded by a 25-year term (MofFLRORD, 2011). It is an area-based tenure which allows the bounded parties to operate within a specified area. This is a fixed area that will not change unless an application is completed following the provincial mandate for expansion. The WL joint tenure operates 40,000 cubic meters of annual allowable cut.

'''Limited Partnership Agreement'''

The WLCF is run by a Limited Partnership Agreement (LPA). An LPA will have at least one general partner but potentially more, as well as at least one limited partner (PofBC, n.d.). Limited partners typically offer an investment capital but are not involved in many decision-making or hold a high degree of liability(BCCFA, 2012). The general partner on the other hand holds much more liability. They are seen as the manager and main stronghold for management, furthermore, they retain utmost liability for the community forest (BCCFA, 2012). In our case there are two limited partners: The City of Williams Lake and the Williams Lake Indian Band. The general partner is made up by six individuals. Three of the six individuals are considered directors who are appointed from each of the limited parties (WLCF, 2013).

== Administrative arrangements ==
The WLCF operates under two main players in the form of a limited partnership which holds the Community Forest Agreement in tandem. The two players in the limited partnership are the Williams Lake Indian Band and the City of Williams Lake. In addition, the limited partnership has formed a designated group responsible for the execution of business decisions which is called the “WLCF General Partnership”. The structure of the WLCF General Partnership contains a Board of Directors. The Board of Directors is made up of a total of six members. Each main player has the opportunity to choose three members to make up the Board of Directors. The purpose of the Board of Directors is to make recommendations to the current active manager of the WLCF. Also, the WLCF General Partnership has elected an additional 11 members to the Standing Committee which has been put in place to make recommendations to the Board of Directors. The standing committee is composed of community members. Having community members making recommendations to the Board of Directors ensures that the “interests of adjacent or neighbouring communities and licensed resource users”, will be taken into consideration[[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]]. Other responsibilities of the standing committee are providing opinions on “strategic and operational planning and implementation” to the Board of Directors <ref name=":0" />. The standing committee is also responsible for providing reflection on how management strategies from the community forest have had on the land base, as well as making sure there is a fair distribution of revenue into programs such as grant funds. Lastly, a community forest manager is appointed by the Board of Directors to make detailed decisions for the forest management. The community forest manager is responsible for the ‘day to day’ decisions and operational planning. They are the ones who are intimately connected to the activities happening in the WLCF and know the fine details. Currently, there are two active managers in the WLCF.

An understanding on management goals was agreed upon by the limited partnership in the form of an Letter of Understanding (LOU) that was signed back on January 13, 2009 [[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]]. The limited partnership meets social, economic, and ecological values through management plans and Forest Stewardship Plans (FSPs) that are required by the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations, and Rural Development, also known as MoFLNRORD. These management plans and FSPs must be reviewed by “First Nations, resource tenure holders, community members and local governments, soliciting comments”, before the documents are given to the District Manager of MoFLNRORD for final approval [[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]]. The WLCF must also adhere to the Cariboo Chilcotin Land Use Plan [[Course:FRST370/The Williams Lake Community Forest, British Columbia, Canada: history, governance and lessons learned#cite note-:0-1|[1]]].

The WLCF is obligated to share annual statistics on their financial state and timber harvest volumes to ensure a level of transparency to the community is met. These statistics come in the form of an ‘Annual Report’ and also includes the “activities and accomplishments” throughout the year <ref name=":0">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Management and Administrative Intentions|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/about/history/management-and-administrative-intentions/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=November 29, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>. The WLCF also holds an ‘in person’ community forest day to showcase and give tours to the local peoples to help them understand what is happening in their community forest. Having a transparent reporting system is a crucial component of running an equitable community forest. This eliminates any unknown aspects to the community of Williams Lake. Net income is divided equally to the two members of the limited partnership. Each partner in the limited partnership then decides on how they will use the net revenue to benefit their communities. Often the money is directed into program funding and grants. According to the annual report for 2019 released by the WLCF, there is "$45,000...available for local projects" in 2020 through the grant application program and "$5,000 is available for local graduates" in 2020 through the bursary application program <ref>{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=November 30, 2020|title=2019 WLCF Annual Report / Virtual Community Meeting PowerPoint|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/20201130_PublicVirtualMeetingPPT.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref> .

== Affected Stakeholders ==

The two key affected stakeholders are the two parties that comprise the Williams Lake community forest agreement. First is the Williams Lake Indian Band, the other is the City of Williams lake. Both parties have equal power as both groups have 3 appointed directors for the community forest to sit on a board of 6 members. A power analysis would place both groups under high influence and high importance as they share equal power and retain equal property rights to legal title of the Community Forest.

The document which outlines the agreement of both parties is called the Williams Lake Community Forest Limited partnership (WLCFLP, 2017). In this agreement there is a general partner and a limited partner. The limited partner company formed by the partners to act as the managing general partner for the partnership. In order to maintain structure and due process only one director can not be present from each party. When it comes to decision making, quorum is 4 directors, 2 directors representing each partner. The general party has the full power and authority to manage the business affairs of the partnership. Financials are incurred in the name of the partnership, meaning both parties are tied to each other regardless of the financial outcomes the community forest bestows on the shareholders.

== Interested Outside Stakeholders ==

There are tons of interested stakeholders in this case study as the community forest provides a bountiful range of benefits to its shareholders. Many of these stakeholders are offered various outlets to voice their opinions. For example, prior to establishment of the Community Forest, many community meetings were held. Additionally, ongoing platforms are available for the public, neighbouring first nations and other communities to join and share their opinions. In this situation though, we are focussed on the interested stakeholders who also hold a significant portion of power. This is Tolko industries and West Fraser Mills. Both of these stakeholders are absolutely necessary for this community forest to operate as much of the fiber is sold to their mills in Williams Lake. In a power analysis these groups would be placed in low importance and high influence. In our case study 98% of wood harvested went to the open market in the cariboo (Stirling, J. n.d.). This means that the community forest is a price taker as they will receive payment based on the going market price for lumber. Timber from the community forest was harvested by local contractors and log haulers and the CFA attempts to hire local workers within the community.

== Discussion ==
A discussion of the aims and intentions of the community forestry project and your assessment of relative successes or failures. You should also include a discussion of critical issues or conflicts in this community and how they are being managed

=== Aims and Intentions ===
The WLCF has a clear 6 point general goal objective as well as a 5 point strategic planning regime. The 6 point general goal objectives are the following “to reflect community values and respect the land; to sustainably manage for all forest resources; to enhance local partnerships that support forest education and an increased public understanding of forestry; to operate the community forest as a viable forestry enterprise; to realize socio-economic benefits such as local employment and economic activity associated with milling and manufacturing; to generate revenue for economic development and community stability” <ref name=":1">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Goals and Strategic Planning Pillars|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/about/goals/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=November 29, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>. The 5 point strategic planning regime utilizes the following criteria: “strong positive partnership: sustainable forest management; respect for culture and heritage resources; community engagement and education; and long term financial sustainability” <ref name=":1" />. It is crucial to have clear objectives and goals set out to have a successful and sustainable community forestry. These goals all reflect aspects of social, economic, and ecological ideas.

The WLCF has been agreed on to be a ‘working forest’, meaning that it will be managed to generate economic activity from primarily timber but also other sources. A good definition of a working forest that aligns with the ideas of the WLCF is given by Peter Schleifenbaum, who states: "A working forest is a forest where the sustainable production of timber is balanced with other consumptive and non-consumptive uses while contributing to the non-quantifiable benefits received by society" <ref>{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=2013|title=What is a Working Forest?|url=http://www.silviculturemagazine.com/articles/spring-2013/what-working-forest|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Silviculture Magazine}}</ref>.

In recent years, the WLCF has set their aims and intentions to address issues on the land base around the community of Williams Lake. These issues include the recent wildfires of 2018, Douglas-fir bark beetle infestations, and decreasing mule deer winter range habitat. The management of Douglas-fir bark beetle is done through logging the infested Douglas-fir tree, which is known as sanitation logging. The Douglas-fir bark beetle has been a problem for the WLCF because it kills and degrades the value of Douglas-fir trees which are one of the main merchantable species for timber harvest. This issue has been increasingly important due to rising populations of the bark beetle because of recent warm, dry winters and sever wildfires seasons in 2017 and 2018 <ref name=":3" />. The WLCF forest is making progress with the sanitation logging of infected Douglas-fir and state that the Fall 2020 sanitation harvest will be much lower than past years due to decreasing bark beetle attack <ref name=":3">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Operations|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/operations/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>. In order to mitigate wildfire risk, the WLCF has been working towards hand fuel treatments which is a type of forest thinning that decreases the risk of high severity wildfire. Additionally, the WLCF has established fire breaks near the community, which act as impassible barriers for wildfire. These barriers are created by removing organic materials that will burn in a fire. Lastly, the concern over mule deer winter range habitat has been address through forest thinning treatments which creates mores suitable habitat for mule deer in the winter months <ref>{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=|title=Hand Fuel-Treatment & Mule Deer Habitat enhancements funded by FESBC|url=https://williamslakecommunityforest.com/news/fesbc-20190814-press-release/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=December 13, 2020|website=Williams Lake Community Forest}}</ref>.

The WLCF has done an excellent job at displaying transparent goals that are easily accessible for the public to obtain and understand. Establishing goals gives the community forest in Williams Lake a sense of direction. Updates on these goals are often presented in the annual reports given by the WLCF.
[[File:20180423 FuelTreatmentAfter-600x450.jpg|thumb|Hand fuel treatment in the Williams Lake Community Forest. This type of treatment lowers the risk of high severity wildfire and improves mule deer winter range habitat.]]

=== Governance ===
The governance structure of the WLCF operates through the limited partnership which holds the Community Forest Agreement in tandem. Governance is also conducted through the WLCF General Partnership and the Standing committee. Under the Community Forest Agreement, the members of the WLCF have the decision-making power for their designated tenure area. The decisions made by the WLCF must comply with the Forest Range and Practice Act, which is laid out by the provincial government to meet 11 resource values. Unlike other tenure arrangements in British Columbia, the WLCF encourages public input to ensure the governance of the CFA is not only being operated by a select few decision makers. This is a key component to successful community forestry in British Columbia. It seems that the WLCF tries to balance economic, social, and ecological values through their governance structure to ensure all stakeholders are satisfied.

The WLCF shares their land base with diverse tenures and stakeholders for other specific resources. The WLCF respects and works with the other stakeholders to ensure they are both getting their desired outcomes from the land base. The community forest in Williams Lake allows people to access the public land and use it within their legal rights.

Ultimately, the overarching level of governance for the WLCF is the provincial government in the form of MoFLNRORD. The purpose of MoFLNRORD is to ensure the “stewardship of provincial Crown land and ensures the sustainable management of forest, wildlife, water and other land-based resources” <ref name=":2">{{Cite web|last=|first=|date=November 27, 2020|title=Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development|url=https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/governments/organizational-structure/ministries-organizations/ministries/forests-lands-natural-resource-operations-and-rural-development|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=November 29, 2020|website=}}</ref>. Additionally, MoFLRORD takes the opportunity to work with “Indigenous and rural communities to strengthen and diversify their economies<nowiki>''</nowiki> <ref name=":2" />.

== Assessment ==
Your assessment of the relative power of each group of social actors, and how that power is being used

== Recommendations ==
Your recommendations about this community forestry project

== References ==
<references />

{{Projectbox FRST370|names=|share=}}

Thread:Course talk:APBI200/Nitrogen and PH

2017-04-19T02:21:21Z

ThomasLawson: New thread: Nitrogen and PH

How does nitrification influence soil pH?

Thanks! :)

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-08T03:54:39Z

ThomasLawson: /* Conclusion */

4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. Food loss is defined as the edible food that is lost throughout production, postharvest, and processing, whereas, food waste refers to edible food lost at the end of the food chain due to behaviour of retailers and consumers<ref name="FAOloss"/>. Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, while consumers throw away only 6-11 kg per year in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia <ref name="FAO key"/>. Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> , however, the consumers' demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributors, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.
[[File:Carrots.png|frame|Source: Imperfect Produce.
These carrots do not meet market standards because they considered to be 'too crooked'.]]

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency-driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the [http://%20https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution Green Revolution], agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small-scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains, and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, consumers, markets, and farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drives demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers' convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free'<ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

Supermarkets are concerned with creating a reliable image that customers can trust. One of the ways they create this image is by providing shelves filled with fresh food, but customers often do not see the unsustainable methods used to create this reputation. Many times, markets throw away perfectly good produce because consumers misinterpret the purpose of sell-by dates and assume that after these dates products are not good for consumption. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>. Markets also use overstocking as a strategy to create an image of always having more than enough. Because of the low cost of discarding food, especially for fruits and vegetables in comparison to meat and dairy, markets often feel complacent about ordering more than can be sold and discard the rest<ref name="EU"/>. This practice creates pressure for farmers to produce large yields to meet this demand and keep up with competition leading to less concern about sustainable agriculture practices.

Supply chain inefficiencies between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often over plant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large-scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land<ref name="intensive">The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, Intensive farming, 2009, https://www.britannica.com/topic/intensive-agriculture, accessed April 7, 2017</ref>.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. The majority of farm-level food loss is due to over harvesting. Farmers will often over estimate their harvest size when planting to ensure that a crop loss, resulting from any number of biotic or abiotic factors, does not inhibit them from filling their orders. If a healthy crop yield is obtained, this will result in excess produce that does not have a buyer and is often thrown away. Small blemishes which occur during harvest and while processing the food are another contributor to food loss on farms. Produce is handled many times after it is pulled from the ground, and at every step there is an opportunity for produce to be bruised, punctured, or overexposed to the sun. This produce will not meet a quality inspection and be thrown out, regardless of how superficial the blemish may be. Produce that is not sold, or doesn't make grade, may be cycled back into the soil through composting, but is often disposed of in landfills as a less expensive alternative.

==Costs==

===Environmental===
[[File:fao.png|frame|]]

'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)

Often when farming practices are being applied to a certain location there are environmental impacts when the land is initially converted, primarily in terms of habitat destruction and biodiversity loss. Secondly, impacts due to stresses on the land which degrade soils and cause erosion. Land conversion is the first step in most agricultural practices. In Developing countries, conversion of land is responsible for 72 percent of biodiversity loss, on the other hand, 44 percent is responsible for developed countries. (FAO) The higher percentage of biodiversity loss is due to the high amounts of deforestation. (FAO) Fifty five percent of new agricultural land in low income regions was created from where a forest stood last. (FAO) The land conversion factor that destroys biodiversity is classified by the FAO at a ecosystem and a species level. For produce that is diverse like fruit, there is a diverse crop location. Although the conversion affected the ecosystem by destroying it, many species are able to survive in the diverse crops therefor maintaining species biodiversity. (FAO) On the other hand, a crop that is simple will cause ecosystem and species biodiversity loss because the crop doesn't offer habitat for a range of species. (FAO) The pressure agricultural land faces once it has been converted results in further degradation. The FAO classifies land in three categories regarding land degradation; strong, medium and low, further more the FAO classifies land degradation as " [...] reduction of land capacity to provide ecosystems good and services over a period of time for its beneficiaries." The FAO notes that 99 percent of food loss is occurring on strong land degradation sites. The inefficient food loss tied into the high degradation results in a significant amount of stress and pressure on that land. When land is facing immense pressure, erosion is likely to occur due to over ploughing. (WWF) Erosion by wind or excess water will remove nutrient rich top soil and reduce the fertility of soil. (WWF) In extreme cases, places like Brazil loose 55 million tons of top soil annually. (WWF) The loss of soil fertility causes a reduction in harvesting and forces farmers to expand their agricultural practices resulting in a detrimental cycle.(WWF)

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>. "At world level, the total amount of food wastage in 2007 occupied almost 1.4 billion hectares, equal to about 28 percent of the world’s agricultural land area. "http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf. "Globally, the blue water footprint for the agricultural production of total food wastage in 2007 is about 250 km3, which is more than 38 times the blue water footprint of USA households, or 3.6 times the blue water footprint of total USA consumption (Mekonnen & Hoekstra 2011). In terms of volume, it represents almost three times the volume of Lake Geneva, or the annual water discharge of the Volga River".http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf "Blue water in agriculture is the consumptive use of irrigation water taken from ground or surface water."
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide<ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

===Economic===

There are many parts along the food supply chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive. Excess produce refers to fruits and vegetables that are planted and harvested for sale, yet never get consumed due to imperfect appearances.

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 of food that's purchased per household is not consumed per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses. By only purchasing food that they will consume, households could potentially save hundreds of dollars per year. This incentive not only makes sense economically, but it will also lessen environmental impacts.

Roughly $5.8 billion fruits and $9.2 billion vegetables are lost at the retail level from the US food supply annually<ref>Buzby, J. C., Hyman, J., Stewart, H., & Wells, H. F., The value of retail‐and consumer‐level fruit and vegetable losses in the United States. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 2011, p. 492-515.</ref>. Supermarkets do not consider this as a loss of money because they view overstocked shelves as part of the consumer experience. If the food waste for a market is low, they consider it an indicator that consumers did not get the experience the markets strive for. So although these numbers are high, markets do not view it as a cost but rather as an investment in marketing.

Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm <ref name="footprint"/>. The fruits and vegetables that do not meet market standards often end up in the various places; some are used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most end up in the landfill <ref name="Goldernberg">Goldernberg S., The Guardian: Half of all US food produce is thrown away, new research suggests, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1, accessed April 7, 2017.</ref>. This is due to unintentional producer surplus as a result of farmers try to meet the demand of markets. The cost of producing food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost<ref name="intensive"/>. Since farmers don't receive a cheque for food that is audited or unused, the resources used to produce the food lost results in farmers needlessly spending money on resources. The accumulated waste of resources on unused product forces farmers to bear marginal returns on their product because they are not getting reimbursed for the food that does not go to market<ref>Gravely, E. The hidden cost of perfect produce, Waterloo Region Food Systems, January 23, 2015.</ref>.

===Social===

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many local small-scale production farmers. Farms are working to match consumer demand but not all producers are able to meet their quotas. Small-scale local farmers also have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t compete against large industrial producers. These farmers don't have the labor force, capital investment, or technology that allows for efficient production of consistently desirable produce. These market pressures are causing large numbers of local farmers to abandon their farms, and the sustainable agricultural practices they use. Not only are current farmers hanging up their pitchforks, but there are very few young farmers entering the small-scale market to fill their rolls. A decline in local farms means that consumers in the surrounding communities, who choose to buy sustainable produce, no longer have the ability to buy locally and must rely on imported produce.

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences associated with the food they buy. Cultural trends towards consumerism, in conjunction with higher levels of disposable incomes, has resulted in overspending and overbuying by members of modern society. Buyers with a higher income can now afford to spend lots of money on food, so wasted food doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it. These consumers often take the apparent abundance and availability of produce for granted. Because grocery stores are always so well stocked, consumers rarely associate scarcity as a prominent issue. Due to a lack of education, consumers remain generally uninformed about the worries and concerns that the food supply industry faces.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1. EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from the demand created by their everyday habits. As the concern of food loss and food waste rises, efforts to raise awareness become critical as the change in consumer attitudes and demand accelerates markets efforts to respond and, in turn, farmers to respond to markets. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. Many of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with more information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce and resources wasted. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information, such as the use of sell-by dates, is clear to help educate and inform purchasers. Supermarkets can also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer standards <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level can contribute to reducing overall emissions. Canadian cities such as Vancouver, Ottawa, and Toronto have seen remarkable landfill waste decreases after implementing a weekly collection of organic waste<ref>Mustapha, I., Composting by households in Canada, Statistics Canada, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/16-002-x/2013001/article/11848-eng.htm, accessed April 7th, 2017</ref>. Households are much more likely to compost if it's provided for them, since it is a user friendly process that does not require much time or responsibility.

As consumers become more aware of the consequences of food waste, leading to a result in a shift of demand, supermarkets have opportunities to market towards this by showing sustainable practices and building consumer confidence. Supermarkets in Europe are already taking the initiative on reducing food waste, in 2014, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try. On average, 2.1 tons of fruits and vegetables were sold per store in the first two days.<ref>Monaco, E., 3 food waste facts about France's ugly produce campaign, Organic Authority, September 3, 2014.</ref>

Donation of edible food that is no longer considered marketable is one way retail can divert food from landfills<ref name="Schneider"/>. Although some businesses are concerned about liability, the Donation of Food Act, in Canada, and the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, in the United States, protect contributors. Donations can be tax deductible giving the incentive to avoid landfill disposal costs. While food donation is becoming a popular alternative to food waste, it is important to remember that reducing the source is the primary goal.

Until demands are modified, there are ways for farmers to change their production methods while still being able to generate enough produce to meet current demands. Producers of fruits and vegetables are usually either local companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful to the environment but do not yield a feasible harvest. There have been two methods to address the arising issues of growing demand of agriculture and habitat destruction causing loss of biodiversity. Land sparing suggests intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation<ref name="Green">Green, R.E, Cornell, S.J., Scharlemann, J.P.W., & Balmford, A., Farming and the fate of wild nature, Science, 2005, p. 550-555.</ref>. This non-integrated approach allows for land to be used strictly for mass production, while still allowing biodiversity in other areas to flourish without the stress of habitat loss. Alternatively, land sharing is a less intense way of farming that mitigates habitat destruction while still producing food<ref name="Green"/>. Agriculture will grow in areas where organisms are able to live and therefore share the land together. This concept requires more land but promises less habitat destruction and overall loss of biodiversity.

Remedial action is required throughout the food supply chain. While the participation of all actors in reducing the source of food waste is critical, alternative disposal methods should be utilized to avoid the environmental, economic, and social costs caused by food loss and waste.

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and processes.

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Need to touch on the remedial actions we discussed. Disposal chart etc.

Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. Though there are many benefits of an efficiency based, global food production chain, there are also many consequences. From the consumers who use the purchasing power to drive the supply chain, to the farmers who cultivate the food, there is an immense amount of food wasted due to a rise in superficial aesthetic standards in modern society. The effects of food waste are vast.

Economic costs are shared by the entire supply chain, with consumers throwing away much of the food they purchase, supermarkets throwing away the huge quantities of non-aesthetic fruits and vegetables that don’t make it to the shelves, and farmers throwing away large portions of their crop because of unfeasible consumer demands. If a shift in mindset were to allow consumers to accept slightly blemished or a-symmetrical produce they, as well as the markets and farmers who made the food available, would save a great deal of money.

The social costs are difficult to quantify and often go unnoticed, but the implications are very important. Farmers who are producing food on a small scale are being forced out of the agriculture market by large corporations who use economy-of-scale to produce food less expensively and year round. This is creating a loss of jobs for many farmers who have dedicated their lives to cultivating their land in order to feed their local communities. Furthermore, consumers are often unaware of the social costs associated with their insistence on cosmetically perfect produce. The ideals that a consumer deserves perfect produce has contributed to a consumer society, which is willing to make huge environmental sacrifices for the sake of buying something aesthetically pleasing This mindset can be modified only through the education of consumers, and by increasing their awareness that the products they purchase may come at an extremely high cost, regardless of their affordability.

The environmental costs of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are paramount. In a time when our food production practices are simply unsustainable, food waste is a bad habit that humans cannot afford. Arable land is being degraded by large-scale agriculture at an alarming rate, which, with additional environmental stresses associated with climate change, will make it very difficult for farmers to produce the necessary food to support our growing population. On top of this, runoff fertilizers are contributing to oceanic dead zones, and massive amounts of rainforest are being cleared to support agriculture globally. A reduction in food wastage will certainly help to ease the pressure of these environmental impacts, but large-scale agriculture has intrinsic environmental costs. Organizations such as ___ are creating a culture that celebrates small-scale local farming, and with education of consumers our food production may be able to shift back towards smaller, more sustainably managed farms.

There are many ways our society can improve to create a more sustainable food system. It starts with a change in mind set and education of the general public. This will have positive effects that ripple through the supply chain. A social movement towards sustainably harvested produce will allow super markets to stock a variety of produce while minimizing their waste, and ultimately, contribute to a shift towards local food production which will drastically reduce our unnecessary waste.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-08T03:19:04Z

ThomasLawson: /* Environmental */

4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. Food loss is defined as the edible food that is lost throughout production, postharvest, and processing, whereas, food waste refers to edible food lost at the end of the food chain due to behaviour of retailers and consumers<ref name="FAOloss"/>. Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, while consumers throw away only 6-11 kg per year in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia <ref name="FAO key"/>. Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> , however, the consumers' demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributors, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.
[[File:Carrots.png|frame|Source: Imperfect Produce.
These carrots do not meet market standards because they considered to be 'too crooked'.]]

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency-driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the [http://%20https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution Green Revolution], agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small-scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains, and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, consumers, markets, and farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drives demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers' convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free'<ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

Supermarkets are concerned with creating a reliable image that customers can trust. One of the ways they create this image is by providing shelves filled with fresh food, but customers often do not see the unsustainable methods used to create this reputation. Many times, markets throw away perfectly good produce because consumers misinterpret the purpose of sell-by dates and assume that after these dates products are not good for consumption. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>. Markets also use overstocking as a strategy to create an image of always having more than enough. Because of the low cost of discarding food, especially for fruits and vegetables in comparison to meat and dairy, markets often feel complacent about ordering more than can be sold and discard the rest<ref name="EU"/>. This practice creates pressure for farmers to produce large yields to meet this demand and keep up with competition leading to less concern about sustainable agriculture practices.

Supply chain inefficiencies between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often over plant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large-scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land<ref name="intensive">The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, Intensive farming, 2009, https://www.britannica.com/topic/intensive-agriculture, accessed April 7, 2017</ref>.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. The majority of farm-level food loss is due to over harvesting. Farmers will often over estimate their harvest size when planting to ensure that a crop loss, resulting from any number of biotic or abiotic factors, does not inhibit them from filling their orders. If a healthy crop yield is obtained, this will result in excess produce that does not have a buyer and is often thrown away. Small blemishes which occur during harvest and while processing the food are another contributor to food loss on farms. Produce is handled many times after it is pulled from the ground, and at every step there is an opportunity for produce to be bruised, punctured, or overexposed to the sun. This produce will not meet a quality inspection and be thrown out, regardless of how superficial the blemish may be. Produce that is not sold, or doesn't make grade, may be cycled back into the soil through composting, but is often disposed of in landfills as a less expensive alternative.

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)

Often when farming practices are being applied to a certain location there are environmental impacts when the land is initially converted, primarily in terms of habitat destruction and biodiversity loss. Secondly, impacts due to stresses on the land which degrade soils and cause erosion. Land conversion is the first step in most agricultural practices. In Developing countries, conversion of land is responsible for 72 percent of biodiversity loss, on the other hand, 44 percent is responsible for developed countries. (FAO) The higher percentage of biodiversity loss is due to the high amounts of deforestation. (FAO) Fifty five percent of new agricultural land in low income regions was created from where a forest stood last. (FAO) The land conversion factor that destroys biodiversity is classified by the FAO at a ecosystem and a species level. For produce that is diverse like fruit, there is a diverse crop location. Although the conversion affected the ecosystem by destroying it, many species are able to survive in the diverse crops therefor maintaining species biodiversity. (FAO) On the other hand, a crop that is simple will cause ecosystem and species biodiversity loss because the crop doesn't offer habitat for a range of species. (FAO) The pressure agricultural land faces once it has been converted results in further degradation. The FAO classifies land in three categories regarding land degradation; strong, medium and low, further more the FAO classifies land degradation as " [...] reduction of land capacity to provide ecosystems good and services over a period of time for its beneficiaries." The FAO notes that 99 percent of food loss is occurring on strong land degradation sites. The inefficient food loss tied into the high degradation results in a significant amount of stress and pressure on that land. When land is facing immense pressure, erosion is likely to occur due to over ploughing. (WWF) Erosion by wind or excess water will remove nutrient rich top soil and reduce the fertility of soil. (WWF) In extreme cases, places like Brazil loose 55 million tons of top soil annually. (WWF) The loss of soil fertility causes a reduction in harvesting and forces farmers to expand their agricultural practices resulting in a detrimental cycle.(WWF)

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>. "At world level, the total amount of food wastage in 2007 occupied almost 1.4 billion hectares, equal to about 28 percent of the world’s agricultural land area. "http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf. "Globally, the blue water footprint for the agricultural production of total food wastage in 2007 is about 250 km3, which is more than 38 times the blue water footprint of USA households, or 3.6 times the blue water footprint of total USA consumption (Mekonnen & Hoekstra 2011). In terms of volume, it represents almost three times the volume of Lake Geneva, or the annual water discharge of the Volga River".http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf "Blue water in agriculture is the consumptive use of irrigation water taken from ground or surface water."
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide<ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

===Economic===

There are many parts along the food supply chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive. Excess produce refers to fruits and vegetables that are planted and harvested for sale, yet never get consumed due to imperfect appearances.

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 of food that's purchased per household is not consumed per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses. By only purchasing food that they will consume, households could potentially save hundreds of dollars per year. This incentive not only makes sense economically, but it will also lessen environmental impacts.

Roughly $5.8 billion fruits and $9.2 billion vegetables are lost at the retail level from the US food supply annually<ref>Buzby, J. C., Hyman, J., Stewart, H., & Wells, H. F., The value of retail‐and consumer‐level fruit and vegetable losses in the United States. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 2011, p. 492-515.</ref>. Supermarkets do not consider this as a loss of money because they view overstocked shelves as part of the consumer experience. If the food waste for a market is low, they consider it an indicator that consumers did not get the experience the markets strive for. So although these numbers are high, markets do not view it as a cost but rather as an investment in marketing.

Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm <ref name="footprint"/>. The fruits and vegetables that do not meet market standards often end up in the various places; some are used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most end up in the landfill <ref name="Goldernberg">Goldernberg S., The Guardian: Half of all US food produce is thrown away, new research suggests, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1, accessed April 7, 2017.</ref>. This is due to unintentional producer surplus as a result of farmers try to meet the demand of markets. The cost of producing food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost<ref name="intensive"/>. Since farmers don't receive a cheque for food that is audited or unused, the resources used to produce the food lost results in farmers needlessly spending money on resources. The accumulated waste of resources on unused product forces farmers to bear marginal returns on their product because they are not getting reimbursed for the food that does not go to market<ref>Gravely, E. The hidden cost of perfect produce, Waterloo Region Food Systems, January 23, 2015.</ref>.

===Social===

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many local small-scale production farmers. Farms are working to match consumer demand but not all producers are able to meet required quotas. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. Because volume production is much higher from large-scale producers, they can offer more desirable quantities of produce. Local organic farmers don't have the resources such as labour and technology that allows for mass production and availability of aesthetically desirable produce. This intimidating, stressful, and often unfeasible market for local farmers is decreasing the number of firms in the market. Fewer people are going into small-scale production careers, especially young people. This forces close-to-retiring farmers to stop their current production because no one will fill up their jobs once they retire. As a result, retiring local farmers are forced to sell their land to large industries, who may implement high food loss production methods while trying to achieve mass production. 66 There is a magnitude of problems that both local and large scale production farmers face, but local farmers don't have the volume to sell produce after the food loss, and it inhibits many locals from partaking in the agricultural markets. Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather. In addition, high winds or intense sun rays can alter the appearance of produce, which can ruin its opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its nutritional value. <ref>Goldernberg S., The Guardian: Half of all US food produce is thrown away, new research suggests, Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 </ref> . Another factor for food loss is strict food audits. Farmers that don’t have large-scale production can't sell all a portion of their products due to small bruises and blemishes that don't meet the aesthetic requirements from produce buyers. 14.

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviors. Cultural trends towards consumerism, in conjunction with higher levels of disposable incomes, has resulted in overspending and overbuying by members of modern society. Buyers with a higher income can now afford to spend lots of money on food, so wasted food doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it. These consumers often take the apparent abundance and availability of produce for granted. Because grocery stores are always so well stocked, consumers rarely associate scarcity as a prominent issue. Due to a lack of education, consumers remain generally uninformed about the worries and concerns that the food supply industry faces.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1. EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from the demand created by their everyday habits. As the concern of food loss and food waste rises, efforts to raise awareness become critical as the change in consumer attitudes and demand accelerates markets efforts to respond and, in turn, farmers to respond to markets. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. Many of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with more information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce and resources wasted. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information, such as the use of sell-by dates, is clear to help educate and inform purchasers. Supermarkets can also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer standards <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level can contribute to reducing overall emissions. Canadian cities such as Vancouver, Ottawa, and Toronto have seen remarkable landfill waste decreases after implementing a weekly collection of organic waste<ref>Mustapha, I., Composting by households in Canada, Statistics Canada, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/16-002-x/2013001/article/11848-eng.htm, accessed April 7th, 2017</ref>. Households are much more likely to compost if it's provided for them, since it is a user friendly process that does not require much time or responsibility.

As consumers become more aware of the consequences of food waste, leading to a result in a shift of demand, supermarkets have opportunities to market towards this by showing sustainable practices and building consumer confidence. Supermarkets in Europe are already taking the initiative on reducing food waste, in 2014, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try. On average, 2.1 tons of fruits and vegetables were sold per store in the first two days.<ref>Monaco, E., 3 food waste facts about France's ugly produce campaign, Organic Authority, September 3, 2014.</ref>

Donation of edible food that is no longer considered marketable is one way retail can divert food from landfills<ref name="Schneider"/>. Although some businesses are concerned about liability, the Donation of Food Act, in Canada, and the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, in the United States, protect contributors. Donations can be tax deductible giving the incentive to avoid landfill disposal costs. While food donation is becoming a popular alternative to food waste, it is important to remember that reducing the source is the primary goal.

Until demands are modified, there are ways for farmers to change their production methods while still being able to generate enough produce to meet current demands. Producers of fruits and vegetables are usually either local companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful to the environment but do not yield a feasible harvest. There have been two methods to address the arising issues of growing demand of agriculture and habitat destruction causing loss of biodiversity. Land sparing suggests intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation<ref name="Green">Green, R.E, Cornell, S.J., Scharlemann, J.P.W., & Balmford, A., Farming and the fate of wild nature, Science, 2005, p. 550-555.</ref>. This non-integrated approach allows for land to be used strictly for mass production, while still allowing biodiversity in other areas to flourish without the stress of habitat loss. Alternatively, land sharing is a less intense way of farming that mitigates habitat destruction while still producing food<ref name="Green"/>. Agriculture will grow in areas where organisms are able to live and therefore share the land together. This concept requires more land but promises less habitat destruction and overall loss of biodiversity.

Remedial action is required throughout the food supply chain. While the participation of all actors in reducing the source of food waste is critical, alternative disposal methods should be utilized to avoid the environmental, economic, and social costs caused by food loss and waste.

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and processes.

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Need to touch on the remedial actions we discussed. Disposal chart etc.

Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. Though there are many benefits of an efficiency based, global food production chain, there are also many consequences. From the consumers who use the purchasing power to drive the supply chain, to the farmers who cultivate the food, there is an immense amount of food wasted due to a rise in superficial aesthetic standards in modern society. The effects of food waste are vast.

Economic costs are shared by the entire supply chain, with consumers throwing away much of the food they purchase, supermarkets throwing away the huge quantities of non-aesthetic fruits and vegetables that don’t make it to the shelves, and farmers throwing away large portions of their crop because of ____(improper storage? Audits? Necessary over estimation? Thomas?). If a shift in mindset were to allow consumers to accept slightly blemished or a-symmetrical produce they, as well as the markets and farmers who made the food available, would save a great deal of money.

The social costs are difficult to quantify and often go unnoticed, but the implications are very important. Farmers who are producing food on a small scale are being forced out of the agriculture market by large corporations who use economy-of-scale to produce food less expensively and year round. This is creating a loss of jobs for many farmers who have dedicated their lives to cultivating their land in order to feed their local communities. Furthermore, consumers are often unaware of the social costs associated with their insistence on cosmetically perfect produce. The ideals that a consumer deserves perfect produce has contributed to a consumer society, which is willing to make huge environmental sacrifices for the sake of buying something aesthetically pleasing This mindset can be modified only through the education of consumers, and by increasing their awareness that the products they purchase may come at an extremely high cost, regardless of their affordability.

The environmental costs of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are paramount. In a time when our food production practices are simply unsustainable, food waste is a bad habit that humans cannot afford. Arable land is being degraded by large-scale agriculture at an alarming rate, which, with additional environmental stresses associated with climate change, will make it very difficult for farmers to produce the necessary food to support our growing population. On top of this, runoff fertilizers are contributing to oceanic dead zones, and massive amounts of rainforest are being cleared to support agriculture globally. A reduction in food wastage will certainly help to ease the pressure of these environmental impacts, but large-scale agriculture has intrinsic environmental costs. Organizations such as ___ are creating a culture that celebrates small-scale local farming, and with education of consumers our food production may be able to shift back towards smaller, more sustainably managed farms.

There are many ways our society can improve to create a more sustainable food system. It starts with a change in mind set and education of the general public. This will have positive effects that ripple through the supply chain. A social movement towards sustainably harvested produce will allow super markets to stock a variety of produce while minimizing their waste, and ultimately, contribute to a shift towards local food production which will drastically reduce our unnecessary waste.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-08T03:15:22Z

ThomasLawson: /* Costs */

4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. Food loss is defined as the edible food that is lost throughout production, postharvest, and processing, whereas, food waste refers to edible food lost at the end of the food chain due to behaviour of retailers and consumers<ref name="FAOloss"/>. Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, while consumers throw away only 6-11 kg per year in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia <ref name="FAO key"/>. Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> , however, the consumers' demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributors, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.
[[File:Carrots.png|frame|Source: Imperfect Produce.
These carrots do not meet market standards because they considered to be 'too crooked'.]]

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency-driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the [http://%20https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution Green Revolution], agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small-scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains, and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, consumers, markets, and farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drives demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers' convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free'<ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

Supermarkets are concerned with creating a reliable image that customers can trust. One of the ways they create this image is by providing shelves filled with fresh food, but customers often do not see the unsustainable methods used to create this reputation. Many times, markets throw away perfectly good produce because consumers misinterpret the purpose of sell-by dates and assume that after these dates products are not good for consumption. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>. Markets also use overstocking as a strategy to create an image of always having more than enough. Because of the low cost of discarding food, especially for fruits and vegetables in comparison to meat and dairy, markets often feel complacent about ordering more than can be sold and discard the rest<ref name="EU"/>. This practice creates pressure for farmers to produce large yields to meet this demand and keep up with competition leading to less concern about sustainable agriculture practices.

Supply chain inefficiencies between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often over plant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large-scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land<ref name="intensive">The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, Intensive farming, 2009, https://www.britannica.com/topic/intensive-agriculture, accessed April 7, 2017</ref>.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. The majority of farm-level food loss is due to over harvesting. Farmers will often over estimate their harvest size when planting to ensure that a crop loss, resulting from any number of biotic or abiotic factors, does not inhibit them from filling their orders. If a healthy crop yield is obtained, this will result in excess produce that does not have a buyer and is often thrown away. Small blemishes which occur during harvest and while processing the food are another contributor to food loss on farms. Produce is handled many times after it is pulled from the ground, and at every step there is an opportunity for produce to be bruised, punctured, or overexposed to the sun. This produce will not meet a quality inspection and be thrown out, regardless of how superficial the blemish may be. Produce that is not sold, or doesn't make grade, may be cycled back into the soil through composting, but is often disposed of in landfills as a less expensive alternative.

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)

Often when farming practices are being applied to a certain location there are environmental impacts when the land is initially converted primarily in terms habitat destruction and biodiversity loss and secondly, impacts due to stresses on the land, which degrade soils and cause erosion. Land conversion is the first step in most agricultural practices. In Developing countries, conversion of land is responsible for 72 percent of biodiversity loss, on the other hand, 44 percent is responsible for developed countries. (FAO) The higher percentage of biodiversity loss is due to the high amounts of deforestation. (FAO) Fifty five percent of new agricultural land in low income regions was created from where a forest stood last. (FAO) The land conversion factor that destroys biodiversity is classified by the FAO at a ecosystem and a species level. For produce that is diverse like fruit, there is a diverse crop location. Although the conversion affected the ecosystem by destroying it, many species are able to survive in the diverse crops therefor maintaining species biodiversity. (FAO) On the other hand, a crop that is simple will cause ecosystem and species biodiversity loss because the crop doesn't offer habitat for a range of species. (FAO) The pressure agricultural land faces once it has been converted results in further degradation. The FAO classifies land in three categories regarding land degradation; strong, medium and low, further more the FAO classifies land degradation as " [...] reduction of land capacity to provide ecosystems good and services over a period of time for its beneficiaries." The FAO notes that 99 percent of food loss is occurring on strong land degradation sites. The inefficient food loss tied into the high degradation results in a significant amount of stress and pressure on that land. When land is facing immense pressure, erosion is likely to occur due to over ploughing. (WWF) Erosion by wind or excess water will remove nutrient rich top soil and reduce the fertility of soil. (WWF) In extreme cases, places like Brazil loose 55 million tons of top soil annually. (WWF) The loss of soil fertility causes a reduction in harvesting and forces farmers to expand their agricultural practices resulting in a detrimental cycle.(WWF)

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>.
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide<ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

===Economic===

There are many parts along the food supply chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive. Excess produce refers to fruits and vegetables that are planted and harvested for sale, yet never get consumed due to imperfect appearances.

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 of food that's purchased per household is not consumed per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses. By only purchasing food that they will consume, households could potentially save hundreds of dollars per year. This incentive not only makes sense economically, but it will also lessen environmental impacts.

Roughly $5.8 billion fruits and $9.2 billion vegetables are lost at the retail level from the US food supply annually<ref>Buzby, J. C., Hyman, J., Stewart, H., & Wells, H. F., The value of retail‐and consumer‐level fruit and vegetable losses in the United States. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 2011, p. 492-515.</ref>. Supermarkets do not consider this as a loss of money because they view overstocked shelves as part of the consumer experience. If the food waste for a market is low, they consider it an indicator that consumers did not get the experience the markets strive for. So although these numbers are high, markets do not view it as a cost but rather as an investment in marketing.

Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm <ref name="footprint"/>. The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill <ref name="Goldernberg">Goldernberg S., The Guardian: Half of all US food produce is thrown away, new research suggests, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1, accessed April 7, 2017.</ref>. This is due to unintentional producer surplus where farmers try to meet the demand of markets. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost<ref name="intensive"/>. Since farmers don't receive a cheque for food that is audited or unused, the resources used to produce the food lost results in farmers needlessly spending money on resources. The accumulated waste of resources on unused product forces farmers to bear marginal returns on their product because they are not getting reimbursed for the food that does not go to market<ref>Gravely, E. The hidden cost of perfect produce, Waterloo Region Food Systems, January 23, 2015.</ref>.

===Social===

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many local small-scale production farmers. Farms are working to match consumer demand but not all producers are able to meet required quotas. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. Because volume production is much higher from large-scale producers, they can offer more desirable quantities of produce. Local organic farmers don't have the resources such as labour and technology that allows for mass production and availability of aesthetically desirable produce. This intimidating, stressful, and often unfeasible market for local farmers is decreasing the number of firms in the market. Fewer people are going into small-scale production careers, especially young people. This forces close-to-retiring farmers to stop their current production because no one will fill up their jobs once they retire. As a result, retiring local farmers are forced to sell their land to large industries, who may implement high food loss production methods while trying to achieve mass production. 66 There is a magnitude of problems that both local and large scale production farmers face, but local farmers don't have the volume to sell produce after the food loss, and it inhibits many locals from partaking in the agricultural markets. Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather. In addition, high winds or intense sun rays can alter the appearance of produce, which can ruin its opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its nutritional value. <ref>Goldernberg S., The Guardian: Half of all US food produce is thrown away, new research suggests, Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 </ref> . Another factor for food loss is strict food audits. Farmers that don’t have large-scale production can't sell all a portion of their products due to small bruises and blemishes that don't meet the aesthetic requirements from produce buyers. 14.

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviors. Cultural trends towards consumerism, in conjunction with higher levels of disposable incomes, has resulted in overspending and overbuying by members of modern society. Buyers with a higher income can now afford to spend lots of money on food, so wasted food doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it. These consumers often take the apparent abundance and availability of produce for granted. Because grocery stores are always so well stocked, consumers rarely associate scarcity as a prominent issue. Due to a lack of education, consumers remain generally uninformed about the worries and concerns that the food supply industry faces.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1. EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from the demand created by their everyday habits. As the concern of food loss and food waste rises, efforts to raise awareness become critical as the change in consumer attitudes and demand accelerates markets efforts to respond and, in turn, farmers to respond to markets. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. Many of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with more information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce and resources wasted. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information, such as the use of sell-by dates, is clear to help educate and inform purchasers. Supermarkets can also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer standards <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level can contribute to reducing overall emissions. Canadian cities such as Vancouver, Ottawa, and Toronto have seen remarkable landfill waste decreases after implementing a weekly collection of organic waste<ref>Mustapha, I., Composting by households in Canada, Statistics Canada, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/16-002-x/2013001/article/11848-eng.htm, accessed April 7th, 2017</ref>. Households are much more likely to compost if it's provided for them, since it is a user friendly process that does not require much time or responsibility.

As consumers become more aware of the consequences of food waste, leading to a result in a shift of demand, supermarkets have opportunities to market towards this by showing sustainable practices and building consumer confidence. Supermarkets in Europe are already taking the initiative on reducing food waste, in 2014, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try. On average, 2.1 tons of fruits and vegetables were sold per store in the first two days.<ref>Monaco, E., 3 food waste facts about France's ugly produce campaign, Organic Authority, September 3, 2014.</ref>

Donation of edible food that is no longer considered marketable is one way retail can divert food from landfills<ref name="Schneider"/>. Although some businesses are concerned about liability, the Donation of Food Act, in Canada, and the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, in the United States, protect contributors. Donations can be tax deductible giving the incentive to avoid landfill disposal costs. While food donation is becoming a popular alternative to food waste, it is important to remember that reducing the source is the primary goal.

Until demands are modified, there are ways for farmers to change their production methods while still being able to generate enough produce to meet current demands. Producers of fruits and vegetables are usually either local companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful to the environment but do not yield a feasible harvest. There have been two methods to address the arising issues of growing demand of agriculture and habitat destruction causing loss of biodiversity. Land sparing suggests intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation<ref name="Green">Green, R.E, Cornell, S.J., Scharlemann, J.P.W., & Balmford, A., Farming and the fate of wild nature, Science, 2005, p. 550-555.</ref>. This non-integrated approach allows for land to be used strictly for mass production, while still allowing biodiversity in other areas to flourish without the stress of habitat loss. Alternatively, land sharing is a less intense way of farming that mitigates habitat destruction while still producing food<ref name="Green"/>. Agriculture will grow in areas where organisms are able to live and therefore share the land together. This concept requires more land but promises less habitat destruction and overall loss of biodiversity.

Remedial action is required throughout the food supply chain. While the participation of all actors in reducing the source of food waste is critical, alternative disposal methods should be utilized to avoid the environmental, economic, and social costs caused by food loss and waste.

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and processes.

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Need to touch on the remedial actions we discussed. Disposal chart etc.

Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. Though there are many benefits of an efficiency based, global food production chain, there are also many consequences. From the consumers who use the purchasing power to drive the supply chain, to the farmers who cultivate the food, there is an immense amount of food wasted due to a rise in superficial aesthetic standards in modern society. The effects of food waste are vast.

Economic costs are shared by the entire supply chain, with consumers throwing away much of the food they purchase, supermarkets throwing away the huge quantities of non-aesthetic fruits and vegetables that don’t make it to the shelves, and farmers throwing away large portions of their crop because of ____(improper storage? Audits? Necessary over estimation? Thomas?). If a shift in mindset were to allow consumers to accept slightly blemished or a-symmetrical produce they, as well as the markets and farmers who made the food available, would save a great deal of money.

The social costs are difficult to quantify and often go unnoticed, but the implications are very important. Farmers who are producing food on a small scale are being forced out of the agriculture market by large corporations who use economy-of-scale to produce food less expensively and year round. This is creating a loss of jobs for many farmers who have dedicated their lives to cultivating their land in order to feed their local communities. Furthermore, consumers are often unaware of the social costs associated with their insistence on cosmetically perfect produce. The ideals that a consumer deserves perfect produce has contributed to a consumer society, which is willing to make huge environmental sacrifices for the sake of buying something aesthetically pleasing This mindset can be modified only through the education of consumers, and by increasing their awareness that the products they purchase may come at an extremely high cost, regardless of their affordability.

The environmental costs of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are paramount. In a time when our food production practices are simply unsustainable, food waste is a bad habit that humans cannot afford. Arable land is being degraded by large-scale agriculture at an alarming rate, which, with additional environmental stresses associated with climate change, will make it very difficult for farmers to produce the necessary food to support our growing population. On top of this, runoff fertilizers are contributing to oceanic dead zones, and massive amounts of rainforest are being cleared to support agriculture globally. A reduction in food wastage will certainly help to ease the pressure of these environmental impacts, but large-scale agriculture has intrinsic environmental costs. Organizations such as ___ are creating a culture that celebrates small-scale local farming, and with education of consumers our food production may be able to shift back towards smaller, more sustainably managed farms.

There are many ways our society can improve to create a more sustainable food system. It starts with a change in mind set and education of the general public. This will have positive effects that ripple through the supply chain. A social movement towards sustainably harvested produce will allow super markets to stock a variety of produce while minimizing their waste, and ultimately, contribute to a shift towards local food production which will drastically reduce our unnecessary waste.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-08T03:11:27Z

ThomasLawson: /* Environmental */

4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. Food loss is defined as the edible food that is lost throughout production, postharvest, and processing, whereas, food waste refers to edible food lost at the end of the food chain due to behaviour of retailers and consumers<ref name="FAOloss"/>. Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, while consumers throw away only 6-11 kg per year in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia <ref name="FAO key"/>. Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> , however, the consumers' demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributors, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.
[[File:Carrots.png|frame|Source: Imperfect Produce.
These carrots do not meet market standards because they considered to be 'too crooked'.]]

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency-driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the [http://%20https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution Green Revolution], agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small-scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains, and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, consumers, markets, and farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drives demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers' convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free'<ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

Supermarkets are concerned with creating a reliable image that customers can trust. One of the ways they create this image is by providing shelves filled with fresh food, but customers often do not see the unsustainable methods used to create this reputation. Many times, markets throw away perfectly good produce because consumers misinterpret the purpose of sell-by dates and assume that after these dates products are not good for consumption. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>. Markets also use overstocking as a strategy to create an image of always having more than enough. Because of the low cost of discarding food, especially for fruits and vegetables in comparison to meat and dairy, markets often feel complacent about ordering more than can be sold and discard the rest<ref name="EU"/>. This practice creates pressure for farmers to produce large yields to meet this demand and keep up with competition leading to less concern about sustainable agriculture practices.

Supply chain inefficiencies between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often over plant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large-scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land<ref name="intensive">The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, Intensive farming, 2009, https://www.britannica.com/topic/intensive-agriculture, accessed April 7, 2017</ref>.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. The majority of farm-level food loss is due to over harvesting. Farmers will often over estimate their harvest size when planting to ensure that a crop loss, resulting from any number of biotic or abiotic factors, does not inhibit them from filling their orders. If a healthy crop yield is obtained, this will result in excess produce that does not have a buyer and is often thrown away. Small blemishes which occur during harvest and while processing the food are another contributor to food loss on farms. Produce is handled many times after it is pulled from the ground, and at every step there is an opportunity for produce to be bruised, punctured, or overexposed to the sun. This produce will not meet a quality inspection and be thrown out, regardless of how superficial the blemish may be. Produce that is not sold, or doesn't make grade, may be cycled back into the soil through composting, but is often disposed of in landfills as a less expensive alternative.

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)

Often when farming practices are being applied to a certain location there are environmental impacts when the land is initially converted primarily in terms habitat destruction and biodiversity loss and secondly, impacts due to stresses on the land, which degrade soils and cause erosion. Land conversion is the first step in most agricultural practices. In Developing countries, conversion of land is responsible for 72 percent of biodiversity loss, on the other hand, 44 percent is responsible for developed countries. (FAO) The higher percentage of biodiversity loss is due to the high amounts of deforestation. (FAO) Fifty five percent of new agricultural land in low income regions was created from where a forest stood last. (FAO) The land conversion factor that destroys biodiversity is classified by the FAO at a ecosystem and a species level. For produce that is diverse like fruit, there is a diverse crop location. Although the conversion affected the ecosystem by destroying it, many species are able to survive in the diverse crops therefor maintaining species biodiversity. (FAO) On the other hand, a crop that is simple will cause ecosystem and species biodiversity loss because the crop doesn't offer habitat for a range of species. (FAO) The pressure agricultural land faces once it has been converted results in further degradation. The FAO classifies land in three categories regarding land degradation; strong, medium and low, further more the FAO classifies land degradation as " [...] reduction of land capacity to provide ecosystems good and services over a period of time for its beneficiaries." The FAO notes that 99 percent of food loss is occurring on strong land degradation sites. The inefficient food loss tied into the high degradation results in a significant amount of stress and pressure on that land. When land is facing immense pressure, erosion is likely to occur due to over ploughing. (WWF) Erosion by wind or excess water will remove nutrient rich top soil and reduce the fertility of soil. (WWF) In extreme cases, places like Brazil loose 55 million tons of top soil annually. (WWF) The loss of soil fertility causes a reduction in harvesting and forces farmers to expand their agricultural practices resulting in a detrimental cycle.(WWF)

*Loss of arable land (7) <ref name="footprint">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Food wastage footprint impacts on natural resources, 2013.</ref> land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest
*soil degradation (8)
*habitat destruction/deforestation etc.
*biodiversity loss (4) [[File:Fao.png|400px|right|FAO: food waste as a country]]

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>.
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide<ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

===Economic===

There are many parts along the food supply chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive. Excess produce refers to fruits and vegetables that are planted and harvested for sale, yet never get consumed due to imperfect appearances.

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 of food that's purchased per household is not consumed per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses. By only purchasing food that they will consume, households could potentially save hundreds of dollars per year. This incentive not only makes sense economically, but it will also lessen environmental impacts.

Roughly $5.8 billion fruits and $9.2 billion vegetables are lost at the retail level from the US food supply annually<ref>Buzby, J. C., Hyman, J., Stewart, H., & Wells, H. F., The value of retail‐and consumer‐level fruit and vegetable losses in the United States. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 2011, p. 492-515.</ref>. Supermarkets do not consider this as a loss of money because they view overstocked shelves as part of the consumer experience. If the food waste for a market is low, they consider it an indicator that consumers did not get the experience the markets strive for. So although these numbers are high, markets do not view it as a cost but rather as an investment in marketing.

Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm <ref name="footprint"/>. The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill <ref name="Goldernberg">Goldernberg S., The Guardian: Half of all US food produce is thrown away, new research suggests, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1, accessed April 7, 2017.</ref>. This is due to unintentional producer surplus where farmers try to meet the demand of markets. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost<ref name="intensive"/>. Since farmers don't receive a cheque for food that is audited or unused, the resources used to produce the food lost results in farmers needlessly spending money on resources. The accumulated waste of resources on unused product forces farmers to bear marginal returns on their product because they are not getting reimbursed for the food that does not go to market<ref>Gravely, E. The hidden cost of perfect produce, Waterloo Region Food Systems, January 23, 2015.</ref>.

===Social===

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many local small-scale production farmers. Farms are working to match consumer demand but not all producers are able to meet required quotas. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. Because volume production is much higher from large-scale producers, they can offer more desirable quantities of produce. Local organic farmers don't have the resources such as labour and technology that allows for mass production and availability of aesthetically desirable produce. This intimidating, stressful, and often unfeasible market for local farmers is decreasing the number of firms in the market. Fewer people are going into small-scale production careers, especially young people. This forces close-to-retiring farmers to stop their current production because no one will fill up their jobs once they retire. As a result, retiring local farmers are forced to sell their land to large industries, who may implement high food loss production methods while trying to achieve mass production. 66 There is a magnitude of problems that both local and large scale production farmers face, but local farmers don't have the volume to sell produce after the food loss, and it inhibits many locals from partaking in the agricultural markets. Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather. In addition, high winds or intense sun rays can alter the appearance of produce, which can ruin its opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its nutritional value. <ref>Goldernberg S., The Guardian: Half of all US food produce is thrown away, new research suggests, Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 </ref> . Another factor for food loss is strict food audits. Farmers that don’t have large-scale production can't sell all a portion of their products due to small bruises and blemishes that don't meet the aesthetic requirements from produce buyers. 14.

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviors. Cultural trends towards consumerism, in conjunction with higher levels of disposable incomes, has resulted in overspending and overbuying by members of modern society. Buyers with a higher income can now afford to spend lots of money on food, so wasted food doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it. These consumers often take the apparent abundance and availability of produce for granted. Because grocery stores are always so well stocked, consumers rarely associate scarcity as a prominent issue. Due to a lack of education, consumers remain generally uninformed about the worries and concerns that the food supply industry faces.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1. EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from the demand created by their everyday habits. As the concern of food loss and food waste rises, efforts to raise awareness become critical as the change in consumer attitudes and demand accelerates markets efforts to respond and, in turn, farmers to respond to markets. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. Many of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with more information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce and resources wasted. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information, such as the use of sell-by dates, is clear to help educate and inform purchasers. Supermarkets can also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer standards <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level can contribute to reducing overall emissions. Canadian cities such as Vancouver, Ottawa, and Toronto have seen remarkable landfill waste decreases after implementing a weekly collection of organic waste<ref>Mustapha, I., Composting by households in Canada, Statistics Canada, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/16-002-x/2013001/article/11848-eng.htm, accessed April 7th, 2017</ref>. Households are much more likely to compost if it's provided for them, since it is a user friendly process that does not require much time or responsibility.

As consumers become more aware of the consequences of food waste, leading to a result in a shift of demand, supermarkets have opportunities to market towards this by showing sustainable practices and building consumer confidence. Supermarkets in Europe are already taking the initiative on reducing food waste, in 2014, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try. On average, 2.1 tons of fruits and vegetables were sold per store in the first two days.<ref>Monaco, E., 3 food waste facts about France's ugly produce campaign, Organic Authority, September 3, 2014.</ref>

Donation of edible food that is no longer considered marketable is one way retail can divert food from landfills<ref name="Schneider"/>. Although some businesses are concerned about liability, the Donation of Food Act, in Canada, and the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, in the United States, protect contributors. Donations can be tax deductible giving the incentive to avoid landfill disposal costs. While food donation is becoming a popular alternative to food waste, it is important to remember that reducing the source is the primary goal.

Until demands are modified, there are ways for farmers to change their production methods while still being able to generate enough produce to meet current demands. Producers of fruits and vegetables are usually either local companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful to the environment but do not yield a feasible harvest. There have been two methods to address the arising issues of growing demand of agriculture and habitat destruction causing loss of biodiversity. Land sparing suggests intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation<ref name="Green">Green, R.E, Cornell, S.J., Scharlemann, J.P.W., & Balmford, A., Farming and the fate of wild nature, Science, 2005, p. 550-555.</ref>. This non-integrated approach allows for land to be used strictly for mass production, while still allowing biodiversity in other areas to flourish without the stress of habitat loss. Alternatively, land sharing is a less intense way of farming that mitigates habitat destruction while still producing food<ref name="Green"/>. Agriculture will grow in areas where organisms are able to live and therefore share the land together. This concept requires more land but promises less habitat destruction and overall loss of biodiversity.

Remedial action is required throughout the food supply chain. While the participation of all actors in reducing the source of food waste is critical, alternative disposal methods should be utilized to avoid the environmental, economic, and social costs caused by food loss and waste.

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and processes.

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Need to touch on the remedial actions we discussed. Disposal chart etc.

Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. Though there are many benefits of an efficiency based, global food production chain, there are also many consequences. From the consumers who use the purchasing power to drive the supply chain, to the farmers who cultivate the food, there is an immense amount of food wasted due to a rise in superficial aesthetic standards in modern society. The effects of food waste are vast.

Economic costs are shared by the entire supply chain, with consumers throwing away much of the food they purchase, supermarkets throwing away the huge quantities of non-aesthetic fruits and vegetables that don’t make it to the shelves, and farmers throwing away large portions of their crop because of ____(improper storage? Audits? Necessary over estimation? Thomas?). If a shift in mindset were to allow consumers to accept slightly blemished or a-symmetrical produce they, as well as the markets and farmers who made the food available, would save a great deal of money.

The social costs are difficult to quantify and often go unnoticed, but the implications are very important. Farmers who are producing food on a small scale are being forced out of the agriculture market by large corporations who use economy-of-scale to produce food less expensively and year round. This is creating a loss of jobs for many farmers who have dedicated their lives to cultivating their land in order to feed their local communities. Furthermore, consumers are often unaware of the social costs associated with their insistence on cosmetically perfect produce. The ideals that a consumer deserves perfect produce has contributed to a consumer society, which is willing to make huge environmental sacrifices for the sake of buying something aesthetically pleasing This mindset can be modified only through the education of consumers, and by increasing their awareness that the products they purchase may come at an extremely high cost, regardless of their affordability.

The environmental costs of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are paramount. In a time when our food production practices are simply unsustainable, food waste is a bad habit that humans cannot afford. Arable land is being degraded by large-scale agriculture at an alarming rate, which, with additional environmental stresses associated with climate change, will make it very difficult for farmers to produce the necessary food to support our growing population. On top of this, runoff fertilizers are contributing to oceanic dead zones, and massive amounts of rainforest are being cleared to support agriculture globally. A reduction in food wastage will certainly help to ease the pressure of these environmental impacts, but large-scale agriculture has intrinsic environmental costs. Organizations such as ___ are creating a culture that celebrates small-scale local farming, and with education of consumers our food production may be able to shift back towards smaller, more sustainably managed farms.

There are many ways our society can improve to create a more sustainable food system. It starts with a change in mind set and education of the general public. This will have positive effects that ripple through the supply chain. A social movement towards sustainably harvested produce will allow super markets to stock a variety of produce while minimizing their waste, and ultimately, contribute to a shift towards local food production which will drastically reduce our unnecessary waste.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-08T03:01:56Z

ThomasLawson: /* Environmental */

4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. Food loss is defined as the edible food that is lost throughout production, postharvest, and processing, whereas, food waste refers to edible food lost at the end of the food chain due to behaviour of retailers and consumers<ref name="FAOloss"/>. Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, while consumers throw away only 6-11 kg per year in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia <ref name="FAO key"/>. Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> , however, the consumers' demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributors, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.
[[File:Carrots.png|frame|Source:Imperfect Produce.
These carrots do not meet market standards because they considered to be 'too crooked'.]]

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency-driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the [http://%20https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution Green Revolution], agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small-scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains, and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, consumers, markets, and farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drives demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers' convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free'<ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

Supermarkets are concerned with creating a reliable image that customers can trust. One of the ways they create this image is by providing shelves filled with fresh food, but customers often do not see the unsustainable methods used to create this reputation. Many times, markets throw away perfectly good produce because consumers misinterpret the purpose of sell-by dates and assume that after these dates products are not good for consumption. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>. Markets also use overstocking as a strategy to create an image of always having more than enough. Because of the low cost of discarding food, especially for fruits and vegetables in comparison to meat and dairy, markets often feel complacent about ordering more than can be sold and discard the rest<ref name="EU"/>. This practice creates pressure for farmers to produce large yields to meet this demand and keep up with competition leading to less concern about sustainable agriculture practices.

Supply chain inefficiencies between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often over plant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large-scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land<ref name="intensive">The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, Intensive farming, 2009, https://www.britannica.com/topic/intensive-agriculture, accessed April 7, 2017</ref>.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. The majority of farm-level food loss is due to over harvesting. Farmers will often over estimate their harvest size when planting to ensure that a crop loss, resulting from any number of biotic or abiotic factors, does not inhibit them from filling their orders. If a healthy crop yield is obtained, this will result in excess produce that does not have a buyer and is often thrown away. Small blemishes which occur during harvest and while processing the food are another contributor to food loss on farms. Produce is handled many times after it is pulled from the ground, and at every step there is an opportunity for produce to be bruised, punctured, or overexposed to the sun. This produce will not meet a quality inspection and be thrown out, regardless of how superficial the blemish may be. Produce that is not sold, or doesn't make grade, may be cycled back into the soil through composting, but is often disposed of in landfills as a less expensive alternative.

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)

Often when farming practices are being applied to a certain location there are environmental impacts when the land is initially converted usually in terms habitat destruction and biodiversity loss and secondly, impacts due to stresses on the land, which degrade soils and cause erosion. Land conversion is the first step in most agricultural practices. In Developing countries, conversion of land is responsible for 72 percent of biodiversity loss, on the other hand, 44 percent is responsible for developed countries. (FAO) The higher percentage of biodiversity loss is due to the high amounts of deforestation. (FAO) Fifty five percent of new agricultural land in low income regions was created from where a forest stood last. (FAO) The land conversion factor that destroys biodiversity is classified by the FAO at a ecosystem and a species level. For produce that is diverse like fruit, there is a diverse crop location. Although the conversion affected the ecosystem by destroying it, many species are able to survive in the diverse crops therefor maintaining species biodiversity. (FAO) On the other hand, a crop that is simple will cause ecosystem and species biodiversity loss because the crop doesn't offer habitat for a range of species. (FAO) The pressure agricultural land faces once it has been converted results in further degradation. The FAO classifies land in three categories regarding land degradation; strong, medium and low.

*Loss of arable land (7) <ref name="footprint">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Food wastage footprint impacts on natural resources, 2013.</ref> land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest
*soil degradation (8)
*habitat destruction/deforestation etc.
*biodiversity loss (4) [[File:Fao.png|400px|right|FAO: food waste as a country]]

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>.
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide<ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

===Economic===

There are many parts along the food supply chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive. Excess produce refers to fruits and vegetables that are planted and harvested for sale, yet never get consumed due to imperfect appearances.

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 of food that's purchased per household is not consumed per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses. By only purchasing food that they will consume, households could potentially save hundreds of dollars per year. This incentive not only makes sense economically, but it will also lessen environmental impacts.

Roughly $5.8 billion fruits and $9.2 billion vegetables are lost at the retail level from the US food supply annually<ref>Buzby, J. C., Hyman, J., Stewart, H., & Wells, H. F., The value of retail‐and consumer‐level fruit and vegetable losses in the United States. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 2011, p. 492-515.</ref>. Supermarkets do not consider this as a loss of money because they view overstocked shelves as part of the consumer experience. If the food waste for a market is low, they consider it an indicator that consumers did not get the experience the markets strive for. So although these numbers are high, markets do not view it as a cost but rather as an investment in marketing.

Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm <ref name="footprint"/>. The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill <ref name="Goldernberg">Goldernberg S., The Guardian: Half of all US food produce is thrown away, new research suggests, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1, accessed April 7, 2017.</ref>. This is due to unintentional producer surplus where farmers try to meet the demand of markets. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost<ref name="intensive"/>. Since farmers don't receive a cheque for food that is audited or unused, the resources used to produce the food lost results in farmers needlessly spending money on resources. The accumulated waste of resources on unused product forces farmers to bear marginal returns on their product because they are not getting reimbursed for the food that does not go to market<ref>Gravely, E. The hidden cost of perfect produce, Waterloo Region Food Systems, January 23, 2015.</ref>.

===Social===

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many local small-scale production farmers. Farms are working to match consumer demand but not all producers are able to meet required quotas. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. Because volume production is much higher from large-scale producers, they can offer more desirable quantities of produce. Local organic farmers don't have the resources such as labour and technology that allows for mass production and availability of aesthetically desirable produce. This intimidating, stressful, and often unfeasible market for local farmers is decreasing the number of firms in the market. Fewer people are going into small-scale production careers, especially young people. This forces close-to-retiring farmers to stop their current production because no one will fill up their jobs once they retire. As a result, retiring local farmers are forced to sell their land to large industries, who may implement high food loss production methods while trying to achieve mass production. 66 There is a magnitude of problems that both local and large scale production farmers face, but local farmers don't have the volume to sell produce after the food loss, and it inhibits many locals from partaking in the agricultural markets. Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather. In addition, high winds or intense sun rays can alter the appearance of produce, which can ruin its opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its nutritional value. <ref>Goldernberg S., The Guardian: Half of all US food produce is thrown away, new research suggests, Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 </ref> . Another factor for food loss is strict food audits. Farmers that don’t have large-scale production can't sell all a portion of their products due to small bruises and blemishes that don't meet the aesthetic requirements from produce buyers. 14.

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviors. Cultural trends towards consumerism, in conjunction with higher levels of disposable incomes, has resulted in overspending and overbuying by members of modern society. Buyers with a higher income can now afford to spend lots of money on food, so wasted food doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it. These consumers often take the apparent abundance and availability of produce for granted. Because grocery stores are always so well stocked, consumers rarely associate scarcity as a prominent issue. Due to a lack of education, consumers remain generally uninformed about the worries and concerns that the food supply industry faces.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1. EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from the demand created by their everyday habits. As the concern of food loss and food waste rises, efforts to raise awareness become critical as the change in consumer attitudes and demand accelerates markets efforts to respond and, in turn, farmers to respond to markets. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. Many of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with more information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce and resources wasted. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information, such as the use of sell-by dates, is clear to help educate and inform purchasers. Supermarkets can also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer standards <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level can contribute to reducing overall emissions. Canadian cities such as Vancouver, Ottawa, and Toronto have seen remarkable landfill waste decreases after implementing a weekly collection of organic waste<ref>Mustapha, I., Composting by households in Canada, Statistics Canada, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/16-002-x/2013001/article/11848-eng.htm, accessed April 7th, 2017</ref>. Households are much more likely to compost if it's provided for them, since it is a user friendly process that does not require much time or responsibility.

As consumers become more aware of the consequences of food waste, leading to a result in a shift of demand, supermarkets have opportunities to market towards this by showing sustainable practices and building consumer confidence. Supermarkets in Europe are already taking the initiative on reducing food waste, in 2014, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try. On average, 2.1 tons of fruits and vegetables were sold per store in the first two days.<ref>Monaco, E., 3 food waste facts about France's ugly produce campaign, Organic Authority, September 3, 2014.</ref>

Donation of edible food that is no longer considered marketable is one way retail can divert food from landfills<ref name="Schneider"/>. Although some businesses are concerned about liability, the Donation of Food Act, in Canada, and the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, in the United States, protect contributors. Donations can be tax deductible giving the incentive to avoid landfill disposal costs. While food donation is becoming a popular alternative to food waste, it is important to remember that reducing the source is the primary goal.

Until demands are modified, there are ways for farmers to change their production methods while still being able to generate enough produce to meet current demands. Producers of fruits and vegetables are usually either local companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful to the environment but do not yield a feasible harvest. There have been two methods to address the arising issues of growing demand of agriculture and habitat destruction causing loss of biodiversity. Land sparing suggests intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation<ref name="Green">Green, R.E, Cornell, S.J., Scharlemann, J.P.W., & Balmford, A., Farming and the fate of wild nature, Science, 2005, p. 550-555.</ref>. This non-integrated approach allows for land to be used strictly for mass production, while still allowing biodiversity in other areas to flourish without the stress of habitat loss. Alternatively, land sharing is a less intense way of farming that mitigates habitat destruction while still producing food<ref name="Green"/>. Agriculture will grow in areas where organisms are able to live and therefore share the land together. This concept requires more land but promises less habitat destruction and overall loss of biodiversity.

Remedial action is required throughout the food supply chain. While the participation of all actors in reducing the source of food waste is critical, alternative disposal methods should be utilized to avoid the environmental, economic, and social costs caused by food loss and waste.

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and processes.

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Need to touch on the remedial actions we discussed. Disposal chart etc.

Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. Though there are many benefits of an efficiency based, global food production chain, there are also many consequences. From the consumers who use the purchasing power to drive the supply chain, to the farmers who cultivate the food, there is an immense amount of food wasted due to a rise in superficial aesthetic standards in modern society. The effects of food waste are vast.

Economic costs are shared by the entire supply chain, with consumers throwing away much of the food they purchase, supermarkets throwing away the huge quantities of non-aesthetic fruits and vegetables that don’t make it to the shelves, and farmers throwing away large portions of their crop because of ____(improper storage? Audits? Necessary over estimation? Thomas?). If a shift in mindset were to allow consumers to accept slightly blemished or a-symmetrical produce they, as well as the markets and farmers who made the food available, would save a great deal of money.

The social costs are difficult to quantify and often go unnoticed, but the implications are very important. Farmers who are producing food on a small scale are being forced out of the agriculture market by large corporations who use economy-of-scale to produce food less expensively and year round. This is creating a loss of jobs for many farmers who have dedicated their lives to cultivating their land in order to feed their local communities. Furthermore, consumers are often unaware of the social costs associated with their insistence on cosmetically perfect produce. The ideals that a consumer deserves perfect produce has contributed to a consumer society, which is willing to make huge environmental sacrifices for the sake of buying something aesthetically pleasing This mindset can be modified only through the education of consumers, and by increasing their awareness that the products they purchase may come at an extremely high cost, regardless of their affordability.

The environmental costs of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are paramount. In a time when our food production practices are simply unsustainable, food waste is a bad habit that humans cannot afford. Arable land is being degraded by large-scale agriculture at an alarming rate, which, with additional environmental stresses associated with climate change, will make it very difficult for farmers to produce the necessary food to support our growing population. On top of this, runoff fertilizers are contributing to oceanic dead zones, and massive amounts of rainforest are being cleared to support agriculture globally. A reduction in food wastage will certainly help to ease the pressure of these environmental impacts, but large-scale agriculture has intrinsic environmental costs. Organizations such as ___ are creating a culture that celebrates small-scale local farming, and with education of consumers our food production may be able to shift back towards smaller, more sustainably managed farms.

There are many ways our society can improve to create a more sustainable food system. It starts with a change in mind set and education of the general public. This will have positive effects that ripple through the supply chain. A social movement towards sustainably harvested produce will allow super markets to stock a variety of produce while minimizing their waste, and ultimately, contribute to a shift towards local food production which will drastically reduce our unnecessary waste.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-08T03:00:13Z

ThomasLawson: /* Environmental */

4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. Food loss is defined as the edible food that is lost throughout production, postharvest, and processing, whereas, food waste refers to edible food lost at the end of the food chain due to behaviour of retailers and consumers<ref name="FAOloss"/>. Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, while consumers throw away only 6-11 kg per year in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia <ref name="FAO key"/>. Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> , however, the consumers' demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributors, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.
[[File:Carrots.png|frame|Source: Imperfect ProduceThis is an example of perfectly edible carrots that were considered too crooked to make it to the market.]]

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency-driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the [http://%20https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution Green Revolution], agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small-scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains, and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, consumers, markets, and farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drives demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers' convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free'<ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

Supermarkets are concerned with creating a reliable image that customers can trust. One of the ways they create this image is by providing shelves filled with fresh food, but customers often do not see the unsustainable methods used to create this reputation. Many times, markets throw away perfectly good produce because consumers misinterpret the purpose of sell-by dates and assume that after these dates products are not good for consumption. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>. Markets also use overstocking as a strategy to create an image of always having more than enough. Because of the low cost of discarding food, especially for fruits and vegetables in comparison to meat and dairy, markets often feel complacent about ordering more than can be sold and discard the rest<ref name="EU"/>. This practice creates pressure for farmers to produce large yields to meet this demand and keep up with competition leading to less concern about sustainable agriculture practices.

Supply chain inefficiencies between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often over plant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large-scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land<ref name="intensive">The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, Intensive farming, 2009, https://www.britannica.com/topic/intensive-agriculture, accessed April 7, 2017</ref>.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. The majority of farm-level food loss is due to over harvesting. Farmers will often over estimate their harvest size when planting to ensure that a crop loss, resulting from any number of biotic or abiotic factors, does not inhibit them from filling their orders. If a healthy crop yield is obtained, this will result in excess produce that does not have a buyer and is often thrown away. Small blemishes which occur during harvest and while processing the food are another contributor to food loss on farms. Produce is handled many times after it is pulled from the ground, and at every step there is an opportunity for produce to be bruised, punctured, or overexposed to the sun. This produce will not meet a quality inspection and be thrown out, regardless of how superficial the blemish may be. Produce that is not sold, or doesn't make grade, may be cycled back into the soil through composting, but is often disposed of in landfills as a less expensive alternative.

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)

Often when farming practices are being applied to a certain location there are environmental impacts when the land is initially converted usually in terms habitat destruction and biodiversity loss and secondly, impacts due to stresses on the land, which degrade soils and cause erosion. Land conversion is the first step in most agricultural practices. In Developing countries, conversion of land is responsible for 72 percent of biodiversity loss, on the other hand, 44 percent is responsible for developed countries. (FAO) The higher percentage of biodiversity loss is due to the high amounts of deforestation. (FAO) Fifty five percent of new agricultural land in low income regions was created from where a forest stood last. (FAO) The land conversion factor that destroys biodiversity is classified by the FAO at a ecosystem and a species level. For produce that is diverse like fruit, there is a diverse crop location. Although the conversion affected the ecosystem by destroying it, many species are able to survive in the diverse crops therefor maintaining species biodiversity. (FAO) On the other hand, a crop that is simple will cause ecosystem and species biodiversity loss because the crop doesn't offer habitat for a range of species. (FAO) The pressure agricultural land faces once it has been converted results in further degradation.

*Loss of arable land (7) <ref name="footprint">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Food wastage footprint impacts on natural resources, 2013.</ref> land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest
*soil degradation (8)
*habitat destruction/deforestation etc.
*biodiversity loss (4) [[File:Fao.png|400px|right|FAO: food waste as a country]]

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>.
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide<ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

===Economic===

There are many parts along the food supply chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive. Excess produce refers to fruits and vegetables that are planted and harvested for sale, yet never get consumed due to imperfect appearances.

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 of food that's purchased per household is not consumed per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses. By only purchasing food that they will consume, households could potentially save hundreds of dollars per year. This incentive not only makes sense economically, but it will also lessen environmental impacts.

Roughly $5.8 billion fruits and $9.2 billion vegetables are lost at the retail level from the US food supply annually<ref>Buzby, J. C., Hyman, J., Stewart, H., & Wells, H. F., The value of retail‐and consumer‐level fruit and vegetable losses in the United States. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 2011, p. 492-515.</ref>. Supermarkets do not consider this as a loss of money because they view overstocked shelves as part of the consumer experience. If the food waste for a market is low, they consider it an indicator that consumers did not get the experience the markets strive for. So although these numbers are high, markets do not view it as a cost but rather as an investment in marketing.

Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm <ref name="footprint"/>. The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill <ref name="Goldernberg">Goldernberg S., The Guardian: Half of all US food produce is thrown away, new research suggests, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1, accessed April 7, 2017.</ref>. This is due to unintentional producer surplus where farmers try to meet the demand of markets. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost<ref name="intensive"/>. Since farmers don't receive a cheque for food that is audited or unused, the resources used to produce the food lost results in farmers needlessly spending money on resources. The accumulated waste of resources on unused product forces farmers to bear marginal returns on their product because they are not getting reimbursed for the food that does not go to market<ref>Gravely, E. The hidden cost of perfect produce, Waterloo Region Food Systems, January 23, 2015.</ref>.

===Social===

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many local small-scale production farmers. Farms are working to match consumer demand but not all producers are able to meet required quotas. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. Because volume production is much higher from large-scale producers, they can offer more desirable quantities of produce. Local organic farmers don't have the resources such as labour and technology that allows for mass production and availability of aesthetically desirable produce. This intimidating, stressful, and often unfeasible market for local farmers is decreasing the number of firms in the market. Fewer people are going into small-scale production careers, especially young people. This forces close-to-retiring farmers to stop their current production because no one will fill up their jobs once they retire. As a result, retiring local farmers are forced to sell their land to large industries, who may implement high food loss production methods while trying to achieve mass production. 66 There is a magnitude of problems that both local and large scale production farmers face, but local farmers don't have the volume to sell produce after the food loss, and it inhibits many locals from partaking in the agricultural markets. Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather. In addition, high winds or intense sun rays can alter the appearance of produce, which can ruin its opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its nutritional value. <ref>Goldernberg S., The Guardian: Half of all US food produce is thrown away, new research suggests, Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 </ref> . Another factor for food loss is strict food audits. Farmers that don’t have large-scale production can't sell all a portion of their products due to small bruises and blemishes that don't meet the aesthetic requirements from produce buyers. 14.

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviors. Cultural trends towards consumerism, in conjunction with higher levels of disposable incomes, has resulted in overspending and overbuying by members of modern society. Buyers with a higher income can now afford to spend lots of money on food, so wasted food doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it. These consumers often take the apparent abundance and availability of produce for granted. Because grocery stores are always so well stocked, consumers rarely associate scarcity as a prominent issue. Due to a lack of education, consumers remain generally uninformed about the worries and concerns that the food supply industry faces.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1. EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from the demand created by their everyday habits. As the concern of food loss and food waste rises, efforts to raise awareness become critical as the change in consumer attitudes and demand accelerates markets efforts to respond and, in turn, farmers to respond to markets. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. Many of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with more information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce and resources wasted. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information, such as the use of sell-by dates, is clear to help educate and inform purchasers. Supermarkets can also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer standards <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level can contribute to reducing overall emissions. Canadian cities such as Vancouver, Ottawa, and Toronto have seen remarkable landfill waste decreases after implementing a weekly collection of organic waste<ref>Mustapha, I., Composting by households in Canada, Statistics Canada, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/16-002-x/2013001/article/11848-eng.htm, accessed April 7th, 2017</ref>. Households are much more likely to compost if it's provided for them, since it is a user friendly process that does not require much time or responsibility.

As consumers become more aware of the consequences of food waste, leading to a result in a shift of demand, supermarkets have opportunities to market towards this by showing sustainable practices and building consumer confidence. Supermarkets in Europe are already taking the initiative on reducing food waste, in 2014, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try. On average, 2.1 tons of fruits and vegetables were sold per store in the first two days.<ref>Monaco, E., 3 food waste facts about France's ugly produce campaign, Organic Authority, September 3, 2014.</ref>

Donation of edible food that is no longer considered marketable is one way retail can divert food from landfills<ref name="Schneider"/>. Although some businesses are concerned about liability, the Donation of Food Act, in Canada, and the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, in the United States, protect contributors. Donations can be tax deductible giving the incentive to avoid landfill disposal costs. While food donation is becoming a popular alternative to food waste, it is important to remember that reducing the source is the primary goal.

Until demands are modified, there are ways for farmers to change their production methods while still being able to generate enough produce to meet current demands. Producers of fruits and vegetables are usually either local companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful to the environment but do not yield a feasible harvest. There have been two methods to address the arising issues of growing demand of agriculture and habitat destruction causing loss of biodiversity. Land sparing suggests intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation<ref name="Green">Green, R.E, Cornell, S.J., Scharlemann, J.P.W., & Balmford, A., Farming and the fate of wild nature, Science, 2005, p. 550-555.</ref>. This non-integrated approach allows for land to be used strictly for mass production, while still allowing biodiversity in other areas to flourish without the stress of habitat loss. Alternatively, land sharing is a less intense way of farming that mitigates habitat destruction while still producing food<ref name="Green"/>. Agriculture will grow in areas where organisms are able to live and therefore share the land together. This concept requires more land but promises less habitat destruction and overall loss of biodiversity.

Remedial action is required throughout the food supply chain. While the participation of all actors in reducing the source of food waste is critical, alternative disposal methods should be utilized to avoid the environmental, economic, and social costs caused by food loss and waste.

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and processes.

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Need to touch on the remedial actions we discussed. Disposal chart etc.

Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. Though there are many benefits of an efficiency based, global food production chain, there are also many consequences. From the consumers who use the purchasing power to drive the supply chain, to the farmers who cultivate the food, there is an immense amount of food wasted due to a rise in superficial aesthetic standards in modern society. The effects of food waste are vast.

Economic costs are shared by the entire supply chain, with consumers throwing away much of the food they purchase, supermarkets throwing away the huge quantities of non-aesthetic fruits and vegetables that don’t make it to the shelves, and farmers throwing away large portions of their crop because of ____(improper storage? Audits? Necessary over estimation? Thomas?). If a shift in mindset were to allow consumers to accept slightly blemished or a-symmetrical produce they, as well as the markets and farmers who made the food available, would save a great deal of money.

The social costs are difficult to quantify and often go unnoticed, but the implications are very important. Farmers who are producing food on a small scale are being forced out of the agriculture market by large corporations who use economy-of-scale to produce food less expensively and year round. This is creating a loss of jobs for many farmers who have dedicated their lives to cultivating their land in order to feed their local communities. Furthermore, consumers are often unaware of the social costs associated with their insistence on cosmetically perfect produce. The ideals that a consumer deserves perfect produce has contributed to a consumer society, which is willing to make huge environmental sacrifices for the sake of buying something aesthetically pleasing This mindset can be modified only through the education of consumers, and by increasing their awareness that the products they purchase may come at an extremely high cost, regardless of their affordability.

The environmental costs of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are paramount. In a time when our food production practices are simply unsustainable, food waste is a bad habit that humans cannot afford. Arable land is being degraded by large-scale agriculture at an alarming rate, which, with additional environmental stresses associated with climate change, will make it very difficult for farmers to produce the necessary food to support our growing population. On top of this, runoff fertilizers are contributing to oceanic dead zones, and massive amounts of rainforest are being cleared to support agriculture globally. A reduction in food wastage will certainly help to ease the pressure of these environmental impacts, but large-scale agriculture has intrinsic environmental costs. Organizations such as ___ are creating a culture that celebrates small-scale local farming, and with education of consumers our food production may be able to shift back towards smaller, more sustainably managed farms.

There are many ways our society can improve to create a more sustainable food system. It starts with a change in mind set and education of the general public. This will have positive effects that ripple through the supply chain. A social movement towards sustainably harvested produce will allow super markets to stock a variety of produce while minimizing their waste, and ultimately, contribute to a shift towards local food production which will drastically reduce our unnecessary waste.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-08T01:20:15Z

ThomasLawson: /* Costs */

4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. Food loss is defined as the edible food that is lost throughout production, postharvest, and processing, whereas, food waste refers to edible food lost at the end of the food chain due to behaviour of retailers and consumers<ref name="FAOloss"/>. Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, while consumers throw away only 6-11 kg per year in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia <ref name="FAO key"/>. Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> , however, the consumers' demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributors, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency-driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the [http://%20https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution Green Revolution], agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small-scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains, and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, consumers, markets, and farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drives demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers' convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free'<ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

Supermarkets are concerned with creating a reliable image that customers can trust. One of the ways they create this image is by providing shelves filled with fresh food, but customers often do not see the unsustainable methods used to create this reputation. Many times, markets throw away perfectly good produce because consumers misinterpret the purpose of sell-by dates and assume that after these dates products are not good for consumption. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>. Markets also use overstocking as a strategy to create an image of always having more than enough. Because of the low cost of discarding food, especially for fruits and vegetables in comparison to meat and dairy, markets often feel complacent about ordering more than can be sold and discard the rest<ref name="EU"/>. This practice creates pressure for farmers to produce large yields to meet this demand and keep up with competition leading to less concern about sustainable agriculture practices.

Supply chain inefficiencies between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often overplant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large-scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. <ref>The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, Intensive farming, 2009, https://www.britannica.com/topic/intensive-agriculture, accessed April 7, 2017</ref> "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. The majority of farm-level food loss is due to over harvesting. Farmers will often over estimate their harvest size when planting to ensure that a crop loss, resulting from any number of biotic or abiotic factors, does not inhibit them from filling their orders. If a healthy crop yield is obtained, this will result in excess produce that does not have a buyer and is often thrown away. Small blemishes which occur during harvest and while processing the food are another contributor to food loss on farms. Produce is handled many times after it is pulled from the ground, and at every step there is an opportunity for produce to be bruised, punctured, or overexposed to the sun. This produce will not meet a quality inspection and be thrown out, regardless of how superficial the blemish may be. Produce that is not sold, or doesn't make grade, may be cycled back into the soil through composting, but is often disposed of in landfills as a less expensive alternative.

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)
*Loss of arable land (7) <ref name="footprint">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Food wastage footprint impacts on natural resources, 2013.</ref> land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest
*soil degradation (8)
*habitat destruction/deforestation etc.
**biodiversity loss (4) [[File:Fao.png|400px|right|FAO: food waste as a country]]

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>.
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide<ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

===Economic===

There are many parts along the food supply chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive. Excess produce refers to fruits and vegetables that are planted and harvested for sale, yet never get consumed due to imperfect appearances.

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food that purchased per household is not consumed per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses. By only purchasing food that they will consume, households could potentially save hundreds of dollars per year. This incentive not only makes sense economically, but it will also lessen environmental impacts.

Roughly $5.8 billion fruits and $9.2 billion vegetables are lost at the retail level from the US food supply anually<ref>Buzby, J. C., Hyman, J., Stewart, H., & Wells, H. F., The value of retail‐and consumer‐level fruit and vegetable losses in the United States. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 2011, p. 492-515.</ref>.

Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm 9 . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill <ref>Goldernberg S., The Guardian: Half of all US food produce is thrown away, new research suggests, Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 </ref>. This is due to unintentional producer surplus where farmers try to meet the demand of markets. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost 10. Since farmers don't receive a cheque for food that is audited or unused, the resources used to produce the food lost results in farmers needlessly spending money on resources. The accumulated waste of resources on unused product forces farmers to bear marginal returns on their product because they are not getting reimbursed for the food that doesn't go to market. 55.

===Social===

While the environmental and economic factors can be measured, there are also significant social costs that exist within the food supply chain.

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many local small-scale production farmers. Farms are working to match consumer demand but not all producers are able to meet required quotas. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. Because volume production is much higher from large-scale producers, they can offer more desirable quantities of produce. Local organic farmers don't have the resources such as labour and technology that allows for mass production and availability of aesthetically desirable produce. This intimidating, stressful, and often unfeasible market for local farmers is decreasing the number of firms in the market. Fewer people are going into small-scale production careers, especially young people. This forces close-to-retiring farmers to stop their current production because no one will fill up their jobs once they retire. As a result, retiring local farmers are forced to sell their land to large industries, who may implement high food loss production methods while trying to achieve mass production. 66 There is a magnitude of problems that both local and large scale production farmers face, but local farmers don't have the volume to sell produce after the food loss, and it inhibits many locals from partaking in the agricultural markets. Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather. In addition, high winds or intense sun rays can alter the appearance of produce, which can ruin its opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its nutritional value. <ref>Goldernberg S., The Guardian: Half of all US food produce is thrown away, new research suggests, Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 </ref> . Another factor for food loss is strict food audits. Farmers that don’t have large-scale production can't sell all a portion of their products due to small bruises and blemishes that don't meet the aesthetic requirements from produce buyers. 14.

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviours. Cultural consumerism and higher disposable incomes result in overspending and overbuying. Buyers with a higher income can afford to spend lots of money on food, so when it gets wasted it doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it.
When asked about throwing away once perfectly edible fruits and vegetables, consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste <ref name="c3"/>, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere. Consumers often take the abundance and availability of produce for granted. Because grocery stores are always so well stocked, consumers rarely associate scarcity as a prominent issue. Due to a lack of education, consumers remain generally uninformed about the worries and concerns that the food supply industry faces <ref name="c3"/>.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1. EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from the demand created by their everyday habits. As the concern of food loss and food waste rises, efforts to raise awareness become critical as the change in consumer attitudes and demand accelerates markets efforts to respond and, in turn, farmers to respond to markets. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. Many of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with more information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce and resources wasted. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information, such as the use of sell-by dates, is clear to help educate and inform purchasers. Supermarkets can also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer standards <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level can contribute to reducing overall emissions. Canadian cities such as Vancouver, Ottawa, and Toronto have seen remarkable landfill waste decreases after implementing a weekly collection of organic waste<ref>Mustapha, I., Composting by households in Canada, Statistics Canada, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/16-002-x/2013001/article/11848-eng.htm, accessed April 7th, 2017</ref>. Households are much more likely to compost if it's provided for them, since it is a user friendly process that does not require much time or responsibility.

As consumers become more aware of the consequences of food waste, leading to a result in a shift of demand, supermarkets have opportunities to market towards this by showing sustainable practices and building consumer confidence. Supermarkets in Europe are already taking the initiative on reducing food waste, in 2014, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try. On average, 2.1 tons of fruits and vegetables were sold per store in the first two days.<ref>Monaco, E., 3 food waste facts about France's ugly produce campaign, Organic Authority, September 3, 2014.</ref>

Donation of edible food that is no longer considered marketable is one way retail can divert food from landfills<ref name="Schneider"/>. Although some businesses are concerned about liability, the Donation of Food Act, in Canada, and the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, in the United States, protect contributors. Donations can be tax deductible giving the incentive to avoid landfill disposal costs. While food donation is becoming a popular alternative to food waste, it is important to remember that reducing the source is the primary goal.

Until demands are modified, there are ways for farmers to change their production methods while still being able to generate enough produce to meet current demands. Producers of fruits and vegetables are usually either local companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful to the environment but do not yield a feasible harvest. There have been two methods to address the arising issues of growing demand of agriculture and habitat destruction causing loss of biodiversity. Land sparing suggests intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation<ref name="Green">Green, R.E, Cornell, S.J., Scharlemann, J.P.W., & Balmford, A., Farming and the fate of wild nature, Science, 2005, p. 550-555.</ref>. This non-integrated approach allows for land to be used strictly for mass production, while still allowing biodiversity in other areas to flourish without the stress of habitat loss. Alternatively, land sharing is a less intense way of farming that mitigates habitat destruction while still producing food<ref name="Green"/>. Agriculture will grow in areas where organisms are able to live and therefore share the land together. This concept requires more land but promises less habitat destruction and overall loss of biodiversity.

Remedial action is required throughout the food supply chain. While the participation of all actors in reducing the source of food waste is critical, alternative disposal methods should be utilized to avoid the environmental, economic, and social costs caused by food loss and waste.

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and processes.

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Need to touch on the remedial actions we discussed. Disposal chart etc.

Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. Though there are many benefits of an efficiency based, global food production chain, there are also many consequences. From the consumers who use the purchasing power to drive the supply chain, to the farmers who cultivate the food, there is an immense amount of food wasted due to a rise in superficial aesthetic standards in modern society. The effects of food waste are vast.

Economic costs are shared by the entire supply chain, with consumers throwing away much of the food they purchase, supermarkets throwing away the huge quantities of non-aesthetic fruits and vegetables that don’t make it to the shelves, and farmers throwing away large portions of their crop because of ____(improper storage? Audits? Necessary over estimation? Thomas?). If a shift in mindset were to allow consumers to accept slightly blemished or a-symmetrical produce they, as well as the markets and farmers who made the food available, would save a great deal of money.

The social costs are difficult to quantify and often go unnoticed, but the implications are very important. Farmers who are producing food on a small scale are being forced out of the agriculture market by large corporations who use economy-of-scale to produce food less expensively and year round. This is creating a loss of jobs for many farmers who have dedicated their lives to cultivating their land in order to feed their local communities. Furthermore, consumers are often unaware of the social costs associated with their insistence on cosmetically perfect produce. The ideals that a consumer deserves perfect produce has contributed to a consumer society, which is willing to make huge environmental sacrifices for the sake of buying something aesthetically pleasing This mindset can be modified only through the education of consumers, and by increasing their awareness that the products they purchase may come at an extremely high cost, regardless of their affordability.

The environmental costs of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are paramount. In a time when our food production practices are simply unsustainable, food waste is a bad habit that humans cannot afford. Arable land is being degraded by large-scale agriculture at an alarming rate, which, with additional environmental stresses associated with climate change, will make it very difficult for farmers to produce the necessary food to support our growing population. On top of this, runoff fertilizers are contributing to oceanic dead zones, and massive amounts of rainforest are being cleared to support agriculture globally. A reduction in food wastage will certainly help to ease the pressure of these environmental impacts, but large-scale agriculture has intrinsic environmental costs. Organizations such as ___ are creating a culture that celebrates small-scale local farming, and with education of consumers our food production may be able to shift back towards smaller, more sustainably managed farms.

There are many ways our society can improve to create a more sustainable food system. It starts with a change in mind set and education of the general public. This will have positive effects that ripple through the supply chain. A social movement towards sustainably harvested produce will allow super markets to stock a variety of produce while minimizing their waste, and ultimately, contribute to a shift towards local food production which will drastically reduce our unnecessary waste.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-08T01:09:24Z

ThomasLawson: /* Social */

4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. Food loss is defined as the edible food that is lost throughout production, postharvest, and processing, whereas, food waste refers to edible food lost at the end of the food chain due to behaviour of retailers and consumers<ref name="FAOloss"/>. Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, while consumers throw away only 6-11 kg per year in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia <ref name="FAO key"/>. Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> , however, the consumers' demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributors, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency-driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the [http://%20https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution Green Revolution], agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small-scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains, and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, consumers, markets, and farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drives demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers' convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free'<ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

Supermarkets are concerned with creating a reliable image that customers can trust. One of the ways they create this image is by providing shelves filled with fresh food, but customers often do not see the unsustainable methods used to create this reputation. Many times, markets throw away perfectly good produce because consumers misinterpret the purpose of sell-by dates and assume that after these dates products are not good for consumption. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>. Markets also use overstocking as a strategy to create an image of always having more than enough. Because of the low cost of discarding food, especially for fruits and vegetables in comparison to meat and dairy, markets often feel complacent about ordering more than can be sold and discard the rest<ref name="EU"/>. This practice creates pressure for farmers to produce large yields to meet this demand and keep up with competition leading to less concern about sustainable agriculture practices.

Supply chain inefficiencies between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often overplant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large-scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. <ref>The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, Intensive farming, 2009, https://www.britannica.com/topic/intensive-agriculture, accessed April 7, 2017</ref> "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. A majority of the food loss that occurs on the farm level is due to over harvesting. Farmers will often over estimate their harvest size when planting to ensure that a crop loss, resulting from any number of biotic or abiotic factors, does not inhibit them from filling their orders. If a healthy crop yield is obtained, this will result in excess produce that does not have a buyer. This excess crop may be cycled back into the soil, but is often simply disposed of in landfills (Thomas, is this correct?). Small blemishes which occur during harvest and while processing the food are another contributor to food loss on farms. Produce is handled many times after it is pulled from the ground, and at every step there is an opportunity for produce to be bruised, punctured, or overexposed to the sun. This produce will not meet the quality inspection, and be wasted, regardless of how superficial the blemish may be.

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)
*Loss of arable land (7) <ref name="footprint">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Food wastage footprint impacts on natural resources, 2013.</ref> land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest
*soil degradation (8)
*habitat destruction/deforestation etc.
**biodiversity loss (4) [[File:Fao.png|400px|right|FAO: food waste as a country]]

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>.
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide<ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

===Economic===

There are many parts along the food supply chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive. Excess produce refers to fruits and vegetables that are planted and harvested for sale, yet never get consumed due to imperfect appearances.

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food that purchased per household is not consumed per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses. By only purchasing food that they will consume, households could potentially save hundreds of dollars per year. This incentive not only makes sense economically, but it will also lessen environmental impacts.

Roughly $5.8 billion fruits and $9.2 billion vegetables are lost at the retail level from the US food supply anually<ref>Buzby, J. C., Hyman, J., Stewart, H., & Wells, H. F., The value of retail‐and consumer‐level fruit and vegetable losses in the United States. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 2011, p. 492-515.</ref>.

Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm 9. The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill 11. This is due to unintentional producer surplus where farmers try to meet the demand of markets. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost 10. Since farmers don't receive a cheque for food that is audited or unused, the resources used to produce the food lost results in farmers needlessly spending money on resources. The accumulated waste of resources on unused product forces farmers to bear marginal returns on their product because they are not getting reimbursed for the food that doesn't go to market. 55.

===Social===

While the environmental and economic factors can be measured, there are also significant social costs that exist within the food supply chain.

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many local small-scale production farmers. Farms are working to match consumer demand but not all producers are able to meet required quotas. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. Because volume production is much higher from large-scale producers, they can offer more desirable quantities of produce. Local organic farmers don't have the resources such as labour and technology that allows for mass production and availability of aesthetically desirable produce. This intimidating, stressful, and often unfeasible market for local farmers is decreasing the number of firms in the market. Fewer people are going into small-scale production careers, especially young people. This forces close-to-retiring farmers to stop their current production because no one will fill up their jobs once they retire. As a result, retiring local farmers are forced to sell their land to large industries, who may implement high food loss production methods while trying to achieve mass production. 66 There is a magnitude of problems that both local and large scale production farmers face, but local farmers don't have the volume to sell produce after the food loss, and it inhibits many locals from partaking in the agricultural markets. Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather. In addition, high winds or intense sun rays can alter the appearance of produce, which can ruin its opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its nutritional value. 13 . Another factor for food loss is strict food audits. Farmers that don’t have large-scale production can't sell all a portion of their products due to small bruises and blemishes that don't meet the aesthetic requirements from produce buyers. 14.

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviours. Cultural consumerism and higher disposable incomes result in overspending and overbuying. Buyers with a higher income can afford to spend lots of money on food, so when it gets wasted it doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it.
When asked about throwing away once perfectly edible fruits and vegetables, consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste <ref name="c3"/>, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere. Consumers often take the abundance and availability of produce for granted. Because grocery stores are always so well stocked, consumers rarely associate scarcity as a prominent issue. Due to a lack of education, consumers remain generally uninformed about the worries and concerns that the food supply industry faces <ref name="c3"/>.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1. EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from the demand created by their everyday habits. As the concern of food loss and food waste rises, efforts to raise awareness become critical as the change in consumer attitudes and demand accelerates markets efforts to respond and, in turn, farmers to respond to markets. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. Many of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with more information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce and resources wasted. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information, such as the use of sell-by dates, is clear to help educate and inform purchasers. Supermarkets can also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer standards <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level can contribute to reducing overall emissions.

As consumers become more aware of the consequences of food waste, leading to a result in a shift of demand, supermarkets have opportunities to market towards this by showing sustainable practices and building consumer confidence. Supermarkets in Europe are already taking the initiative on reducing food waste, in 2014, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try. On average, 2.1 tons of fruits and vegetables were sold per store in the first two days.<ref>Monaco, E., 3 food waste facts about France's ugly produce campaign, Organic Authority, September 3, 2014.</ref>

Donation of edible food that is no longer considered marketable is one way retail can divert food from landfills<ref name="Schneider"/>. Although some businesses are concerned about liability, the Donation of Food Act, in Canada, and the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, in the United States, protect contributors. Donations can be tax deductible giving the incentive to avoid landfill disposal costs. While food donation is becoming a popular alternative to food waste, it is important to remember that reducing the source is the primary goal.

Until demands are modified, there are ways for farmers to change their production methods while still being able to generate enough produce to meet current demands. Producers of fruits and vegetables are usually either local companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful to the environment but do not yield a feasible harvest. There have been two methods to address the arising issues of growing demand of agriculture and habitat destruction causing loss of biodiversity. Land sparing suggests intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation<ref name="Green">Green, R.E, Cornell, S.J., Scharlemann, J.P.W., & Balmford, A., Farming and the fate of wild nature, Science, 2005, p. 550-555.</ref>. This non-integrated approach allows for land to be used strictly for mass production, while still allowing biodiversity in other areas to flourish without the stress of habitat loss. Alternatively, land sharing is a less intense way of farming that mitigates habitat destruction while still producing food<ref name="Green"/>. Agriculture will grow in areas where organisms are able to live and therefore share the land together. This concept requires more land but promises less habitat destruction and overall loss of biodiversity.

Remedial action is required throughout the food supply chain. While the participation of all actors in reducing the source of food waste is critical, alternative disposal methods should be utilized to avoid the environmental, economic, and social costs caused by food loss and waste.

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and processes.

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Need to touch on the remedial actions we discussed. Disposal chart etc.

Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. Though there are many benefits of an efficiency based, global food production chain, there are also many consequences. From the consumers who use the purchasing power to drive the supply chain, to the farmers who cultivate the food, there is an immense amount of food wasted due to a rise in superficial aesthetic standards in modern society. The effects of food waste are vast.

Economic costs are shared by the entire supply chain, with consumers throwing away much of the food they purchase, supermarkets throwing away the huge quantities of non-aesthetic fruits and vegetables that don’t make it to the shelves, and farmers throwing away large portions of their crop because of ____(improper storage? Audits? Necessary over estimation? Thomas?). If a shift in mindset were to allow consumers to accept slightly blemished or a-symmetrical produce they, as well as the markets and farmers who made the food available, would save a great deal of money.

The social costs are difficult to quantify and often go unnoticed, but the implications are very important. Farmers who are producing food on a small scale are being forced out of the agriculture market by large corporations who use economy-of-scale to produce food less expensively and year round. This is creating a loss of jobs for many farmers who have dedicated their lives to cultivating their land in order to feed their local communities. Furthermore, consumers are often unaware of the social costs associated with their insistence on cosmetically perfect produce. The ideals that a consumer deserves perfect produce has contributed to a consumer society, which is willing to make huge environmental sacrifices for the sake of buying something aesthetically pleasing This mindset can be modified only through the education of consumers, and by increasing their awareness that the products they purchase may come at an extremely high cost, regardless of their affordability.

The environmental costs of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are paramount. In a time when our food production practices are simply unsustainable, food waste is a bad habit that humans cannot afford. Arable land is being degraded by large-scale agriculture at an alarming rate, which, with additional environmental stresses associated with climate change, will make it very difficult for farmers to produce the necessary food to support our growing population. On top of this, runoff fertilizers are contributing to oceanic dead zones, and massive amounts of rainforest are being cleared to support agriculture globally. A reduction in food wastage will certainly help to ease the pressure of these environmental impacts, but large-scale agriculture has intrinsic environmental costs. Organizations such as ___ are creating a culture that celebrates small-scale local farming, and with education of consumers our food production may be able to shift back towards smaller, more sustainably managed farms.

There are many ways our society can improve to create a more sustainable food system. It starts with a change in mind set and education of the general public. This will have positive effects that ripple through the supply chain. A social movement towards sustainably harvested produce will allow super markets to stock a variety of produce while minimizing their waste, and ultimately, contribute to a shift towards local food production which will drastically reduce our unnecessary waste.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-08T01:05:22Z

ThomasLawson: /* Economic */

4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. Food loss is defined as the edible food that is lost throughout production, postharvest, and processing, whereas, food waste refers to edible food lost at the end of the food chain due to behaviour of retailers and consumers<ref name="FAOloss"/>. Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, while consumers throw away only 6-11 kg per year in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia <ref name="FAO key"/>. Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> , however, the consumers' demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributors, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency-driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the [http://%20https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution Green Revolution], agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small-scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains, and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, consumers, markets, and farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drives demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers' convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free'<ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

Supermarkets are concerned with creating a reliable image that customers can trust. One of the ways they create this image is by providing shelves filled with fresh food, but customers often do not see the unsustainable methods used to create this reputation. Many times, markets throw away perfectly good produce because consumers misinterpret the purpose of sell-by dates and assume that after these dates products are not good for consumption. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>. Markets also use overstocking as a strategy to create an image of always having more than enough. Because of the low cost of discarding food, especially for fruits and vegetables in comparison to meat and dairy, markets often feel complacent about ordering more than can be sold and discard the rest<ref name="EU"/>. This practice creates pressure for farmers to produce large yields to meet this demand and keep up with competition leading to less concern about sustainable agriculture practices.

Supply chain inefficiencies between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often overplant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large-scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. <ref>The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, Intensive farming, 2009, https://www.britannica.com/topic/intensive-agriculture, accessed April 7, 2017</ref> "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. A majority of the food loss that occurs on the farm level is due to over harvesting. Farmers will often over estimate their harvest size when planting to ensure that a crop loss, resulting from any number of biotic or abiotic factors, does not inhibit them from filling their orders. If a healthy crop yield is obtained, this will result in excess produce that does not have a buyer. This excess crop may be cycled back into the soil, but is often simply disposed of in landfills (Thomas, is this correct?). Small blemishes which occur during harvest and while processing the food are another contributor to food loss on farms. Produce is handled many times after it is pulled from the ground, and at every step there is an opportunity for produce to be bruised, punctured, or overexposed to the sun. This produce will not meet the quality inspection, and be wasted, regardless of how superficial the blemish may be.

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)
*Loss of arable land (7) <ref name="footprint">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Food wastage footprint impacts on natural resources, 2013.</ref> land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest
*soil degradation (8)
*habitat destruction/deforestation etc.
**biodiversity loss (4) [[File:Fao.png|400px|right|FAO: food waste as a country]]

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>.
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide<ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

===Economic===

There are many parts along the food supply chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive. Excess produce refers to fruits and vegetables that are planted and harvested for sale, yet never get consumed due to imperfect appearances.

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food that purchased per household is not consumed per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses. By only purchasing food that they will consume, households could potentially save hundreds of dollars per year. This incentive not only makes sense economically, but it will also lessen environmental impacts.

Roughly $5.8 billion fruits and $9.2 billion vegetables are lost at the retail level from the US food supply anually<ref>Buzby, J. C., Hyman, J., Stewart, H., & Wells, H. F., The value of retail‐and consumer‐level fruit and vegetable losses in the United States. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 2011, p. 492-515.</ref>.

Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm 9. The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill 11. This is due to unintentional producer surplus where farmers try to meet the demand of markets. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost 10. Since farmers don't receive a cheque for food that is audited or unused, the resources used to produce the food lost results in farmers needlessly spending money on resources. The accumulated waste of resources on unused product forces farmers to bear marginal returns on their product because they are not getting reimbursed for the food that doesn't go to market. 55.

===Social===

While the environmental and economic factors can be measured, there are also significant social costs that exist within the food supply chain.

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many local small-scale production farmers. Farms are working to match consumer demand but not all producers are able to meet required quotas. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. Because volume production is much higher from large-scale producers, they can offer more desirable quantities of produce. Local organic farmers don't have the resources such as labour and technology that allows for mass production and availability of aesthetically desirable produce. This intimidating, stressful, and often unfeasible market for local farmers is decreasing the number of firms in the market. Fewer people are going into small-scale production careers, especially young people. This forces close-to-retiring farmers to stop their current production because no one will fill up their jobs once they retire. As a result, retiring local farmers are forced to sell their land to large industries, who may implement high food loss production methods while trying to achieve mass production. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/16/young-people-farming-future-agriculture There is a magnitude of problems that both local and large scale production farmers face, but local farmers don't have the volume to sell produce after the food loss, and it inhibits many locals from partaking in the agricultural markets. Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather. In addition, high winds or intense sun rays can alter the appearance of produce, which can ruin its opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its nutritional value. 13 . Another factor for food loss is strict food audits. Farmers that don’t have large-scale production can't sell all a portion of their products due to small bruises and blemishes that don't meet the aesthetic requirements from produce buyers. 14.

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviours. Cultural consumerism and higher disposable incomes result in overspending and overbuying. Buyers with a higher income can afford to spend lots of money on food, so when it gets wasted it doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it.
When asked about throwing away once perfectly edible fruits and vegetables, consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste <ref name="c3"/>, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere. Consumers often take the abundance and availability of produce for granted. Because grocery stores are always so well stocked, consumers rarely associate scarcity as a prominent issue. Due to a lack of education, consumers remain generally uninformed about the worries and concerns that the food supply industry faces <ref name="c3"/>.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1. EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from the demand created by their everyday habits. As the concern of food loss and food waste rises, efforts to raise awareness become critical as the change in consumer attitudes and demand accelerates markets efforts to respond and, in turn, farmers to respond to markets. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. Many of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with more information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce and resources wasted. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information, such as the use of sell-by dates, is clear to help educate and inform purchasers. Supermarkets can also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer standards <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level can contribute to reducing overall emissions.

As consumers become more aware of the consequences of food waste, leading to a result in a shift of demand, supermarkets have opportunities to market towards this by showing sustainable practices and building consumer confidence. Supermarkets in Europe are already taking the initiative on reducing food waste, in 2014, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try. On average, 2.1 tons of fruits and vegetables were sold per store in the first two days.<ref>Monaco, E., 3 food waste facts about France's ugly produce campaign, Organic Authority, September 3, 2014.</ref>

Donation of edible food that is no longer considered marketable is one way retail can divert food from landfills<ref name="Schneider"/>. Although some businesses are concerned about liability, the Donation of Food Act, in Canada, and the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, in the United States, protect contributors. Donations can be tax deductible giving the incentive to avoid landfill disposal costs. While food donation is becoming a popular alternative to food waste, it is important to remember that reducing the source is the primary goal.

Until demands are modified, there are ways for farmers to change their production methods while still being able to generate enough produce to meet current demands. Producers of fruits and vegetables are usually either local companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful to the environment but do not yield a feasible harvest. There have been two methods to address the arising issues of growing demand of agriculture and habitat destruction causing loss of biodiversity. Land sparing suggests intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation<ref name="Green">Green, R.E, Cornell, S.J., Scharlemann, J.P.W., & Balmford, A., Farming and the fate of wild nature, Science, 2005, p. 550-555.</ref>. This non-integrated approach allows for land to be used strictly for mass production, while still allowing biodiversity in other areas to flourish without the stress of habitat loss. Alternatively, land sharing is a less intense way of farming that mitigates habitat destruction while still producing food<ref name="Green"/>. Agriculture will grow in areas where organisms are able to live and therefore share the land together. This concept requires more land but promises less habitat destruction and overall loss of biodiversity.

Remedial action is required throughout the food supply chain. While the participation of all actors in reducing the source of food waste is critical, alternative disposal methods should be utilized to avoid the environmental, economic, and social costs caused by food loss and waste.

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and processes.

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Need to touch on the remedial actions we discussed. Disposal chart etc.

Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. Though there are many benefits of an efficiency based, global food production chain, there are also many consequences. From the consumers who use the purchasing power to drive the supply chain, to the farmers who cultivate the food, there is an immense amount of food wasted due to a rise in superficial aesthetic standards in modern society. The effects of food waste are vast.

Economic costs are shared by the entire supply chain, with consumers throwing away much of the food they purchase, supermarkets throwing away the huge quantities of non-aesthetic fruits and vegetables that don’t make it to the shelves, and farmers throwing away large portions of their crop because of ____(improper storage? Audits? Necessary over estimation? Thomas?). If a shift in mindset were to allow consumers to accept slightly blemished or a-symmetrical produce they, as well as the markets and farmers who made the food available, would save a great deal of money.

The social costs are difficult to quantify and often go unnoticed, but the implications are very important. Farmers who are producing food on a small scale are being forced out of the agriculture market by large corporations who use economy-of-scale to produce food less expensively and year round. This is creating a loss of jobs for many farmers who have dedicated their lives to cultivating their land in order to feed their local communities. Furthermore, consumers are often unaware of the social costs associated with their insistence on cosmetically perfect produce. The ideals that a consumer deserves perfect produce has contributed to a consumer society, which is willing to make huge environmental sacrifices for the sake of buying something aesthetically pleasing This mindset can be modified only through the education of consumers, and by increasing their awareness that the products they purchase may come at an extremely high cost, regardless of their affordability.

The environmental costs of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are paramount. In a time when our food production practices are simply unsustainable, food waste is a bad habit that humans cannot afford. Arable land is being degraded by large-scale agriculture at an alarming rate, which, with additional environmental stresses associated with climate change, will make it very difficult for farmers to produce the necessary food to support our growing population. On top of this, runoff fertilizers are contributing to oceanic dead zones, and massive amounts of rainforest are being cleared to support agriculture globally. A reduction in food wastage will certainly help to ease the pressure of these environmental impacts, but large-scale agriculture has intrinsic environmental costs. Organizations such as ___ are creating a culture that celebrates small-scale local farming, and with education of consumers our food production may be able to shift back towards smaller, more sustainably managed farms.

There are many ways our society can improve to create a more sustainable food system. It starts with a change in mind set and education of the general public. This will have positive effects that ripple through the supply chain. A social movement towards sustainably harvested produce will allow super markets to stock a variety of produce while minimizing their waste, and ultimately, contribute to a shift towards local food production which will drastically reduce our unnecessary waste.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-08T00:46:42Z

ThomasLawson: /* Farmers */

4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. Food loss is defined as the edible food that is lost throughout production, postharvest, and processing, whereas, food waste refers to edible food lost at the end of the food chain due to behaviour of retailers and consumers<ref name="FAOloss"/>. Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, (while) consumers in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia throw away only 6-11 kg per year"<ref name="FAO key"/>. Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> ,however, the consumers demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributers, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face '''substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the [http://%20https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution Green Revolution], agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, Consumers, Markets, and Farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free'<ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

Supermarkets are concerned with creating a reliable image that customers can trust. One of the ways they create this image is by providing shelves filled with fresh food, but customers often do not see the unsustainable methods used to create this reputation. Many times, markets throw away perfectly good produce because consumers misinterpret the purpose of sell-by dates and assume that after these dates products are not good for consumption. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>. Markets also use overstocking as a strategy to create an image of always having more than enough. Because of the low cost of discarding food, especially for fruits and vegetables in comparison to meat and dairy, markets often feel complacent about ordering more than can be sold and discard the rest<ref name="EU"/>. This practice creates pressure for farmers to produce large yields to meet this demand and keep up with competition leading to less concern about sustainable agriculture practices.

Supply chain inefficiencies between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often overplant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large-scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. <ref>The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica. Intensive farming. 8-7-2009. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/intensive-agriculture</ref> "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. Much of this loss can be attributed to ____ ...Thomas? an initial screening for grade? audits? Inaccurate predictions of future demand? what are the actual causes for food loss here?

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)
*Loss of arable land (7) <ref name="footprint">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Food wastage footprint impacts on natural resources, 2013.</ref> land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest
*soil degradation (8)
*habitat destruction/deforestation etc.
**biodiversity loss (4) [[File:Fao.png|400px|right|FAO: food waste as a country]]

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>.
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide<ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

===Economic===

There are many parts along the food supply chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive. Excess produce is fruits and vegetables that are planted and harvested for sale, yet never get consumed due to imperfect appearances.

Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm 9. The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill 11. This is due to unintentional producer surplus where farmers try to meet the demand of markets. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost 10. Since farmers don't receive a cheque for food that is audited or unused, the resources used to produce the food lost results in farmers needlessly spending money on resources. The accumulated waste of resources on unused product forces farmers to bear marginal returns on their product because they are not getting reimbursed for the food that doesn't go to market. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce

Roughly $5.8 billion fruits and $9.2 billion vegetables are lost at the retail level from the US food supply anually<ref>Buzby, J. C., Hyman, J., Stewart, H., & Wells, H. F., The value of retail‐and consumer‐level fruit and vegetable losses in the United States. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 2011, p. 492-515.</ref>.

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses. By only purchasing food that they will consume, households could potentially save hundreds of dollars per year. This incentive not only makes sense economically, but it will also lessen environmental impacts.

===Social===

While the environmental and economic factors can be measured, there are also significant social costs that exist within the food supply chain.

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many local small-scale production farmers. Farms are working to match consumer demand but not all producers are able to meet required quotas. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. Because volume production is much higher from large-scale producers, they can offer more desirable quantities of produce. Local organic farmers don't have the resources such as labour and technology that allows for mass production and availability of aesthetically desirable produce. This intimidating, stressful, and often unfeasible market for local farmers is decreasing the number of firms in the market. Fewer people are going into small-scale production careers, especially young people. This forces close-to-retiring farmers to stop their current production because no one will fill up their jobs once they retire. As a result, retiring local farmers are forced to sell their land to large industries, who may implement high food loss production methods while trying to achieve mass production. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/16/young-people-farming-future-agriculture There is a magnitude of problems that both local and large scale production farmers face, but local farmers don't have the volume to sell produce after the food loss, and it inhibits many locals from partaking in the agricultural markets. Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather. In addition, high winds or intense sun rays can alter the appearance of produce, which can ruin its opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its nutritional value. 13 . Another factor for food loss is strict food audits. Farmers that don’t have large-scale production can't sell all a portion of their products due to small bruises and blemishes that don't meet the aesthetic requirements from produce buyers. 14.

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviours. Cultural consumerism and higher disposable incomes result in overspending and overbuying. Buyers with a higher income can afford to spend lots of money on food, so when it gets wasted it doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it.
When asked about throwing away once perfectly edible fruits and vegetables, consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste <ref name="c3"/>, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere. Consumers often take the abundance and availability of produce for granted. Because grocery stores are always so well stocked, consumers rarely associate scarcity as a prominent issue. Due to a lack of education, consumers remain generally uninformed about the worries and concerns that the food supply industry faces <ref name="c3"/>.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1. EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from the demand created by their everyday habits. As the concern of food loss and food waste rises, efforts to raise awareness become critical as the change in consumer attitudes and demand accelerates markets efforts to respond and, in turn, farmers to respond to markets. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. Many of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with more information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce and resources wasted. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information, such as the use of sell-by dates, is clear to help educate and inform purchasers. Supermarkets can also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer standards <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level can contribute to reducing overall emissions.

As consumers become more aware of the consequences of food waste, leading to a result in a shift of demand, supermarkets have opportunities to market towards this by showing sustainable practices and building consumer confidence. Supermarkets in Europe are already taking the initiative on reducing food waste, in 2014, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try. On average, 2.1 tons of fruits and vegetables were sold per store in the first two days.<ref>Monaco, E., 3 food waste facts about France's ugly produce campaign, Organic Authority, September 3, 2014.</ref>

Donation of edible food that is no longer considered marketable is one way retail can divert food from landfills<ref name="Schneider"/>. Although some businesses are concerned about liability, the Donation of Food Act, in Canada, and the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, in the United States, protect contributors. Donations can be tax deductible giving the incentive to avoid landfill disposal costs. While food donation is becoming a popular alternative to food waste, it is important to remember that reducing the source is the primary goal.

Until demands are modified, there are ways for farmers to change their production methods while still being able to generate enough produce to meet current demands. Producers of fruits and vegetables are usually either local companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful to the environment but do not yield a feasible harvest. There have been two methods to address the arising issues of growing demand of agriculture and habitat destruction causing loss of biodiversity. Land sparing suggests intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation<ref name="Green">Green, R.E, Cornell, S.J., Scharlemann, J.P.W., & Balmford, A., Farming and the fate of wild nature, Science, 2005, p. 550-555.</ref>. This non-integrated approach allows for land to be used strictly for mass production, while still allowing biodiversity in other areas to flourish without the stress of habitat loss. Alternatively, land sharing is a less intense way of farming that mitigates habitat destruction while still producing food<ref name="Green"/>. Agriculture will grow in areas where organisms are able to live and therefore share the land together. This concept requires more land but promises less habitat destruction and overall loss of biodiversity.

Remedial action is required throughout the food supply chain. While the participation of all actors in reducing the source of food waste is critical, alternative disposal methods should be utilized to avoid the environmental, economic, and social costs caused by food loss and waste.

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and processes.

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Need to touch on the remedial actions we discussed. Disposal chart etc.

Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. Though there are many benefits of an efficiency based, global food production chain, there are also many consequences. From the consumers who use the purchasing power to drive the supply chain, to the farmers who cultivate the food, there is an immense amount of food wasted due to a rise in superficial aesthetic standards in modern society. The effects of food waste are vast.

Economic costs are shared by the entire supply chain, with consumers throwing away much of the food they purchase, supermarkets throwing away the huge quantities of non-aesthetic fruits and vegetables that don’t make it to the shelves, and farmers throwing away large portions of their crop because of ____(improper storage? Audits? Necessary over estimation? Thomas?). If a shift in mindset were to allow consumers to accept slightly blemished or a-symmetrical produce they, as well as the markets and farmers who made the food available, would save a great deal of money.

The social costs are difficult to quantify and often go unnoticed, but the implications are very important. Farmers who are producing food on a small scale are being forced out of the agriculture market by large corporations who use economy-of-scale to produce food less expensively and year round. This is creating a loss of jobs for many farmers who have dedicated their lives to cultivating their land in order to feed their local communities. Furthermore, consumers are often unaware of the social costs associated with their insistence on cosmetically perfect produce. The ideals that a consumer deserves perfect produce has contributed to a consumer society, which is willing to make huge environmental sacrifices for the sake of buying something aesthetically pleasing This mindset can be modified only through the education of consumers, and by increasing their awareness that the products they purchase may come at an extremely high cost, regardless of their affordability.

The environmental costs of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are paramount. In a time when our food production practices are simply unsustainable, food waste is a bad habit that humans cannot afford. Arable land is being degraded by large-scale agriculture at an alarming rate, which, with additional environmental stresses associated with climate change, will make it very difficult for farmers to produce the necessary food to support our growing population. On top of this, runoff fertilizers are contributing to oceanic dead zones, and massive amounts of rainforest are being cleared to support agriculture globally. A reduction in food wastage will certainly help to ease the pressure of these environmental impacts, but large-scale agriculture has intrinsic environmental costs. Organizations such as ___ are creating a culture that celebrates small-scale local farming, and with education of consumers our food production may be able to shift back towards smaller, more sustainably managed farms.

There are many ways our society can improve to create a more sustainable food system. It starts with a change in mind set and education of the general public. This will have positive effects that ripple through the supply chain. A social movement towards sustainably harvested produce will allow super markets to stock a variety of produce while minimizing their waste, and ultimately, contribute to a shift towards local food production which will drastically reduce our unnecessary waste.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-08T00:45:45Z

ThomasLawson: /* Farmers */

4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. Food loss is defined as the edible food that is lost throughout production, postharvest, and processing, whereas, food waste refers to edible food lost at the end of the food chain due to behaviour of retailers and consumers<ref name="FAOloss"/>. Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, (while) consumers in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia throw away only 6-11 kg per year"<ref name="FAO key"/>. Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> ,however, the consumers demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributers, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face '''substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the [http://%20https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution Green Revolution], agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, Consumers, Markets, and Farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free'<ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

Supermarkets are concerned with creating a reliable image that customers can trust. One of the ways they create this image is by providing shelves filled with fresh food, but customers often do not see the unsustainable methods used to create this reputation. Many times, markets throw away perfectly good produce because consumers misinterpret the purpose of sell-by dates and assume that after these dates products are not good for consumption. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>. Markets also use overstocking as a strategy to create an image of always having more than enough. Because of the low cost of discarding food, especially for fruits and vegetables in comparison to meat and dairy, markets often feel complacent about ordering more than can be sold and discard the rest<ref name="EU"/>. This practice creates pressure for farmers to produce large yields to meet this demand and keep up with competition leading to less concern about sustainable agriculture practices.

Supply chain inefficiencies between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often overplant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large-scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. <ref>The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica. Intensive farming. 8-7-2009</ref> "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. Much of this loss can be attributed to ____ ...Thomas? an initial screening for grade? audits? Inaccurate predictions of future demand? what are the actual causes for food loss here?

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)
*Loss of arable land (7) <ref name="footprint">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Food wastage footprint impacts on natural resources, 2013.</ref> land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest
*soil degradation (8)
*habitat destruction/deforestation etc.
**biodiversity loss (4) [[File:Fao.png|400px|right|FAO: food waste as a country]]

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>.
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide<ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

===Economic===

There are many parts along the food supply chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive. Excess produce is fruits and vegetables that are planted and harvested for sale, yet never get consumed due to imperfect appearances.

Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm 9. The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill 11. This is due to unintentional producer surplus where farmers try to meet the demand of markets. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost 10. Since farmers don't receive a cheque for food that is audited or unused, the resources used to produce the food lost results in farmers needlessly spending money on resources. The accumulated waste of resources on unused product forces farmers to bear marginal returns on their product because they are not getting reimbursed for the food that doesn't go to market. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce

Roughly $5.8 billion fruits and $9.2 billion vegetables are lost at the retail level from the US food supply anually<ref>Buzby, J. C., Hyman, J., Stewart, H., & Wells, H. F., The value of retail‐and consumer‐level fruit and vegetable losses in the United States. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 2011, p. 492-515.</ref>.

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses. By only purchasing food that they will consume, households could potentially save hundreds of dollars per year. This incentive not only makes sense economically, but it will also lessen environmental impacts.

===Social===

While the environmental and economic factors can be measured, there are also significant social costs that exist within the food supply chain.

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many local small-scale production farmers. Farms are working to match consumer demand but not all producers are able to meet required quotas. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. Because volume production is much higher from large-scale producers, they can offer more desirable quantities of produce. Local organic farmers don't have the resources such as labour and technology that allows for mass production and availability of aesthetically desirable produce. This intimidating, stressful, and often unfeasible market for local farmers is decreasing the number of firms in the market. Fewer people are going into small-scale production careers, especially young people. This forces close-to-retiring farmers to stop their current production because no one will fill up their jobs once they retire. As a result, retiring local farmers are forced to sell their land to large industries, who may implement high food loss production methods while trying to achieve mass production. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/16/young-people-farming-future-agriculture There is a magnitude of problems that both local and large scale production farmers face, but local farmers don't have the volume to sell produce after the food loss, and it inhibits many locals from partaking in the agricultural markets. Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather. In addition, high winds or intense sun rays can alter the appearance of produce, which can ruin its opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its nutritional value. 13 . Another factor for food loss is strict food audits. Farmers that don’t have large-scale production can't sell all a portion of their products due to small bruises and blemishes that don't meet the aesthetic requirements from produce buyers. 14.

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviours. Cultural consumerism and higher disposable incomes result in overspending and overbuying. Buyers with a higher income can afford to spend lots of money on food, so when it gets wasted it doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it.
When asked about throwing away once perfectly edible fruits and vegetables, consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste <ref name="c3"/>, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere. Consumers often take the abundance and availability of produce for granted. Because grocery stores are always so well stocked, consumers rarely associate scarcity as a prominent issue. Due to a lack of education, consumers remain generally uninformed about the worries and concerns that the food supply industry faces <ref name="c3"/>.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1. EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from the demand created by their everyday habits. As the concern of food loss and food waste rises, efforts to raise awareness become critical as the change in consumer attitudes and demand accelerates markets efforts to respond and, in turn, farmers to respond to markets. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. Many of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with more information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce and resources wasted. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information, such as the use of sell-by dates, is clear to help educate and inform purchasers. Supermarkets can also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer standards <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level can contribute to reducing overall emissions.

As consumers become more aware of the consequences of food waste, leading to a result in a shift of demand, supermarkets have opportunities to market towards this by showing sustainable practices and building consumer confidence. Supermarkets in Europe are already taking the initiative on reducing food waste, in 2014, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try. On average, 2.1 tons of fruits and vegetables were sold per store in the first two days.<ref>Monaco, E., 3 food waste facts about France's ugly produce campaign, Organic Authority, September 3, 2014.</ref>

Donation of edible food that is no longer considered marketable is one way retail can divert food from landfills<ref name="Schneider"/>. Although some businesses are concerned about liability, the Donation of Food Act, in Canada, and the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, in the United States, protect contributors. Donations can be tax deductible giving the incentive to avoid landfill disposal costs. While food donation is becoming a popular alternative to food waste, it is important to remember that reducing the source is the primary goal.

Until demands are modified, there are ways for farmers to change their production methods while still being able to generate enough produce to meet current demands. Producers of fruits and vegetables are usually either local companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful to the environment but do not yield a feasible harvest. There have been two methods to address the arising issues of growing demand of agriculture and habitat destruction causing loss of biodiversity. Land sparing suggests intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation<ref name="Green">Green, R.E, Cornell, S.J., Scharlemann, J.P.W., & Balmford, A., Farming and the fate of wild nature, Science, 2005, p. 550-555.</ref>. This non-integrated approach allows for land to be used strictly for mass production, while still allowing biodiversity in other areas to flourish without the stress of habitat loss. Alternatively, land sharing is a less intense way of farming that mitigates habitat destruction while still producing food<ref name="Green"/>. Agriculture will grow in areas where organisms are able to live and therefore share the land together. This concept requires more land but promises less habitat destruction and overall loss of biodiversity.

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and processes.

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Need to touch on the remedial actions we discussed. Disposal chart etc.

Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. Though there are many benefits of an efficiency based, global food production chain, there are also many consequences. From the consumers who use the purchasing power to drive the supply chain, to the farmers who cultivate the food, there is an immense amount of food wasted due to a rise in superficial aesthetic standards in modern society. The effects of food waste are vast.

Economic costs are shared by the entire supply chain, with consumers throwing away much of the food they purchase, supermarkets throwing away the huge quantities of non-aesthetic fruits and vegetables that don’t make it to the shelves, and farmers throwing away large portions of their crop because of ____(improper storage? Audits? Necessary over estimation? Thomas?). If a shift in mindset were to allow consumers to accept slightly blemished or a-symmetrical produce they, as well as the markets and farmers who made the food available, would save a great deal of money.

The social costs are difficult to quantify and often go unnoticed, but the implications are very important. Farmers who are producing food on a small scale are being forced out of the agriculture market by large corporations who use economy-of-scale to produce food less expensively and year round. This is creating a loss of jobs for many farmers who have dedicated their lives to cultivating their land in order to feed their local communities. Furthermore, consumers are often unaware of the social costs associated with their insistence on cosmetically perfect produce. The ideals that a consumer deserves perfect produce has contributed to a consumer society, which is willing to make huge environmental sacrifices for the sake of buying something aesthetically pleasing This mindset can be modified only through the education of consumers, and by increasing their awareness that the products they purchase may come at an extremely high cost, regardless of their affordability.

The environmental costs of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are paramount. In a time when our food production practices are simply unsustainable, food waste is a bad habit that humans cannot afford. Arable land is being degraded by large-scale agriculture at an alarming rate, which, with additional environmental stresses associated with climate change, will make it very difficult for farmers to produce the necessary food to support our growing population. On top of this, runoff fertilizers are contributing to oceanic dead zones, and massive amounts of rainforest are being cleared to support agriculture globally. A reduction in food wastage will certainly help to ease the pressure of these environmental impacts, but large-scale agriculture has intrinsic environmental costs. Organizations such as ___ are creating a culture that celebrates small-scale local farming, and with education of consumers our food production may be able to shift back towards smaller, more sustainably managed farms.

There are many ways our society can improve to create a more sustainable food system. It starts with a change in mind set and education of the general public. This will have positive effects that ripple through the supply chain. A social movement towards sustainably harvested produce will allow super markets to stock a variety of produce while minimizing their waste, and ultimately, contribute to a shift towards local food production which will drastically reduce our unnecessary waste.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-07T19:22:01Z

ThomasLawson: /* Economic */

Introduction' The nature of the issue or problem – location, duration, scope/scale, intensity/frequency/severity of negative impacts, current and predicted winners and losers if no remedial action(s) is (are) taken;

General notes/ things to include somewhere:

1) Define Food loss vs waste and use these accurately throughout paper!
Food losses refer to the decrease in edible food mass throughout the part of the supply chain that specifically leads to edible food for human consumption. Food losses take place at production, postharvest and processing stages in the food supply chain (Parfitt et al., 2010). Food losses occurring at the end of the food chain (retail and final consumption) are rather called “food waste”, which relates to retailers’ and consumers’ behavior. (Parfitt et al., 2010) http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/mb060e/mb060e00.pdf
2) Bold subheadings in who/retailers. Either add bold to farmers and consumers or remove them here.
3) Thomas, mentioned land sharing vs. land sparing?
4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. FOOD LOSS IS DEFINED AS --- WHEREAS FOOD WASTE REFERS TO ---Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, (while) consumers in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia throw away only 6-11 kg per year"<ref name="FAO key"/>.----Food losses and waste (Losses Vs waste? The cost of produce wasted amounts to...) amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries (Per year?)."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. ----- Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> ,however, the consumers demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributers, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face '''substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”____, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, Consumers, Markets, and Farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free <ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often overplant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. If demand is lower than predicted businesses may put on promotions such as "two for one", this causes the consumers to purchase more food than they will eat and pushes the food waste down the supply chain. Overstocking of fruits and vegetables is not financially harmful to markets because of the low cost of discarding food<ref name="EU"/>. This allows markets to feel complacent with ordering more than purchased because the cost of disposing of unsold food is low, especially for fruits and vegetables compared to meat and dairy.

Many times, markets throw perfectly good produce out because consumers are often confused by best by dates and assume that products are not good for consumption after these dates. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the expiry date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>.

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers/ corporations are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. Much of this loss can be attributed to ____ ...Thomas? an initial screening for grade? audits? Inaccurate predictions of future demand? what are the actual causes for food loss here?

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)
*Loss of arable land (7) <ref name="footprint">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Food wastage footprint impacts on natural resources, 2013.</ref> land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest
*soil degradation (8)
*habitat destruction/deforestation etc.
**biodiversity loss (4)

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>.
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], (Eric's notes: which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissionsane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change <ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost of food waste to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref> (Context. What cost?)

There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive. Excess produce is fruits and vegetables that are planted and harvested for sale yet never get consumed due to imperfect appearances.

Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm 9. The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill 11. This is due to unintentional producer surplus where farmers try to meet the demand of markets. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost 10. Since farmers don't receive a cheque for food that is audited or unused, the resources used to produce the food lost results in farmers needlessly spending money on the resources. The accumulated waste of resources on unused product forces farmers to bear marginal returns on their product because they are not getting reimbursed for the food that doesn't go to market. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

===Social===

While the environmental and economic factors can be measured, there are also significant social costs that exist within the food supply chain.

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many local small-scale production farmers.

Farms are working to match consumer demand but not all producers are able to meet required quotas. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers because volume production is much higher from large scale producers, which offers a variety that makers desire. Local organic farmers don't have the resources like labour and technology that allows mass production to offer large amounts of ascetically desirable produce. The intimidating and often unfeasible market for local farmers is decreasing the amount of firms in the market. Less and less people are going into small scale production, especially young people. This forces close-to retiring farmers to stop their current production because no one will fill up their jobs once they retire, and often retiring local farmers are forced to sell their land to large industries, who will implement high food loss production methods due to mass production. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/16/young-people-farming-future-agriculture There is a magnitude of problems that both local and large scale production farmers face, but local farmers don't have the volume to sell produce after the food loss and it inhibits many locals from partaking in the agricultural markets . Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the aesthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its nutritional value. 13 . Another factor for food loss is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their products due to small bruises and blemishes that don't meet the aesthetic requirements from produce buyers. 14. Furthermore, as a result of broad dietary patterns and high demands, farmers often struggle to produce enough quantity.

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviours. Cultural consumerism and higher disposable incomes result in overspending and overbuying. Buyers with a higher income can afford to spend lots of money on food, so when it gets wasted it doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it.
When asked about throwing away once perfectly edible fruits and vegetables, consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste <ref name="c3"/>, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.
(These are good points, and could/ should be expanded on. Consumers are the largest social factor that we have. Talk about societies consumerism habits, rise in economy leading to more disposable income etc.)

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1. EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Considering the significant costs and dangers of current practices, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications.

Demand is the primary influence of change.
Increasing public awareness will drive demand, and in turn, supermarkets will respond to changing attitudes and pressures.

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This, in turn, has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted.

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits.

A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

As consumers become more aware of the consequences of food waste and result in a shift of demand, supermarkets have opportunities to market towards this by showing sustainable practices and building consumer confidence. Supermarkets in Europe are already taking the initiative on reducing food waste, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try. "The initiative was launched in March of 2014; in the first two days, 2.1 tons of fruits and vegetables per store on average were sold."

Donation of edible food that is no longer considered marketable is one way retail can divert food from landfills<ref name="Schneider"/>. Although some businesses are concerned about liability, both Canada and the United States have the Donation of Food Act and the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act to protect contributors. Donations can be tax deductible giving the incentive to avoid landfill disposal costs. While food donation is becoming a popular alternative to food waste, is is important to remember that reducing the source is the primary goal.

Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current demands. Producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. The idea of Land sharing is a way of farming that mitigates habitat destruction while still producing food. Agriculture will grow in areas where organisms are able to live and therefor share the land together. http://www.ncl.ac.uk/sustainability/funding/awardedprojects/landsharingvssparing/ This requires more land but promises less habitat destruction . However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The non-integrated approach will allow for land to be used just for mass production while still promoting biodiversity in other areas to flourish with less stress of habitat loss. http://www.ncl.ac.uk/sustainability/funding/awardedprojects/landsharingvssparing/

==Global Stuff ??==

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and regulations??

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Need to touch on the remedial actions we discussed. Disposal chart etc.

Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. Though there are many benefits of an efficiency based, global food production chain, there are also many consequences. From the consumers who use the purchasing power to drive the supply chain, to the farmers who cultivate the food, there is an immense amount of food wasted due to a rise in superficial aesthetic standards in modern society. The effects of food waste are vast.

Economic costs are shared by the entire supply chain, with consumers throwing away much of the food they purchase, supermarkets throwing away the huge quantities of non-aesthetic fruits and vegetables that don’t make it to the shelves, and farmers throwing away large portions of their crop because of ____(improper storage? Audits? Necessary over estimation? Thomas?). If a shift in mindset were to allow consumers to accept slightly blemished or a-symmetrical produce they, as well as the markets and farmers who made the food available, would save a great deal of money.

The social costs are difficult to quantify (and often go unnoticed), but the implications are very important. Farmers who are producing food on a small scale are being forced out of the agriculture market by large corporations who use economy-of-scale to produce food less expensively and year round. This is creating a loss of jobs for many farmers who have dedicated their lives to cultivating their land in order to feed their local communities. (transition)Consumers are often unaware of the social costs associated with their insistence on cosmetically perfect produce. The ideals that a consumer deserves perfect produce has contributed to a consumer society which is willing to make huge environmental sacrifices for the sake of buying something pretty. This mindset can be reverted only through the education of consumers, and by increasing their awareness that the products they purchase may come at an extremely high cost, regardless of their affordability.

The environmental costs of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are paramount. In a time when our food production practices are simply unsustainable, food waste is a bad habit that we cannot afford. Arable land is being degraded by large-scale agriculture at an alarming rate, which, with additional environmental stresses associated with climate change, will make it very difficult for farmers to produce the necessary food to support our population. On top of this, runoff fertilizers are contributing to oceanic dead zones, and massive amounts of rainforest are being cleared to support agriculture globally. A reduction in food wastage will certainly help to ease the pressure of these environmental impacts, but large-scale agriculture has intrinsic environmental costs. Organizations such as ___ are creating a culture that celebrates small-scale local farming, and with education of consumers our food production may be able to shift back towards smaller, more sustainably managed farms.

There are many ways our society can improve to create a more sustainable food system. It starts with a change in mind set and education of the general public. This will have positive effects that ripple through the supply chain. A social movement towards sustainably harvested produce will allow super markets to stock a variety of produce while minimizing their waste, and ultimately, contribute to a shift towards local food production which will drastically reduce our unnecessary waste.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-07T19:10:38Z

ThomasLawson: /* Targeted Solutions */

Introduction' The nature of the issue or problem – location, duration, scope/scale, intensity/frequency/severity of negative impacts, current and predicted winners and losers if no remedial action(s) is (are) taken;

General notes/ things to include somewhere:

1) Define Food loss vs waste and use these accurately throughout paper!
Food losses refer to the decrease in edible food mass throughout the part of the supply chain that specifically leads to edible food for human consumption. Food losses take place at production, postharvest and processing stages in the food supply chain (Parfitt et al., 2010). Food losses occurring at the end of the food chain (retail and final consumption) are rather called “food waste”, which relates to retailers’ and consumers’ behavior. (Parfitt et al., 2010) http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/mb060e/mb060e00.pdf
2) Bold subheadings in who/retailers. Either add bold to farmers and consumers or remove them here.
3) Thomas, mentioned land sharing vs. land sparing?
4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. FOOD LOSS IS DEFINED AS --- WHEREAS FOOD WASTE REFERS TO ---Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, (while) consumers in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia throw away only 6-11 kg per year"<ref name="FAO key"/>.----Food losses and waste (Losses Vs waste? The cost of produce wasted amounts to...) amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries (Per year?)."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. ----- Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> ,however, the consumers demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributers, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face '''substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”____, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, Consumers, Markets, and Farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free <ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often overplant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. If demand is lower than predicted businesses may put on promotions such as "two for one", this causes the consumers to purchase more food than they will eat and pushes the food waste down the supply chain. Overstocking of fruits and vegetables is not financially harmful to markets because of the low cost of discarding food<ref name="EU"/>. This allows markets to feel complacent with ordering more than purchased because the cost of disposing of unsold food is low, especially for fruits and vegetables compared to meat and dairy.

Many times, markets throw perfectly good produce out because consumers are often confused by best by dates and assume that products are not good for consumption after these dates. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the expiry date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>.

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers/ corporations are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. Much of this loss can be attributed to ____ ...Thomas? an initial screening for grade? audits? Inaccurate predictions of future demand? what are the actual causes for food loss here?

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)
*Loss of arable land (7) <ref name="footprint">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Food wastage footprint impacts on natural resources, 2013.</ref>- land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest
*soil degradation (8)
*habitat destruction/deforestation etc.
**biodiversity loss (4)

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>.
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], (Eric's notes: which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissionsane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change <ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost of food waste to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref> (Context. What cost?)

There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive. Excess produce is fruits and vegetables that are planted and harvested for sale yet never get consumed due to imperfect appearances.

Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm 9. The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill 11. This is due to unintentional producer surplus where farmers try to meet the demand of markets. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost 10. Since farmers don't receive a cheque for food that is audited or unused, the resources used to produce the food lost results in farmers needlessly spending money on the resources. The accumulated waste of resources on unused product forces farmers to bear marginal returns on their product because they are getting reimbursed for creating product. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

===Social===

While the environmental and economic factors can be measured, there are also significant social costs that exist within the food supply chain.

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many local small-scale production farmers.

Farms are working to match consumer demand but not all producers are able to meet required quotas. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers because volume production is much higher from large scale producers, which offers a variety that makers desire. Local organic farmers don't have the resources like labour and technology that allows mass production to offer large amounts of ascetically desirable produce. The intimidating and often unfeasible market for local farmers is decreasing the amount of firms in the market. Less and less people are going into small scale production, especially young people. This forces close-to retiring farmers to stop their current production because no one will fill up their jobs once they retire, and often retiring local farmers are forced to sell their land to large industries, who will implement high food loss production methods due to mass production. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/16/young-people-farming-future-agriculture There is a magnitude of problems that both local and large scale production farmers face, but local farmers don't have the volume to sell produce after the food loss and it inhibits many locals from partaking in the agricultural markets . Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the aesthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its nutritional value. 13 . Another factor for food loss is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their products due to small bruises and blemishes that don't meet the aesthetic requirements from produce buyers. 14. Furthermore, as a result of broad dietary patterns and high demands, farmers often struggle to produce enough quantity.

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviours. Cultural consumerism and higher disposable incomes result in overspending and overbuying. Buyers with a higher income can afford to spend lots of money on food, so when it gets wasted it doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it.
When asked about throwing away once perfectly edible fruits and vegetables, consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste <ref name="c3"/>, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.
(These are good points, and could/ should be expanded on. Consumers are the largest social factor that we have. Talk about societies consumerism habits, rise in economy leading to more disposable income etc.)

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1. EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Considering the significant costs and dangers of current practices, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications.

Demand is the primary influence of change.
Increasing public awareness will drive demand, and in turn, supermarkets will respond to changing attitudes and pressures.

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This, in turn, has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted.

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits.

A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

As consumers become more aware of the consequences of food waste and result in a shift of demand, supermarkets have opportunities to market towards this by showing sustainable practices and building consumer confidence. Supermarkets in Europe are already taking the initiative on reducing food waste, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try. "The initiative was launched in March of 2014; in the first two days, 2.1 tons of fruits and vegetables per store on average were sold."

Donation of edible food that is no longer considered marketable is one way retail can divert food from landfills<ref name="Schneider"/>. Although some businesses are concerned about liability, both Canada and the United States have the Donation of Food Act and the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act to protect contributors. Donations can be tax deductible giving the incentive to avoid landfill disposal costs. While food donation is becoming a popular alternative to food waste, is is important to remember that reducing the source is the primary goal.

Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current demands. Producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. The idea of Land sharing is a way of farming that mitigates habitat destruction while still producing food. Agriculture will grow in areas where organisms are able to live and therefor share the land together. http://www.ncl.ac.uk/sustainability/funding/awardedprojects/landsharingvssparing/ This requires more land but promises less habitat destruction . However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The non-integrated approach will allow for land to be used just for mass production while still promoting biodiversity in other areas to flourish with less stress of habitat loss. http://www.ncl.ac.uk/sustainability/funding/awardedprojects/landsharingvssparing/

==Global Stuff ??==

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and regulations??

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Need to touch on the remedial actions we discussed. Disposal chart etc.

Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. Though there are many benefits of an efficiency based, global food production chain, there are also many consequences. From the consumers who use the purchasing power to drive the supply chain, to the farmers who cultivate the food, there is an immense amount of food wasted due to a rise in superficial aesthetic standards in modern society. The effects of food waste are vast.

Economic costs are shared by the entire supply chain, with consumers throwing away much of the food they purchase, supermarkets throwing away the huge quantities of non-aesthetic fruits and vegetables that don’t make it to the shelves, and farmers throwing away large portions of their crop because of ____(improper storage? Audits? Necessary over estimation? Thomas?). If a shift in mindset were to allow consumers to accept slightly blemished or a-symmetrical produce they, as well as the markets and farmers who made the food available, would save a great deal of money.

The social costs are difficult to quantify (and often go unnoticed), but the implications are very important. Farmers who are producing food on a small scale are being forced out of the agriculture market by large corporations who use economy-of-scale to produce food less expensively and year round. This is creating a loss of jobs for many farmers who have dedicated their lives to cultivating their land in order to feed their local communities. (transition)Consumers are often unaware of the social costs associated with their insistence on cosmetically perfect produce. The ideals that a consumer deserves perfect produce has contributed to a consumer society which is willing to make huge environmental sacrifices for the sake of buying something pretty. This mindset can be reverted only through the education of consumers, and by increasing their awareness that the products they purchase may come at an extremely high cost, regardless of their affordability.

The environmental costs of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are paramount. In a time when our food production practices are simply unsustainable, food waste is a bad habit that we cannot afford. Arable land is being degraded by large-scale agriculture at an alarming rate, which, with additional environmental stresses associated with climate change, will make it very difficult for farmers to produce the necessary food to support our population. On top of this, runoff fertilizers are contributing to oceanic dead zones, and massive amounts of rainforest are being cleared to support agriculture globally. A reduction in food wastage will certainly help to ease the pressure of these environmental impacts, but large-scale agriculture has intrinsic environmental costs. Organizations such as ___ are creating a culture that celebrates small-scale local farming, and with education of consumers our food production may be able to shift back towards smaller, more sustainably managed farms.

There are many ways our society can improve to create a more sustainable food system. It starts with a change in mind set and education of the general public. This will have positive effects that ripple through the supply chain. A social movement towards sustainably harvested produce will allow super markets to stock a variety of produce while minimizing their waste, and ultimately, contribute to a shift towards local food production which will drastically reduce our unnecessary waste.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-07T18:55:43Z

ThomasLawson: /* Social */

Introduction' The nature of the issue or problem – location, duration, scope/scale, intensity/frequency/severity of negative impacts, current and predicted winners and losers if no remedial action(s) is (are) taken;

General notes/ things to include somewhere:

1) Define Food loss vs waste and use these accurately throughout paper!
Food losses refer to the decrease in edible food mass throughout the part of the supply chain that specifically leads to edible food for human consumption. Food losses take place at production, postharvest and processing stages in the food supply chain (Parfitt et al., 2010). Food losses occurring at the end of the food chain (retail and final consumption) are rather called “food waste”, which relates to retailers’ and consumers’ behavior. (Parfitt et al., 2010) http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/mb060e/mb060e00.pdf
2) Bold subheadings in who/retailers. Either add bold to farmers and consumers or remove them here.
3) Thomas, mentioned land sharing vs. land sparing?
4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. FOOD LOSS IS DEFINED AS --- WHEREAS FOOD WASTE REFERS TO ---Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, (while) consumers in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia throw away only 6-11 kg per year"<ref name="FAO key"/>.----Food losses and waste (Losses Vs waste? The cost of produce wasted amounts to...) amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries (Per year?)."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. ----- Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> ,however, the consumers demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributers, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face '''substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”____, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, Consumers, Markets, and Farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free <ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often overplant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. If demand is lower than predicted businesses may put on promotions such as "two for one", this causes the consumers to purchase more food than they will eat and pushes the food waste down the supply chain. Overstocking of fruits and vegetables is not financially harmful to markets because of the low cost of discarding food<ref name="EU"/>. This allows markets to feel complacent with ordering more than purchased because the cost of disposing of unsold food is low, especially for fruits and vegetables compared to meat and dairy.

Many times, markets throw perfectly good produce out because consumers are often confused by best by dates and assume that products are not good for consumption after these dates. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the expiry date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>.

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers/ corporations are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. Much of this loss can be attributed to ____ ...Thomas? an initial screening for grade? audits? Inaccurate predictions of future demand? what are the actual causes for food loss here?

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)
*Loss of arable land (7) <ref name="footprint">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Food wastage footprint impacts on natural resources, 2013.</ref>- land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest
*soil degradation (8)
*habitat destruction/deforestation etc.
**biodiversity loss (4)

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>.
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], (Eric's notes: which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissionsane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change <ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost of food waste to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref> (Context. What cost?)

There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive. Excess produce is fruits and vegetables that are planted and harvested for sale yet never get consumed due to imperfect appearances.

Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm 9. The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill 11. This is due to unintentional producer surplus where farmers try to meet the demand of markets. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost 10. Since farmers don't receive a cheque for food that is audited or unused, the resources used to produce the food lost results in farmers needlessly spending money on the resources. The accumulated waste of resources on unused product forces farmers to bear marginal returns on their product because they are getting reimbursed for creating product. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

===Social===

While the environmental and economic factors can be measured, there are also significant social costs that exist within the food supply chain.

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many local small-scale production farmers.

Farms are working to match consumer demand but not all producers are able to meet required quotas. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers because volume production is much higher from large scale producers, which offers a variety that makers desire. Local organic farmers don't have the resources like labour and technology that allows mass production to offer large amounts of ascetically desirable produce. The intimidating and often unfeasible market for local farmers is decreasing the amount of firms in the market. Less and less people are going into small scale production, especially young people. This forces close-to retiring farmers to stop their current production because no one will fill up their jobs once they retire, and often retiring local farmers are forced to sell their land to large industries, who will implement high food loss production methods due to mass production. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/16/young-people-farming-future-agriculture There is a magnitude of problems that both local and large scale production farmers face, but local farmers don't have the volume to sell produce after the food loss and it inhibits many locals from partaking in the agricultural markets . Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the aesthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its nutritional value. 13 . Another factor for food loss is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their products due to small bruises and blemishes that don't meet the aesthetic requirements from produce buyers. 14. Furthermore, as a result of broad dietary patterns and high demands, farmers often struggle to produce enough quantity.

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviours. Cultural consumerism and higher disposable incomes result in overspending and overbuying. Buyers with a higher income can afford to spend lots of money on food, so when it gets wasted it doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it.
When asked about throwing away once perfectly edible fruits and vegetables, consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste <ref name="c3"/>, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.
(These are good points, and could/ should be expanded on. Consumers are the largest social factor that we have. Talk about societies consumerism habits, rise in economy leading to more disposable income etc.)

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1. EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Considering the significant costs and dangers of current practices, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications.

Demand is the primary influence of change.
Increasing public awareness will drive demand, and in turn, supermarkets will respond to changing attitudes and pressures.

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This, in turn, has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted.

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits.

A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

As consumers become more aware of the consequences of food waste and result in a shift of demand, supermarkets have opportunities to market towards this by showing sustainable practices. Supermarkets in Europe are already taking the initiative on reducing food waste, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try. "The initiative was launched in March of 2014; in the first two days, 2.1 tons of fruits and vegetables per store on average were sold."

Donation of edible food that is no longer considered saleable is a way retail can divert food from landfills<ref name="Schneider"/>. Although some businesses are concerned about liability, both Canada and the United States have the Donation of Food Act and the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act to protect contributers. Donations can be tax deductable allowing markets to save money that would have been used to ___ landfill

Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current demands. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. ''Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. 16 - (Collected from) NOTE: pls define land sharing/sparing and be more specific to how it would help prevent food loss

==Global Stuff ??==

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and regulations??

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Need to touch on the remedial actions we discussed. Disposal chart etc.

Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. Though there are many benefits of an efficiency based, global food production chain, there are also many consequences. From the consumers who use the purchasing power to drive the supply chain, to the farmers who cultivate the food, there is an immense amount of food wasted due to a rise in superficial aesthetic standards in modern society. The effects of food waste are vast.

Economic costs are shared by the entire supply chain, with consumers throwing away much of the food they purchase, supermarkets throwing away the huge quantities of non-aesthetic fruits and vegetables that don’t make it to the shelves, and farmers throwing away large portions of their crop because of ____(improper storage? Audits? Necessary over estimation? Thomas?). If a shift in mindset were to allow consumers to accept slightly blemished or a-symmetrical produce they, as well as the markets and farmers who made the food available, would save a great deal of money.

The social costs are difficult to quantify (and often go unnoticed), but the implications are very important. Farmers who are producing food on a small scale are being forced out of the agriculture market by large corporations who use economy-of-scale to produce food less expensively and year round. This is creating a loss of jobs for many farmers who have dedicated their lives to cultivating their land in order to feed their local communities. (transition)Consumers are often unaware of the social costs associated with their insistence on cosmetically perfect produce. The ideals that a consumer deserves perfect produce has contributed to a consumer society which is willing to make huge environmental sacrifices for the sake of buying something pretty. This mindset can be reverted only through the education of consumers, and by increasing their awareness that the products they purchase may come at an extremely high cost, regardless of their affordability.

The environmental costs of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are paramount. In a time when our food production practices are simply unsustainable, food waste is a bad habit that we cannot afford. Arable land is being degraded by large-scale agriculture at an alarming rate, which, with additional environmental stresses associated with climate change, will make it very difficult for farmers to produce the necessary food to support our population. On top of this, runoff fertilizers are contributing to oceanic dead zones, and massive amounts of rainforest are being cleared to support agriculture globally. A reduction in food wastage will certainly help to ease the pressure of these environmental impacts, but large-scale agriculture has intrinsic environmental costs. Organizations such as ___ are creating a culture that celebrates small-scale local farming, and with education of consumers our food production may be able to shift back towards smaller, more sustainably managed farms.

There are many ways our society can improve to create a more sustainable food system. It starts with a change in mind set and education of the general public. This will have positive effects that ripple through the supply chain. A social movement towards sustainably harvested produce will allow super markets to stock a variety of produce while minimizing their waste, and ultimately, contribute to a shift towards local food production which will drastically reduce our unnecessary waste.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-07T18:50:03Z

ThomasLawson: /* Social */

Introduction' The nature of the issue or problem – location, duration, scope/scale, intensity/frequency/severity of negative impacts, current and predicted winners and losers if no remedial action(s) is (are) taken;

General notes/ things to include somewhere:

1) Define Food loss vs waste and use these accurately throughout paper!
Food losses refer to the decrease in edible food mass throughout the part of the supply chain that specifically leads to edible food for human consumption. Food losses take place at production, postharvest and processing stages in the food supply chain (Parfitt et al., 2010). Food losses occurring at the end of the food chain (retail and final consumption) are rather called “food waste”, which relates to retailers’ and consumers’ behavior. (Parfitt et al., 2010) http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/mb060e/mb060e00.pdf
2) Bold subheadings in who/retailers. Either add bold to farmers and consumers or remove them here.
3) Thomas, mentioned land sharing vs. land sparing?
4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. FOOD LOSS IS DEFINED AS --- WHEREAS FOOD WASTE REFERS TO ---Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, (while) consumers in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia throw away only 6-11 kg per year"<ref name="FAO key"/>.----Food losses and waste (Losses Vs waste? The cost of produce wasted amounts to...) amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries (Per year?)."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. ----- Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> ,however, the consumers demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributers, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face '''substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”____, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, Consumers, Markets, and Farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free <ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often overplant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. If demand is lower than predicted businesses may put on promotions such as "two for one", this causes the consumers to purchase more food than they will eat and pushes the food waste down the supply chain. Overstocking of fruits and vegetables is not financially harmful to markets because of the low cost of discarding food<ref name="EU"/>. This allows markets to feel complacent with ordering more than purchased because the cost of disposing of unsold food is low, especially for fruits and vegetables compared to meat and dairy.

Many times, markets throw perfectly good produce out because consumers are often confused by best by dates and assume that products are not good for consumption after these dates. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the expiry date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>.

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers/ corporations are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. Much of this loss can be attributed to ____ ...Thomas? an initial screening for grade? audits? Inaccurate predictions of future demand? what are the actual causes for food loss here?

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)
*Loss of arable land (7) <ref name="footprint">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Food wastage footprint impacts on natural resources, 2013.</ref>- land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest
*soil degradation (8)
*habitat destruction/deforestation etc.
**biodiversity loss (4)

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>.
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], (Eric's notes: which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissionsane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change <ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost of food waste to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref> (Context. What cost?)

There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive. Excess produce is fruits and vegetables that are planted and harvested for sale yet never get consumed due to imperfect appearances.

Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm 9. The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill 11. This is due to unintentional producer surplus where farmers try to meet the demand of markets. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost 10. Since farmers don't receive a cheque for food that is audited or unused, the resources used to produce the food lost results in farmers needlessly spending money on the resources. The accumulated waste of resources on unused product forces farmers to bear marginal returns on their product because they are getting reimbursed for creating product. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

===Social===

While the environmental and economic factors can be measured, there are also significant social costs that exist within the food supply chain.

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many local small-scale production farmers.

Farms are working to match consumer demand but not all producers are able to meet required quotas. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers because volume production is much higher from large scale producers, which offers a variety that makers desire. Local organic farmers don't have the resources like labour and technology that allows mass production to offer large amounts of ascetically desirable produce. The intimidating and often unfeasible market for local farmers is decreasing the amount of firms in the market. Less and less people are going into small scale production, especially young people. This forces close-to retiring farmers to stop their current production because no one will fill up their jobs once they retire, and often retiring local farmers are forced to sell their land to large industries, who will implement high food loss production methods due to mass production. There is a magnitude of problems that both local and large scale production farmers face, but local farmers don't have the volume to sell produce after the food loss and it inhibits many locals from partaking in the agricultural markets . Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the aesthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its nutritional value. 13 . Another factor for food loss is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their products due to small bruises and blemishes that don't meet the aesthetic requirements from produce buyers. 14. Furthermore, as a result of broad dietary patterns and high demands, farmers often struggle to produce enough quantity.

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviours. Cultural consumerism and higher disposable incomes result in overspending and overbuying. Buyers with a higher income can afford to spend lots of money on food, so when it gets wasted it doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it.
When asked about throwing away once perfectly edible fruits and vegetables, consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste <ref name="c3"/>, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.
(These are good points, and could/ should be expanded on. Consumers are the largest social factor that we have. Talk about societies consumerism habits, rise in economy leading to more disposable income etc.)

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1. EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Considering the significant costs and dangers of current practices, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications.

Demand is the primary influence of change.
Increasing public awareness will drive demand, and in turn, supermarkets will respond to changing attitudes and pressures.

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This, in turn, has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted.

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits.

A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

As consumers become more aware of the consequences of food waste and result in a shift of demand, supermarkets have opportunities to market towards this by showing sustainable practices. Supermarkets in Europe are already taking the initiative on reducing food waste, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try. "The initiative was launched in March of 2014; in the first two days, 2.1 tons of fruits and vegetables per store on average were sold."

Donation of edible food that is no longer considered saleable is a way retail can divert food from landfills<ref name="Schneider"/>. Although some businesses are concerned about liability, both Canada and the United States have the Donation of Food Act and the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act to protect contributers. Donations can be tax deductable allowing markets to save money that would have been used to ___ landfill

Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current demands. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. ''Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. 16 - (Collected from) NOTE: pls define land sharing/sparing and be more specific to how it would help prevent food loss

==Global Stuff ??==

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and regulations??

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Need to touch on the remedial actions we discussed. Disposal chart etc.

Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. Though there are many benefits of an efficiency based, global food production chain, there are also many consequences. From the consumers who use the purchasing power to drive the supply chain, to the farmers who cultivate the food, there is an immense amount of food wasted due to a rise in superficial aesthetic standards in modern society. The effects of food waste are vast.

Economic costs are shared by the entire supply chain, with consumers throwing away much of the food they purchase, supermarkets throwing away the huge quantities of non-aesthetic fruits and vegetables that don’t make it to the shelves, and farmers throwing away large portions of their crop because of ____(improper storage? Audits? Necessary over estimation? Thomas?). If a shift in mindset were to allow consumers to accept slightly blemished or a-symmetrical produce they, as well as the markets and farmers who made the food available, would save a great deal of money.

The social costs are difficult to quantify (and often go unnoticed), but the implications are very important. Farmers who are producing food on a small scale are being forced out of the agriculture market by large corporations who use economy-of-scale to produce food less expensively and year round. This is creating a loss of jobs for many farmers who have dedicated their lives to cultivating their land in order to feed their local communities. (transition)Consumers are often unaware of the social costs associated with their insistence on cosmetically perfect produce. The ideals that a consumer deserves perfect produce has contributed to a consumer society which is willing to make huge environmental sacrifices for the sake of buying something pretty. This mindset can be reverted only through the education of consumers, and by increasing their awareness that the products they purchase may come at an extremely high cost, regardless of their affordability.

The environmental costs of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are paramount. In a time when our food production practices are simply unsustainable, food waste is a bad habit that we cannot afford. Arable land is being degraded by large-scale agriculture at an alarming rate, which, with additional environmental stresses associated with climate change, will make it very difficult for farmers to produce the necessary food to support our population. On top of this, runoff fertilizers are contributing to oceanic dead zones, and massive amounts of rainforest are being cleared to support agriculture globally. A reduction in food wastage will certainly help to ease the pressure of these environmental impacts, but large-scale agriculture has intrinsic environmental costs. Organizations such as ___ are creating a culture that celebrates small-scale local farming, and with education of consumers our food production may be able to shift back towards smaller, more sustainably managed farms.

There are many ways our society can improve to create a more sustainable food system. It starts with a change in mind set and education of the general public. This will have positive effects that ripple through the supply chain. A social movement towards sustainably harvested produce will allow super markets to stock a variety of produce while minimizing their waste, and ultimately, contribute to a shift towards local food production which will drastically reduce our unnecessary waste.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-07T18:34:25Z

ThomasLawson: /* Costs */

Introduction' The nature of the issue or problem – location, duration, scope/scale, intensity/frequency/severity of negative impacts, current and predicted winners and losers if no remedial action(s) is (are) taken;

General notes/ things to include somewhere:

1) Define Food loss vs waste and use these accurately throughout paper!
Food losses refer to the decrease in edible food mass throughout the part of the supply chain that specifically leads to edible food for human consumption. Food losses take place at production, postharvest and processing stages in the food supply chain (Parfitt et al., 2010). Food losses occurring at the end of the food chain (retail and final consumption) are rather called “food waste”, which relates to retailers’ and consumers’ behavior. (Parfitt et al., 2010) http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/mb060e/mb060e00.pdf
2) Bold subheadings in who/retailers. Either add bold to farmers and consumers or remove them here.
3) Thomas, mentioned land sharing vs. land sparing?
4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, (while) consumers in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia throw away only 6-11 kg per year"<ref name="FAO key"/>.----Food losses and waste (Losses Vs waste? The cost of produce wasted amounts to...) amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries (Per year?)."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. ----- Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> ,however, the consumers demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributers, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face '''substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”____, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, Consumers, Markets, and Farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free <ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often overplant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. If demand is lower than predicted businesses may put on promotions such as "two for one", this causes the consumers to purchase more food than they will eat and pushes the food waste down the supply chain. Overstocking of fruits and vegetables is not financially harmful to markets because of the low cost of discarding food<ref name="EU"/>. This allows markets to feel complacent with ordering more than purchased because the cost of disposing of unsold food is low, especially for fruits and vegetables compared to meat and dairy.

Many times, markets throw perfectly good produce out because consumers are often confused by best by dates and assume that products are not good for consumption after these dates. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the expiry date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>.

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers/ corporations are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. Much of this loss can be attributed to ____ ...Thomas? an initial screening for grade? audits? Inaccurate predictions of future demand? what are the actual causes for food loss here?

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)
*Loss of arable land (7) <ref name="footprint">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Food wastage footprint impacts on natural resources, 2013.</ref>- land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest
*soil degradation (8)
*habitat destruction/deforestation etc.
**biodiversity loss (4)

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>.
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], (Eric's notes: which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissionsane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change <ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost of food waste to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref> (Context. What cost?)

There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive. Excess produce is fruits and vegetables that are planted and harvested for sale yet never get consumed due to imperfect appearances.

Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm 9. The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill 11. This is due to unintentional producer surplus where farmers try to meet the demand of markets. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost 10. Since farmers don't receive a cheque for food that is audited or unused, the resources used to produce the food lost results in farmers needlessly spending money on the resources. The accumulated waste of resources on unused product forces farmers to bear marginal returns on their product because they are getting reimbursed for creating product. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

===Social===

While the environmental and economic factors can be measured, there are also significant social costs that exist within the food supply chain.

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many local small-scale production farmers.

Farms are working to match consumer demand but not all producers are able to meet required quotas. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers because volume production is much higher from large scale producers, which offers a variety that makers desire. Local organic farmers don't have the resources like labour and technology that allows mass production to offer large amounts of ascetically desirable produce. The intimidating and often unfeasible market for local farmers is decreasing the amount of firms in the market. Less and less people are going into small scale production, especially young people. This forces close-to retiring farmers to stop their current production because no one will fill up their jobs once they retire, and often retiring local farmers are forced to sell their land to large industries, who will implement high food loss production methods due to mass production.

(mention the pressure put onto farmers). Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather (and disease/pests etc. ). High winds or intense sun rays can alter the aesthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its nutritional value. 13 . Another factor for food loss is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their products due to small bruises and blemishes that don't meet the aesthetic requirements from produce buyers. 14. Furthermore, as a result of broad dietary patterns and high demands, farmers often struggle to produce enough quantity.
(Nothing in this paragraph has anything to do with social cost... Possibly put it in the who section?)

The organic and environmentally less harsh methods of farming don’t yield enough harvest ("less harsh" is bad. What are the implications of organic farming that make it yield less?). The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round (Just read this out loud.... Also what contracts? and why are large producers able to grow year round? Different climate or greenhouses?). 15 (what does this result in? farmers giving up sustainable practices to meet demands of big suppliers? not being able to afford to produce sustainably?)

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviours. Cultural consumerism and higher disposable incomes result in overspending and overbuying. Buyers with a higher income can afford to spend lots of money on food, so when it gets wasted it doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it.
When asked about throwing away once perfectly edible fruits and vegetables, consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste <ref name="c3"/>, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.
(These are good points, and could/ should be expanded on. Consumers are the largest social factor that we have. Talk about societies consumerism habits, rise in economy leading to more disposable income etc.)

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1. EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Considering the significant costs and dangers of current practices, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications.

Demand is the primary influence of change.
Increasing public awareness will drive demand, and in turn, supermarkets will respond to changing attitudes and pressures.

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This, in turn, has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted.

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits.

A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

As consumers become more aware of the consequences of food waste and result in a shift of demand, supermarkets have opportunities to market towards this by showing sustainable practices. Supermarkets in Europe are already taking the initiative on reducing food waste, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try. "The initiative was launched in March of 2014; in the first two days, 2.1 tons of fruits and vegetables per store on average were sold."

Donation of edible food that is no longer considered saleable is a way retail can divert food from landfills<ref name="Schneider"/>. Although some businesses are concerned about liability, both Canada and the United States have the Donation of Food Act and the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act to protect contributers. Donations can be tax deductable allowing markets to save money that would have been used to ___ landfill

Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current demands. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. ''Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. 16 - (Collected from) NOTE: pls define land sharing/sparing and be more specific to how it would help prevent food loss

==Global Stuff ??==

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and regulations??

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Need to touch on the remedial actions we discussed. Disposal chart etc.

Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. Though there are many benefits of an efficiency based, global food production chain, there are also many consequences. From the consumers who use the purchasing power to drive the supply chain, to the farmers who cultivate the food, there is an immense amount of food wasted due to a rise in superficial aesthetic standards in modern society. The effects of food waste are vast.

Economic costs are shared by the entire supply chain, with consumers throwing away much of the food they purchase, supermarkets throwing away the huge quantities of non-aesthetic fruits and vegetables that don’t make it to the shelves, and farmers throwing away large portions of their crop because of ____(improper storage? Audits? Necessary over estimation? Thomas?). If a shift in mindset were to allow consumers to accept slightly blemished or a-symmetrical produce they, as well as the markets and farmers who made the food available, would save a great deal of money.

The social costs are difficult to quantify (and often go unnoticed), but the implications are very important. Farmers who are producing food on a small scale are being forced out of the agriculture market by large corporations who use economy-of-scale to produce food less expensively and year round. This is creating a loss of jobs for many farmers who have dedicated their lives to cultivating their land in order to feed their local communities. (transition)Consumers are often unaware of the social costs associated with their insistence on cosmetically perfect produce. The ideals that a consumer deserves perfect produce has contributed to a consumer society which is willing to make huge environmental sacrifices for the sake of buying something pretty. This mindset can be reverted only through the education of consumers, and by increasing their awareness that the products they purchase may come at an extremely high cost, regardless of their affordability.

The environmental costs of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are paramount. In a time when our food production practices are simply unsustainable, food waste is a bad habit that we cannot afford. Arable land is being degraded by large-scale agriculture at an alarming rate, which, with additional environmental stresses associated with climate change, will make it very difficult for farmers to produce the necessary food to support our population. On top of this, runoff fertilizers are contributing to oceanic dead zones, and massive amounts of rainforest are being cleared to support agriculture globally. A reduction in food wastage will certainly help to ease the pressure of these environmental impacts, but large-scale agriculture has intrinsic environmental costs. Organizations such as ___ are creating a culture that celebrates small-scale local farming, and with education of consumers our food production may be able to shift back towards smaller, more sustainably managed farms.

There are many ways our society can improve to create a more sustainable food system. It starts with a change in mind set and education of the general public. This will have positive effects that ripple through the supply chain. A social movement towards sustainably harvested produce will allow super markets to stock a variety of produce while minimizing their waste, and ultimately, contribute to a shift towards local food production which will drastically reduce our unnecessary waste.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-07T18:31:04Z

ThomasLawson: /* Costs */

Introduction' The nature of the issue or problem – location, duration, scope/scale, intensity/frequency/severity of negative impacts, current and predicted winners and losers if no remedial action(s) is (are) taken;

General notes/ things to include somewhere:

1) Define Food loss vs waste and use these accurately throughout paper!
Food losses refer to the decrease in edible food mass throughout the part of the supply chain that specifically leads to edible food for human consumption. Food losses take place at production, postharvest and processing stages in the food supply chain (Parfitt et al., 2010). Food losses occurring at the end of the food chain (retail and final consumption) are rather called “food waste”, which relates to retailers’ and consumers’ behavior. (Parfitt et al., 2010) http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/mb060e/mb060e00.pdf
2) Bold subheadings in who/retailers. Either add bold to farmers and consumers or remove them here.
3) Thomas, mentioned land sharing vs. land sparing?
4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, (while) consumers in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia throw away only 6-11 kg per year"<ref name="FAO key"/>.----Food losses and waste (Losses Vs waste? The cost of produce wasted amounts to...) amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries (Per year?)."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. ----- Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> ,however, the consumers demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributers, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face '''substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”____, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, Consumers, Markets, and Farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free <ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often overplant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. If demand is lower than predicted businesses may put on promotions such as "two for one", this causes the consumers to purchase more food than they will eat and pushes the food waste down the supply chain. Overstocking of fruits and vegetables is not financially harmful to markets because of the low cost of discarding food<ref name="EU"/>. This allows markets to feel complacent with ordering more than purchased because the cost of disposing of unsold food is low, especially for fruits and vegetables compared to meat and dairy.

Many times, markets throw perfectly good produce out because consumers are often confused by best by dates and assume that products are not good for consumption after these dates. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the expiry date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>.

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers/ corporations are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. Much of this loss can be attributed to ____ ...Thomas? an initial screening for grade? audits? Inaccurate predictions of future demand? what are the actual causes for food loss here?

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)
*Loss of arable land (7) <ref name="footprint">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Food wastage footprint impacts on natural resources, 2013.</ref>- land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest
*soil degradation (8)
*habitat destruction/deforestation etc.
**biodiversity loss (4)

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>.
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], (Eric's notes: which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissionsane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change <ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost of food waste to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref> (Context. What cost?)

There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive. Excess produce is fruits and vegetables that are planted and harvested for sale yet never get consumed due to imperfect appearances.

Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm 9. The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill 11. This is due to unintentional producer surplus where farmers try to meet the demand of markets. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost 10. Since farmers don't receive a cheque for food that is audited or unused, the resources used to produce the food lost results in farmers needlessly spending money on the resources. The accumulated waste of resources on unused product forces farmers to bear marginal returns on their product because they are getting reimbursed for creating product. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

===Social===

While the environmental and economic factors can be measured, there are also significant social costs that exist within the food supply chain.

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many local small-scale production farmers.

Farms are working to match consumer demand but not all producers are able to meet required quotas. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers because volume production is much higher from large scale producers, which offers a variety that makers desire. Local organic farmers don't have the resources like labour and technology that allows mass production to offer large amounts of ascetically desirable produce. The intimidating and often unfeasible market for local farmers is decreasing the amount of firms in the market. Less and less people are going into small scale production, especially young people. This forces close-to retiring farmers to stop their current production because no one will fill up their jobs once they retire, and often retiring local farmers are forced to sell their land to large industries, who will implement high food loss production methods due to mass production.

(mention the pressure put onto farmers). Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather (and disease/pests etc. ). High winds or intense sun rays (are some rays more intense than others?) can alter the aesthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value (wouldn't the nutritional value be consistent with the rest of the produce on that farm?). 13 . Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their products due to small bruises and blemishes (compound sentence, also define food audit, who is dictating this loss). 14. Furthermore, as a result of broad dietary patterns and high demands, farmers often struggle to produce enough quantity.
(Nothing in this paragraph has anything to do with social cost... Possibly put it in the who section?)

The organic and environmentally less harsh methods of farming don’t yield enough harvest ("less harsh" is bad. What are the implications of organic farming that make it yield less?). The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round (Just read this out loud.... Also what contracts? and why are large producers able to grow year round? Different climate or greenhouses?). 15 (what does this result in? farmers giving up sustainable practices to meet demands of big suppliers? not being able to afford to produce sustainably?)

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviours. Cultural consumerism and higher disposable incomes result in overspending and overbuying. Buyers with a higher income can afford to spend lots of money on food, so when it gets wasted it doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it.
When asked about throwing away once perfectly edible fruits and vegetables, consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste <ref name="c3"/>, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.
(These are good points, and could/ should be expanded on. Consumers are the largest social factor that we have. Talk about societies consumerism habits, rise in economy leading to more disposable income etc.)

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1. EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Considering the significant costs and dangers of current practices, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications.

Demand is the primary influence of change.
Increasing public awareness will drive demand, and in turn, supermarkets will respond to changing attitudes and pressures.

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This, in turn, has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted.

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits.

A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

As consumers become more aware of the consequences of food waste and result in a shift of demand, supermarkets have opportunities to market towards this by showing sustainable practices. Supermarkets in Europe are already taking the initiative on reducing food waste, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try. "The initiative was launched in March of 2014; in the first two days, 2.1 tons of fruits and vegetables per store on average were sold."

Donation of edible food that is no longer considered saleable is a way retail can divert food from landfills<ref name="Schneider"/>. Although some businesses are concerned about liability, both Canada and the United States have the Donation of Food Act and the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act to protect contributers. Donations can be tax deductable allowing markets to save money that would have been used to ___ landfill

Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current demands. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. ''Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. 16 - (Collected from) NOTE: pls define land sharing/sparing and be more specific to how it would help prevent food loss

==Global Stuff ??==

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and regulations??

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Need to touch on the remedial actions we discussed. Disposal chart etc.

Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. Though there are many benefits of an efficiency based, global food production chain, there are also many consequences. From the consumers who use the purchasing power to drive the supply chain, to the farmers who cultivate the food, there is an immense amount of food wasted due to a rise in superficial aesthetic standards in modern society. The effects of food waste are vast.

Economic costs are shared by the entire supply chain, with consumers throwing away much of the food they purchase, supermarkets throwing away the huge quantities of non-aesthetic fruits and vegetables that don’t make it to the shelves, and farmers throwing away large portions of their crop because of ____(improper storage? Audits? Necessary over estimation? Thomas?). If a shift in mindset were to allow consumers to accept slightly blemished or a-symmetrical produce they, as well as the markets and farmers who made the food available, would save a great deal of money.

The social costs are difficult to quantify (and often go unnoticed), but the implications are very important. Farmers who are producing food on a small scale are being forced out of the agriculture market by large corporations who use economy-of-scale to produce food less expensively and year round. This is creating a loss of jobs for many farmers who have dedicated their lives to cultivating their land in order to feed their local communities. (transition)Consumers are often unaware of the social costs associated with their insistence on cosmetically perfect produce. The ideals that a consumer deserves perfect produce has contributed to a consumer society which is willing to make huge environmental sacrifices for the sake of buying something pretty. This mindset can be reverted only through the education of consumers, and by increasing their awareness that the products they purchase may come at an extremely high cost, regardless of their affordability.

The environmental costs of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are paramount. In a time when our food production practices are simply unsustainable, food waste is a bad habit that we cannot afford. Arable land is being degraded by large-scale agriculture at an alarming rate, which, with additional environmental stresses associated with climate change, will make it very difficult for farmers to produce the necessary food to support our population. On top of this, runoff fertilizers are contributing to oceanic dead zones, and massive amounts of rainforest are being cleared to support agriculture globally. A reduction in food wastage will certainly help to ease the pressure of these environmental impacts, but large-scale agriculture has intrinsic environmental costs. Organizations such as ___ are creating a culture that celebrates small-scale local farming, and with education of consumers our food production may be able to shift back towards smaller, more sustainably managed farms.

There are many ways our society can improve to create a more sustainable food system. It starts with a change in mind set and education of the general public. This will have positive effects that ripple through the supply chain. A social movement towards sustainably harvested produce will allow super markets to stock a variety of produce while minimizing their waste, and ultimately, contribute to a shift towards local food production which will drastically reduce our unnecessary waste.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-07T18:04:37Z

ThomasLawson: /* Costs */

Introduction' The nature of the issue or problem – location, duration, scope/scale, intensity/frequency/severity of negative impacts, current and predicted winners and losers if no remedial action(s) is (are) taken;

General notes/ things to include somewhere:

1) Define Food loss vs waste and use these accurately throughout paper!
Food losses refer to the decrease in edible food mass throughout the part of the supply chain that specifically leads to edible food for human consumption. Food losses take place at production, postharvest and processing stages in the food supply chain (Parfitt et al., 2010). Food losses occurring at the end of the food chain (retail and final consumption) are rather called “food waste”, which relates to retailers’ and consumers’ behavior. (Parfitt et al., 2010) http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/mb060e/mb060e00.pdf
2) Bold subheadings in who/retailers. Either add bold to farmers and consumers or remove them here.
3) Thomas, mentioned land sharing vs. land sparing?
4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, (while) consumers in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia throw away only 6-11 kg per year"<ref name="FAO key"/>.----Food losses and waste (Losses Vs waste? The cost of produce wasted amounts to...) amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries (Per year?)."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. ----- Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> ,however, the consumers demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributers, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face '''substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”____, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, Consumers, Markets, and Farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free <ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often overplant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty.If demand is lower than predicted businesses may put on promotions such as "two for one", this causes the consumers to purchase more food than they will eat and pushes the food waste down the supply chain. Overstocking of fruits and vegetables is not financially harmful to markets because of the low cost of discarding food<ref name="EU"/>. This allows markets to feel complacent with ordering more than purchased because the cost of disposing of unsold food is low, especially for fruits and vegetables compared to meat and dairy.

Many times, markets throw perfectly good produce out because consumers are often confused by best by dates and assume that products are not good for consumption after these dates. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>.

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers/ corporations are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. Much of this loss can be attributed to ____ ...Thomas? an initial screening for grade? audits? Inaccurate predictions of future demand? what are the actual causes for food loss here?

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)
*Loss of arable land (7) <ref name="footprint">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Food wastage footprint impacts on natural resources, 2013.</ref>- land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest
*soil degradation (8)
*habitat destruction/deforestation etc.
**biodiversity loss (4)

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>.
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], (Eric's notes: which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissionsane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change <ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost of food waste to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref> (Context. What cost?)

There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive. Excess produce is fruits and vegetables that are planted and harvested for sale yet never get consumed due to imperfect appearances.

Note: define excess produce, expand on why this is an economic issues and how it is costing famers money. Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm 9. The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill 11. This is due to unintentional producer surplus where farmers try to meet the demand of markets. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost 10. Since farmers don't receive a cheque for food that is audited, the resources used to produce the food lost results in farmers needlessly spending money not the resources. (NEED SOME LEGIT MONEY STATS $$$$$$$)
(Good Ideas, but this is nowhere near ready to publish...)

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

===Social===

While the environmental and economic factors can be measured, there are also significant social costs that exist within the food supply chain.

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many farmers (ok. which ones, and why?).

Since the suppliers (farmers? super markets?) are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community (what grave effects are you referring to?). Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up (how "cant they keep up? is cost of production too high? Do they not have necessary knowledge? are they not able to produce exotic foods on their land?") with large industrial producers. (is this stressful for farmers? describe the social/community consequences).

(mention the pressure put onto farmers). Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather (and disease/pests etc. ). High winds or intense sun rays (are some rays more intense than others?) can alter the aesthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value (wouldn't the nutritional value be consistent with the rest of the produce on that farm?). 13 . Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their products due to small bruises and blemishes (compound sentence, also define food audit, who is dictating this loss). 14. Furthermore, as a result of broad dietary patterns and high demands, farmers often struggle to produce enough quantity.
(Nothing in this paragraph has anything to do with social cost... Possibly put it in the who section?)

The organic and environmentally less harsh methods of farming don’t yield enough harvest ("less harsh" is bad. What are the implications of organic farming that make it yield less?). The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round (Just read this out loud.... Also what contracts? and why are large producers able to grow year round? Different climate or greenhouses?). 15 (what does this result in? farmers giving up sustainable practices to meet demands of big suppliers? not being able to afford to produce sustainably?)

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviours. Cultural consumerism and higher disposable incomes result in overspending and overbuying. Buyers with a higher income can afford to spend lots of money on food, so when it gets wasted it doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it.
When asked about throwing away once perfectly edible fruits and vegetables, consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste <ref name="c3"/>, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.
(These are good points, and could/ should be expanded on. Consumers are the largest social factor that we have. Talk about societies consumerism habits, rise in economy leading to more disposable income etc.)

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1.EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Considering the significant costs and dangers of current practices, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications.

Demand is the primary influencer of change.
Increasing public awareness will drive demand, and in turn, supermarkets will respond to changing attitudes and pressures.

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This, in turn, has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted.

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits.

A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

As consumer demands shift, supermarkets will become more confident in supplying less cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables at a cheaper price alongside the produce they already sell, giving consumers the option. Some supermarkets in Europe are taking the initiative on reducing food waste. For example, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try.

Donation of edible food that is no longer considered saleable is a way retail can divert food from landfills<ref name="Schneider"/>. Although some businesses are concerned about liability, both Canada and the United States have the Donation of Food Act and

Sustainable disposal

Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current demands. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. ''Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. 16 - (Collected from) NOTE: pls define land sharing/sparing and be more specific to how it would help prevent food loss

==Global Stuff ??==

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and regulations??

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Need to touch on the remedial actions we discussed. Disposal chart etc.

Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. Though there are many benefits of an efficiency based, global food production chain, there are also many consequences. From the consumers who use the purchasing power to drive the supply chain, to the farmers who cultivate the food, there is an immense amount of food wasted due to a rise in superficial aesthetic standards in modern society. The effects of food waste are vast.

Economic costs are shared by the entire supply chain, with consumers throwing away much of the food they purchase, supermarkets throwing away the huge quantities of non-aesthetic fruits and vegetables that don’t make it to the shelves, and farmers throwing away large portions of their crop because of ____(improper storage? Audits? Necessary over estimation? Thomas?). If a shift in mindset were to allow consumers to accept slightly blemished or a-symmetrical produce they, as well as the markets and farmers who made the food available, would save a great deal of money.

The social costs are difficult to quantify (and often go unnoticed), but the implications are very important. Farmers who are producing food on a small scale are being forced out of the agriculture market by large corporations who use economy-of-scale to produce food less expensively and year round. This is creating a loss of jobs for many farmers who have dedicated their lives to cultivating their land in order to feed their local communities. (transition)Consumers are often unaware of the social costs associated with their insistence on cosmetically perfect produce. The ideals that a consumer deserves perfect produce has contributed to a consumer society which is willing to make huge environmental sacrifices for the sake of buying something pretty. This mindset can be reverted only through the education of consumers, and by increasing their awareness that the products they purchase may come at an extremely high cost, regardless of their affordability.

The environmental costs of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are paramount. In a time when our food production practices are simply unsustainable, food waste is a bad habit that we cannot afford. Arable land is being degraded by large-scale agriculture at an alarming rate, which, with additional environmental stresses associated with climate change, will make it very difficult for farmers to produce the necessary food to support our population. On top of this, runoff fertilizers are contributing to oceanic dead zones, and massive amounts of rainforest are being cleared to support agriculture globally. A reduction in food wastage will certainly help to ease the pressure of these environmental impacts, but large-scale agriculture has intrinsic environmental costs. Organizations such as ___ are creating a culture that celebrates small-scale local farming, and with education of consumers our food production may be able to shift back towards smaller, more sustainably managed farms.

There are many ways our society can improve to create a more sustainable food system. It starts with a change in mind set and education of the general public. This will have positive effects that ripple through the supply chain. A social movement towards sustainably harvested produce will allow super markets to stock a variety of produce while minimizing their waste, and ultimately, contribute to a shift towards local food production which will drastically reduce our unnecessary waste.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-07T17:35:04Z

ThomasLawson: /* Who is involved? How are they contributing? */

Introduction' The nature of the issue or problem – location, duration, scope/scale, intensity/frequency/severity of negative impacts, current and predicted winners and losers if no remedial action(s) is (are) taken;

General notes/ things to include somewhere:

1) Define Food loss vs waste and use these accurately throughout paper!
Food losses refer to the decrease in edible food mass throughout the part of the supply chain that specifically leads to edible food for human consumption. Food losses take place at production, postharvest and processing stages in the food supply chain (Parfitt et al., 2010). Food losses occurring at the end of the food chain (retail and final consumption) are rather called “food waste”, which relates to retailers’ and consumers’ behavior. (Parfitt et al., 2010) http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/mb060e/mb060e00.pdf
2) Bold subheadings in who/retailers. Either add bold to farmers and consumers or remove them here.
3) Thomas, mentioned land sharing vs. land sparing?
4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, (while) consumers in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia throw away only 6-11 kg per year"<ref name="FAO key"/>.----Food losses and waste (Losses Vs waste? The cost of produce wasted amounts to...) amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries (Per year?)."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. ----- Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> ,however, the consumers demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributers, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face '''substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”____, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, Consumers, Markets, and Farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free <ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often overplant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty.If demand is lower than predicted businesses may put on promotions such as "two for one", this causes the consumers to purchase more food than they will eat and pushes the food waste down the supply chain. Overstocking of fruits and vegetables is not financially harmful to markets because of the low cost of discarding food<ref name="EU"/>. This allows markets to feel complacent with ordering more than purchased because the cost of disposing of unsold food is low, especially for fruits and vegetables compared to meat and dairy.

Many times, markets throw perfectly good produce out because consumers are often confused by best by dates and assume that products are not good for consumption after these dates. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>.

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production is dominated by large scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers/ corporations are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable loss occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. Much of this loss can be attributed to ____ ...Thomas? an initial screening for grade? audits? Inaccurate predictions of future demand? what are the actual causes for food loss here?

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)
*Loss of arable land (7) <ref name="footprint">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Food wastage footprint impacts on natural resources, 2013.</ref>- land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest
*soil degradation (8)
*habitat destruction/deforestation etc.
**biodiversity loss (4)

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>.
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? <ref name="footprint"/>

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], (Eric's notes: which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissionsane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change <ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

The impact on the environment from excess farming (What is excess farming?) is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses (How? what processes?) which are a driving factor of global warming (How? be specific). Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest (This is only part of the problem). ----The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far worse than CarbonDioxide on the environment, which stimulates climate change. 3 . The production of fruits and vegetables has less of an impact on biodiversity compared to other food products (How is biodiversity impacted by fruit/veg? How is it impacted differently by other foods? You have to give reasons.), but the habitat modification (What habitat modification?) destroys crucial land for through various species. (What? "for through various species") 5 The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometres (for Canada? china?), usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time (what unit of time? minute day year? ). 6 Specifically to Agriculture (as opposed to what?), the blue water footprint (What is this?) is higher than any other country. 7 Land degradation is often directly related to production pressures (HOW?). Comparatively, nearly all food wasted is grown on land that is facing a high case (word choice) of degradation (is food that is not wasted not grown on degraded land?) 8 The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. (How? and what are the implications?)

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost of food waste to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref> (Context. What cost?)

There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive.

Note: define excess produce, expand on why this is an economic issues and how it is costing famers money. Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm 9. The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill 11. This is due to unintentional producer surplus (expand). The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost (explain how this is economic, not environmental) 10. (NEED SOME LEGIT MONEY STATS $$$$$$$)
(Good Ideas, but this is nowhere near ready to publish...)

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

===Social===

While the environmental and economic factors can be measured, there are also significant social costs that exist within the food supply chain.

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many farmers (ok. which ones, and why?).

Since the suppliers (farmers? super markets?) are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community (what grave effects are you referring to?). Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up (how "cant they keep up? is cost of production too high? Do they not have necessary knowledge? are they not able to produce exotic foods on their land?") with large industrial producers. (is this stressful for farmers? describe the social/community consequences).

(mention the pressure put onto farmers). Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather (and disease/pests etc. ). High winds or intense sun rays (are some rays more intense than others?) can alter the aesthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value (wouldn't the nutritional value be consistent with the rest of the produce on that farm?). 13 . Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their products due to small bruises and blemishes (compound sentence, also define food audit, who is dictating this loss). 14. Furthermore, as a result of broad dietary patterns and high demands, farmers often struggle to produce enough quantity.
(Nothing in this paragraph has anything to do with social cost... Possibly put it in the who section?)

The organic and environmentally less harsh methods of farming don’t yield enough harvest ("less harsh" is bad. What are the implications of organic farming that make it yield less?). The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round (Just read this out loud.... Also what contracts? and why are large producers able to grow year round? Different climate or greenhouses?). 15 (what does this result in? farmers giving up sustainable practices to meet demands of big suppliers? not being able to afford to produce sustainably?)

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviours. Cultural consumerism and higher disposable incomes result in overspending and overbuying. Buyers with a higher income can afford to spend lots of money on food, so when it gets wasted it doesn't feel like a significant personal loss since they can afford to replace it.
When asked about throwing away once perfectly edible fruits and vegetables, consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste <ref name="c3"/>, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.
(These are good points, and could/ should be expanded on. Consumers are the largest social factor that we have. Talk about societies consumerism habits, rise in economy leading to more disposable income etc.)

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1.EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Throughout the food supply chain, there are many opportunities for consumers, retail, and farmers to participate in food recovery. The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they can save money by avoiding unnecessary waste. <ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Considering the significant costs and dangers of current practices, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications.

Demand is the primary influencer of change.
Increasing public awareness will drive demand, and in turn supermarkets will respond to changing attitudes and pressures.

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted.

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits.

A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

As consumer demands shift, supermarkets will become more confident in supplying less cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables at a cheaper price alongside the produce they already sell, giving consumers the option. Some supermarkets in Europe are taking the initiative on reducing food waste. For example, Intermarché, the third largest supermarket chain in France led a campaign called "Inglorious Fruits and Vegetables". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle with an additional discount of 30 percent. To reassure customers that aesthetic does not determine quality, markets offered juice and soup made from the produce for customers to try.

Food donation

Sustainable disposal

Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current demands. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. ''Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. 16 - (Collected from) NOTE: pls define land sharing/sparing and be more specific to how it would help prevent food loss

==Global Stuff ??==

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and regulations??

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Industrialization of food production has transformed our world in a matter of a few generations. From the ideals that consumers hold

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-07T16:35:28Z

ThomasLawson: /* Costs */

Introduction' The nature of the issue or problem – location, duration, scope/scale, intensity/frequency/severity of negative impacts, current and predicted winners and losers if no remedial action(s) is (are) taken;

General notes/ things to include somewhere:

1) Define Food loss vs waste and use these accurately throughout paper!
Food losses refer to the decrease in edible food mass throughout the part of the supply chain that specifically leads to edible food for human consumption. Food losses take place at production, postharvest and processing stages in the food supply chain (Parfitt et al., 2010). Food losses occurring at the end of the food chain (retail and final consumption) are rather called “food waste”, which relates to retailers’ and consumers’ behavior. (Parfitt et al., 2010) http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/mb060e/mb060e00.pdf
2) Bold subheadings in who/retailers. Either add bold to farmers and consumers or remove them here.
3) Thomas, mentioned land sharing vs. land sparing?
4) maybe consider just putting minor subheadings for environmental, economic etc. otherwise find a way to make the paragraphs more cohesive.

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' meet aesthetic standards of size, shape, and are free of physical blemishes<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>. Fruits and vegetables have a higher wastage rate than any other food products, with roughly 40-50% of global production lost every year <ref name="FAO key"/>. Although food loss is a global issue, industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada contribute US$680 billion worth of food loss, while developing countries contribute only US$310billion. Per capita waste in Europe and North America is between 95-115 kg per year, (while) consumers in sub-Saharan Africa and southern Asia throw away only 6-11 kg per year"<ref name="FAO key"/>.----Food losses and waste (Losses Vs waste? The cost of produce wasted amounts to...) amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries (Per year?)."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>. ----- Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons"<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref> ,however, the consumers demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables has created an unnecessary amount of waste. Farmers, distributers, and supermarkets are then forced to reinforce these harmful behaviours throughout the food supply chain, in order to satisfy the demand of their customers. As populations continue to grow and arable land continues to be degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices, these consumer patterns threaten global food security. Without remedial action, societies who rely on this global food market will face '''substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally'''.

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
As globalization spreads through the modern world, it brings the ideals of economy-of-scale and efficiency driven business to food production. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”____, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into a market formerly dominated by small scale, local farmers. These corporations outsourced crop production to lands with more optimal climate for vegetative growth and a less expensive labor force. The produce grown by these companies is then transported by trucks, trains and planes to consumer outlets (primarily supermarkets), and ultimately to consumers around the globe.

The modern food supply chain consists of three principle actors, Consumers, Markets, and Farmers, who all contribute to food waste at various levels:
===Consumers===
Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>, which represents the majority of edible produce that goes to waste among the supply chain. Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables <ref name="c1">Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., & Normann, A., Consumer-related food waste: Role of food marketing and retailers and potential for action, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 2016, p. 271-281.</ref>. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Fruits and vegetables that meet to supermarket standards are also more tailored towards the buyers convenience. Produce that is easier to peel, chop, is much more manageable to cook with compared to produce that is misshapen and deformed <ref name="FAOloss"/>. Consequently, consumers are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free <ref name="c4"/>.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased <ref name="c4">Thyberg, K.L., & Tonjes, D.J., Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development, Elsevier, 2015, p.111-121</ref>. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future <ref name="c4"/>.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between consumers and farmers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food waste, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>. "large commercial food buyers can demand tough contract terms including quantity guarantees and the ability to change orders at the last minute. Growers often overplant beyond their contracts for fear of not fulfilling them"<ref name="Gunders">Gunders, D., Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill, Natural Resource Defense Council, 2012, p. 1-26.</ref>

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., & Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty.If demand is lower than predicted businesses may put on promotions such as "two for one", this causes the consumers to purchase more food than they will eat and pushes the food waste down the supply chain. Overstocking of fruits and vegetables is not financially harmful to markets because of the low cost of discarding food<ref name="EU"/>. This allows markets to feel complacent with ordering more than purchased because the cost of disposing of unsold food is low, especially for fruits and vegetables compared to meat and dairy.

Many times, markets throw perfectly good produce out because consumers are often confused by best by dates and assume that products are not good for consumption after these dates. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out 2 to 3 days before the date even it is safe to consume<ref name="Gunders"/>.

===Farmers===

Food production begins with a farm. It is here that farmers cultivate crops of different varieties to be distributed, often through an intermediary, to consumers. Food production for the developing world (Or Global??) is dominated by large scale agriculture practices which maximize the efficiency of crop production by applying synthetic fertilizers to artificially increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics used to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects and weeds. "Intensive farming" is a term coined to describe this method of farming, where farmers/ corporations are able to obtain a much greater crop yield and faster crop cycle on a relatively small amount of land.

Despite farmers determinations to produce the highest yield possible, up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>. Much of this loss can be attributed to ____ ...Thomas? an initial screening for grade? audits? Inaccurate predictions of future demand? what are the actual causes for food loss here?

==Costs==

===Environmental===
'''Agriculture Practices''' (What is this?)
*Loss of arable land (7) - land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest
*soil degradation (8)
*habitat destruction/deforestation etc.
**biodiversity loss (4)

'''Resource losses''' (These are just random facts, not cohesive)
Agriculture uses roughly 70 percent of freshwater supply, therefore, more than 25 percent of total freshwater is used by wasted food<ref name="Hall">Hall, K.D., Guo, J., Dore, M., & Chow, C.C., The progressive increase of food waste in America and its environmental impact, PloS one, 2009.</ref>. . Emissions from this fuel being used in addition to landfill methane. Agriculture uses 40 percent of Earth's land<ref>Owen, J., Farming claims almost half Earth's land, new maps show, National Geographic News, December 9, 2005.</ref>. In addition to 30 percent of energy<ref>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, "Energy-smart" food for people and climate, 2011.</ref>, 300 million barrels of oil per year (approximately 4 percent of the total US oil consumption in 2003) are used to transport fruits and vegetables that are going to be thrown away<ref name="Hall"/>.
*water, fuel, fertilizer, labor, energy waste (all of these cost money) (5? 6)

'''Landfills and Methane'''
When fruits and vegetables are disposed of along the food supply chain, organic waste is often left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition process releases [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases methane], (Eric's notes: which is 25 times more efficient at trapping solar radiation than carbon dioxide, a negative factor which contributes to climate change in increasing the Earth's temperature (maybe add a bit more detail to how this trapped radiation contributes to climate change?))<ref>US Composting Council, USCC position statement: Keeping organics out of landfills, Bethesda, MD, 2010, p. 1-4.</ref>. Methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissionsane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change <ref>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Greenhouse gas emissions, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases, accessed April 6, 2017. </ref>. Globally, if food waste was a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gasses following the United states and China (3).

The impact on the environment from excess farming (What is excess farming?) is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses (How? what processes?) which are a driving factor of global warming (How? be specific). Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest (This is only part of the problem). ----The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far worse than CarbonDioxide on the environment, which stimulates climate change. 3 . The production of fruits and vegetables has less of an impact on biodiversity compared to other food products (How is biodiversity impacted by fruit/veg? How is it impacted differently by other foods? You have to give reasons.), but the habitat modification (What habitat modification?) destroys crucial land for through various species. (What? "for through various species") 5 The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometres (for Canada? china?), usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time (what unit of time? minute day year? ). 6 Specifically to Agriculture (as opposed to what?), the blue water footprint (What is this?) is higher than any other country. 7 Land degradation is often directly related to production pressures (HOW?). Comparatively, nearly all food wasted is grown on land that is facing a high case (word choice) of degradation (is food that is not wasted not grown on degraded land?) 8 The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. (How? and what are the implications?)

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost of food waste to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref> (Context. What cost?)

There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. This food loss is not only wasteful, but also expensive.

Note: define excess produce, expand on why this is an economic issues and how it is costing famers money. Approximately 20 percent of produce never leaves the farm 9. The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill 11. This is due to unintentional producer surplus (expand). The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost (explain how this is economic, not environmental) 10. (NEED SOME LEGIT MONEY STATS $$$$$$$)
(Good Ideas, but this is nowhere near ready to publish...)

As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year <ref name="c3">Stancu, V., Haugaard, P., & Lahteenmaki, L., Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste, Elsevier, 2015, p. 7-15.</ref>. This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

===Social===

While the environmental and economic factors can be measured, there are also significant social costs that exist within the food supply chain.

The demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is threatening the livelihood of many farmers (ok. which ones, and why?).

Since the suppliers (farmers? super markets?) are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community (what grave effects are you referring to?). Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up (how "cant they keep up? is cost of production too high? Do they not have necessary knowledge? are they not able to produce exotic foods on their land?") with large industrial producers. (is this stressful for farmers? describe the social/community consequences).

(mention the pressure put onto farmers). Small scale and local producers cannot always guarantee perfect harvests due to the unpredictables factors such as bad weather (and disease/pests etc. ). High winds or intense sun rays (are some rays more intense than others?) can alter the aesthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value (wouldn't the nutritional value be consistent with the rest of the produce on that farm?). 13 . Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their products due to small bruises and blemishes (compound sentence, also define food audit, who is dictating this loss). 14. Furthermore, as a result of broad dietary patterns and high demands, farmers often struggle to produce enough quantity.
(Nothing in this paragraph has anything to do with social cost... Possibly put it in the who section?)

The organic and environmentally less harsh methods of farming don’t yield enough harvest ("less harsh" is bad. What are the implications of organic farming that make it yield less?). The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round (Just read this out loud.... Also what contracts? and why are large producers able to grow year round? Different climate or greenhouses?). 15 (what does this result in? farmers giving up sustainable practices to meet demands of big suppliers? not being able to afford to produce sustainably?)

Many consumers remain unaware of the consequences of their behaviours. Cultural consumerism and higher disposable incomes result in overspending and overbuying.
As a result, consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste <ref name="c3"/>, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.
(These are good points, and could/ should be expanded on. Consumers are the largest social factor that we have. Talk about societies consumerism habits, rise in economy leading to more disposable income etc.)

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|Figure 1.EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===
Due to the many areas food is wasted in the food supply chain, there are equally as many opportunities for food recovery (awkward sentence). The main objective for each actor would primarily be to limit food waste, which means that all food grown for human consumption would be consumed. But if food waste does occur, the intention is to find secondary uses as alternatives to the landfill to prevent further environmental costs such as methane gas emission. Figure 1 depicts the most preferred solutions at the top, with subsequent solutions leading to least preferred at the bottom.

*Source Reduction: Farmers and retailers can conduct a waste audit and discover areas where they are generating waste. This can save money by to avoid excess waste<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Businesses are legally protected from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: food scraps for animals are less expensive than having the food waste delivered to the landfill<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, and can be used to increase nutrients in soils<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===

Considering the significant costs and dangers of current practices, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications.

Demand is the primary influencer of change.
Increasing public awareness will drive demand, and in turn supermarkets will respond to changing attitudes and pressures.

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted.

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours<ref name="c1"/>. The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations <ref name="c1"/>.

Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits.

A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

As consumer demands shift supermarkets may become more confident in supplying less cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables at a cheaper price alongside the produce they already sell, giving consumers the option. Some supermarkets in Europe are even taking the initiative, ____ the third largest supermarket in France led a campaign called "____" or "Inglorious_____". Giving "ugly" fruits and vegetables a chance, this second-grade produce was given its own aisle, and the supermarket gave customers juice made from the produce to demonstrate the taste is no different.

Food donation

Sustainable disposal

Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current demands. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. ''Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. 16 - (Collected from) NOTE: pls define land sharing/sparing and be more specific to how it would help prevent food loss

==Global Stuff ??==

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option, (1st eliminate, 2 if it does happen, dispose of properly)

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

Insistence on cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is a process that is costly and unsustainable. "Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>, but communication and strategizing for effective solutions among farmers, supermarkets, and consumers is key to reducing overall food loss throughout the food supply chain.

Initiatives in developed countries could revolutionize how food is produced and consumed globally. If humans wish to continue to have a variety of produce over an extended period of time, steps must be taken to modify attitudes, behaviours, and regulations??

While it would be ideal to eliminate 100 percent of food waste, it is important ensure proper disposal of the produce that is not consumed.

Industrialization of food production has transformed our world in a matter of a few generations. From the ideals that consumers hold

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-06T03:18:56Z

ThomasLawson: /* Targeted Solutions */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

Farmers:
1.
Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, will affect products in various negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of wasted product. While trying to match demand, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing even more harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.

2.
Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce perfect product is no fault of their own. The over production of produce and the wasted resources associated with the production is created by farmers, although the production guidelines are set from other contributers. The guidelines are a result of factors farther along the path chain, from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, the relationship between consumers and markets depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. 1 Farmers are also forced to meet standards set by consumers because many consumers in North America can afford to choose their cosmetically desired product. 2 The opportunity to have preferences in produce from money availability in markets enhances the amount of production forced on farmers.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>.

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty.If demand is lower than predicted businesses may put on promotions such as "two for one", this causes the consumers to purchase more food than they will eat and pushes the food waste down the supply chain. Overstocking of fruits and vegetables is not financially harmful to markets because of the low cost of discarding food<ref name="EU"/>. This allows markets to feel complacent with ordering more than purchased because the cost of disposing of unsold food is low, especially for fruits and vegetables compared to meat and dairy.

Many times, markets throw perfectly good produce out because consumers are often confused by best by dates and assume that products are not good for consumption after these dates. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out well in advance.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When consumers do not compost, organic waste is left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition processes releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

Farmers: Environmental Effects: More Than Wasted Product

The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide on the environment, which stimulates climate change. 3 . Food waste is the third largest producer of green house gasses, following the United States and China. 4 The production of fruits and vegetables has less of an impact on biodiversity compared to other food products, but the habitat modification destroys crucial land for through various species. 5 The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometres, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. 6 Specifically to Agriculture, the blue water footprint is higher than any other country. 7 Land degradation is often directly related to production pressures. Comparatively, nearly all food wasted is grown on land that is facing a high case of degradation. 8 The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil.

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

Farmers:
Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. 9 At the farming level, this is due to unintentional producer surplus. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. 10 . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill. 11 Currently, about twenty percent of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. 12

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

-Farmers:
Competition: The effects of mass production
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value. 13 . Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their products due to small bruises and blemishes. 14 Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods of farming don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. 15

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===

*Source Reduction: conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===
Farmers:
The Future: Inhibiting the amount of wasted product
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current demands. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. 16 - (Collected from)

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option,

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-06T03:16:32Z

ThomasLawson: /* Social */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

Farmers:
1.
Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, will affect products in various negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of wasted product. While trying to match demand, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing even more harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.

2.
Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce perfect product is no fault of their own. The over production of produce and the wasted resources associated with the production is created by farmers, although the production guidelines are set from other contributers. The guidelines are a result of factors farther along the path chain, from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, the relationship between consumers and markets depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. 1 Farmers are also forced to meet standards set by consumers because many consumers in North America can afford to choose their cosmetically desired product. 2 The opportunity to have preferences in produce from money availability in markets enhances the amount of production forced on farmers.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>.

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty.If demand is lower than predicted businesses may put on promotions such as "two for one", this causes the consumers to purchase more food than they will eat and pushes the food waste down the supply chain. Overstocking of fruits and vegetables is not financially harmful to markets because of the low cost of discarding food<ref name="EU"/>. This allows markets to feel complacent with ordering more than purchased because the cost of disposing of unsold food is low, especially for fruits and vegetables compared to meat and dairy.

Many times, markets throw perfectly good produce out because consumers are often confused by best by dates and assume that products are not good for consumption after these dates. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out well in advance.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When consumers do not compost, organic waste is left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition processes releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

Farmers: Environmental Effects: More Than Wasted Product

The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide on the environment, which stimulates climate change. 3 . Food waste is the third largest producer of green house gasses, following the United States and China. 4 The production of fruits and vegetables has less of an impact on biodiversity compared to other food products, but the habitat modification destroys crucial land for through various species. 5 The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometres, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. 6 Specifically to Agriculture, the blue water footprint is higher than any other country. 7 Land degradation is often directly related to production pressures. Comparatively, nearly all food wasted is grown on land that is facing a high case of degradation. 8 The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil.

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

Farmers:
Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. 9 At the farming level, this is due to unintentional producer surplus. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. 10 . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill. 11 Currently, about twenty percent of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. 12

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

-Farmers:
Competition: The effects of mass production
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value. 13 . Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their products due to small bruises and blemishes. 14 Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods of farming don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. 15

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===

*Source Reduction: conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===
Farmers:
The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option,

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-06T03:10:33Z

ThomasLawson: /* Economic */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

Farmers:
1.
Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, will affect products in various negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of wasted product. While trying to match demand, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing even more harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.

2.
Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce perfect product is no fault of their own. The over production of produce and the wasted resources associated with the production is created by farmers, although the production guidelines are set from other contributers. The guidelines are a result of factors farther along the path chain, from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, the relationship between consumers and markets depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. 1 Farmers are also forced to meet standards set by consumers because many consumers in North America can afford to choose their cosmetically desired product. 2 The opportunity to have preferences in produce from money availability in markets enhances the amount of production forced on farmers.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>.

Standards that establish food safety and quality objectives are regulated by public authorities<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards for product differentiation are set by businesses<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. Supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Consistently meeting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Because Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like markets are concerned that they will lose business if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard. Cosmetic standards include no blemishes as well as specific size, shape, and color.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty.If demand is lower than predicted businesses may put on promotions such as "two for one", this causes the consumers to purchase more food than they will eat and pushes the food waste down the supply chain. Overstocking of fruits and vegetables is not financially harmful to markets because of the low cost of discarding food<ref name="EU"/>. This allows markets to feel complacent with ordering more than purchased because the cost of disposing of unsold food is low, especially for fruits and vegetables compared to meat and dairy.

Many times, markets throw perfectly good produce out because consumers are often confused by best by dates and assume that products are not good for consumption after these dates. To avoid the appearance of selling near-expired produce, markets often to throw this food out well in advance.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When consumers do not compost, organic waste is left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition processes releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

Farmers: Environmental Effects: More Than Wasted Product

The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide on the environment, which stimulates climate change. 3 . Food waste is the third largest producer of green house gasses, following the United States and China. 4 The production of fruits and vegetables has less of an impact on biodiversity compared to other food products, but the habitat modification destroys crucial land for through various species. 5 The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometres, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. 6 Specifically to Agriculture, the blue water footprint is higher than any other country. 7 Land degradation is often directly related to production pressures. Comparatively, nearly all food wasted is grown on land that is facing a high case of degradation. 8 The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil.

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

Farmers:
Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. 9 At the farming level, this is due to unintentional producer surplus. The cost of producing excess food is laid directly on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. 10 . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get packaged often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot in fields, but most in the landfill. 11 Currently, about twenty percent of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. 12

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

-Farmers:
Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===

*Source Reduction: conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
*Feeding Hungry People: Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act<ref name="Schneider"/><ref name="EPA"/>.Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food<ref name="EPA"/>
*Feeding Animals: it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines<ref name="EPA"/>
*Industrial Use: anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment<ref name="EPA"/>
*Composting: reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..<ref name="EPA"/>

===Targeted Solutions===
Farmers:
The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option,

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-06T01:57:03Z

ThomasLawson: /* Economic */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

Farmers:
1.
Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, will affect products in various negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of wasted product. While trying to match demand, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing even more harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.

2.
Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce perfect product is no fault of their own. The over production of produce and the wasted resources associated with the production is created by farmers, although the production guidelines are set from other contributers. The guidelines are a result of factors farther along the path chain, from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, the relationship between consumers and markets depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. 1 Farmers are also forced to meet standards set by consumers because many consumers in North America can afford to choose their cosmetically desired product. 2 The opportunity to have preferences in produce from money availability in markets enhances the amount of production forced on farmers.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty.If demand is lower than predicted businesses may put on promotions such as "two for one", this causes the consumers to purchase more food than they will eat and pushes the food waste down the supply chain. Overstocking of fruits and vegetables is not financially harmful to markets because of the low cost of discarding food<ref name="EU"/>. This allows markets to feel complacent with ordering more than purchased because the cost of disposing of unsold food is low, especially for fruits and vegetables compared to meat and dairy.

Many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When consumers do not compost, organic waste is left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition processes releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

Farmers: Environmental Effects: More Than Wasted Product

The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide on the environment, which stimulates climate change. 3 . Food waste is the third largest producer of green house gasses, following the United States and China. 4 The production of fruits and vegetables has less of an impact on biodiversity compared to other food products, but the habitat modification destroys crucial land for through various species. 5 The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometres, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. 6 Specifically to Agriculture, the blue water footprint is higher than any other country. 7 Land degradation is often directly related to production pressures. Comparatively, nearly all food wasted is grown on land that is facing a high case of degradation. 8 The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil.

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

Farmers:
Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. 9 At the farming level, this is due to unintentional producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

-Farmers:
Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.

===Targeted Solutions===
Farmers:
The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option,

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-06T01:54:31Z

ThomasLawson: /* Environmental */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

Farmers:
1.
Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, will affect products in various negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of wasted product. While trying to match demand, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing even more harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.

2.
Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce perfect product is no fault of their own. The over production of produce and the wasted resources associated with the production is created by farmers, although the production guidelines are set from other contributers. The guidelines are a result of factors farther along the path chain, from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, the relationship between consumers and markets depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. 1 Farmers are also forced to meet standards set by consumers because many consumers in North America can afford to choose their cosmetically desired product. 2 The opportunity to have preferences in produce from money availability in markets enhances the amount of production forced on farmers.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty.If demand is lower than predicted businesses may put on promotions such as "two for one", this causes the consumers to purchase more food than they will eat and pushes the food waste down the supply chain. Overstocking of fruits and vegetables is not financially harmful to markets because of the low cost of discarding food<ref name="EU"/>. This allows markets to feel complacent with ordering more than purchased because the cost of disposing of unsold food is low, especially for fruits and vegetables compared to meat and dairy.

Many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When consumers do not compost, organic waste is left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition processes releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

Farmers: Environmental Effects: More Than Wasted Product

The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide on the environment, which stimulates climate change. 3 . Food waste is the third largest producer of green house gasses, following the United States and China. 4 The production of fruits and vegetables has less of an impact on biodiversity compared to other food products, but the habitat modification destroys crucial land for through various species. 5 The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometres, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. 6 Specifically to Agriculture, the blue water footprint is higher than any other country. 7 Land degradation is often directly related to production pressures. Comparatively, nearly all food wasted is grown on land that is facing a high case of degradation. 8 The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil.

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

Farmers:
Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

-Farmers:
Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.

===Targeted Solutions===
Farmers:
The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option,

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-06T01:17:35Z

ThomasLawson: /* Farmers */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

Farmers:
1.
Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, will affect products in various negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of wasted product. While trying to match demand, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing even more harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.

2.
Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce perfect product is no fault of their own. The over production of produce and the wasted resources associated with the production is created by farmers, although the production guidelines are set from other contributers. The guidelines are a result of factors farther along the path chain, from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, the relationship between consumers and markets depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. 1 Farmers are also forced to meet standards set by consumers because many consumers in North America can afford to choose their cosmetically desired product. 2 The opportunity to have preferences in produce from money availability in markets enhances the amount of production forced on farmers.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty.If demand is lower than predicted businesses may put on promotions such as "two for one", this causes the consumers to purchase more food than they will eat and pushes the food waste down the supply chain. Overstocking of fruits and vegetables is not financially harmful to markets because of the low cost of discarding food<ref name="EU"/>. This allows markets to feel complacent with ordering more than purchased because the cost of disposing of unsold food is low, especially for fruits and vegetables compared to meat and dairy.

Many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When consumers do not compost, organic waste is left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition processes releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

-Farmers: Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources
The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 . Food waste is the 3 largest producer of ghg, following usa and china. (FAO) Ghg proudciton is just one environmental damage, the expansion of agro-land causes immense loss in biodiversity through various species.- http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf - The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometers, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. (FAo) Land that goes to waste for the production of wasted food is about 1.4 billion hectares. In other wrods, 30 percent of land that is used to produce food is wasted. FAO. The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. Thus farmers need to add fertlizers for soil to match the required harvestings, causing erosion and degreation. FAO. The impacts are severe, demand is rising, and so is population, with more peoples comes more thoughtful minds and the opportunity for innovation. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/food-wastage/

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

Farmers:
Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

-Farmers:
Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.

===Targeted Solutions===
Farmers:
The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option,

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-06T01:11:45Z

ThomasLawson: /* Farmers */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization, Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 5, 2017</ref>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

Farmers:
1.
Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, will affect products in various negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of wasted product. While trying to match demand, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing even more harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.
2.
Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce perfect product is no fault of their own. The over production of produce and the wasted resources associated with the production is created by farmers, although the production guidelines are set from other contributers. The guidelines are a result of factors farther along the path chain, from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, the relationship between consumers and markets depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. 1 Farmers are also forced to meet standards set by consumers because many consumers in North America can afford to choose their cosmetically desired product. 2 The opportunity to have preferences in produce from money availability in markets enhances the amount of production forced on farmers.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="FAO key"/><ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty.If demand is lower than predicted businesses may put on promotions such as "two for one", this causes the consumers to purchase more food than they will eat and pushes the food waste down the supply chain. Overstocking of fruits and vegetables is not financially harmful to markets because of the low cost of discarding food<ref name="EU"/>. This allows markets to feel complacent with ordering more than purchased because the cost of disposing of unsold food is low, especially for fruits and vegetables compared to meat and dairy.

Many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When consumers do not compost, organic waste is left to decompose in landfills. This decomposition processes releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

-Farmers: Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources
The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 . Food waste is the 3 largest producer of ghg, following usa and china. (FAO) Ghg proudciton is just one environmental damage, the expansion of agro-land causes immense loss in biodiversity through various species.- http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf - The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometers, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. (FAo) Land that goes to waste for the production of wasted food is about 1.4 billion hectares. In other wrods, 30 percent of land that is used to produce food is wasted. FAO. The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. Thus farmers need to add fertlizers for soil to match the required harvestings, causing erosion and degreation. FAO. The impacts are severe, demand is rising, and so is population, with more peoples comes more thoughtful minds and the opportunity for innovation. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/food-wastage/

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

Farmers:
Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

-Farmers:
Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

===Food Recovery===

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.

===Targeted Solutions===
Farmers:
The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

(1) to summarize the topic, or some aspect of the topic, as a policy problem,

(2) rationalization of the preferred option,

(3) a clear and specific proposal in simple language without jargon for policy-level actions.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-05T04:05:25Z

ThomasLawson: /* Farmers */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*"Even if just one-fourth of the food currently lost or wasted globally could be saved, it would be enough to feed 870 million hungry people in the world."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 4, 2017.</ref>
*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

Farmers:
Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources, that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable because farmers can not match larger industries. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, which will affect products in various and possibly negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of waste. While trying to stay alive in a danger zone, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing, even more, harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.

Farmers:
-Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce product without any misconfigurations isn’t chosen by them. It is the result of factors farther along the path from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, consumer/ market relationship together, depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. (Susan- Gaurdian) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect. Another reason for the call of perfect food is the actual ability to afford this food, for example, the people who generate lots of waste are the same people in a financially stable position. http://www.foodwastemovie.com/about/ . Having the option to pick and choose where your money is spent relative to the fact that one can have a preference in what they consume greatly enhances waste.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and therefore although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref><ref name="FAO key"/>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

low cost of discarding food can lead to overstocking <ref name="EU"/>

- "two for one" promotions

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. And many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When organic waste is left to decompose in landfills it releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

-Farmers: Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources
The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 . Food waste is the 3 largest producer of ghg, following usa and china. (FAO) Ghg proudciton is just one environmental damage, the expansion of agro-land causes immense loss in biodiversity through various species.- http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf - The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometers, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. (FAo) Land that goes to waste for the production of wasted food is about 1.4 billion hectares. In other wrods, 30 percent of land that is used to produce food is wasted. FAO. The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. Thus farmers need to add fertlizers for soil to match the required harvestings, causing erosion and degreation. FAO. The impacts are severe, demand is rising, and so is population, with more peoples comes more thoughtful minds and the opportunity for innovation. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/food-wastage/

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

Farmers:
Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

-Farmers:
Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

==Remedial Actions==

Farmers:
The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

- insert EPA food recovery hierarchy-<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste <ref name="EPA"/>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.
Using vegetables in the salad bar

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-05T04:05:12Z

ThomasLawson: /* Farmers */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*"Even if just one-fourth of the food currently lost or wasted globally could be saved, it would be enough to feed 870 million hungry people in the world."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 4, 2017.</ref>
*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

Farmers:
Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources, that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable because farmers can not match larger industries. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, which will affect products in various and possibly negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of waste. While trying to stay alive in a danger zone, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing, even more, harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.
Farmers:
-Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce product without any misconfigurations isn’t chosen by them. It is the result of factors farther along the path from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, consumer/ market relationship together, depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. (Susan- Gaurdian) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect. Another reason for the call of perfect food is the actual ability to afford this food, for example, the people who generate lots of waste are the same people in a financially stable position. http://www.foodwastemovie.com/about/ . Having the option to pick and choose where your money is spent relative to the fact that one can have a preference in what they consume greatly enhances waste.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and therefore although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref><ref name="FAO key"/>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

low cost of discarding food can lead to overstocking <ref name="EU"/>

- "two for one" promotions

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. And many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When organic waste is left to decompose in landfills it releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

-Farmers: Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources
The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 . Food waste is the 3 largest producer of ghg, following usa and china. (FAO) Ghg proudciton is just one environmental damage, the expansion of agro-land causes immense loss in biodiversity through various species.- http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf - The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometers, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. (FAo) Land that goes to waste for the production of wasted food is about 1.4 billion hectares. In other wrods, 30 percent of land that is used to produce food is wasted. FAO. The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. Thus farmers need to add fertlizers for soil to match the required harvestings, causing erosion and degreation. FAO. The impacts are severe, demand is rising, and so is population, with more peoples comes more thoughtful minds and the opportunity for innovation. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/food-wastage/

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

Farmers:
Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

-Farmers:
Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

==Remedial Actions==

Farmers:
The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

- insert EPA food recovery hierarchy-<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste <ref name="EPA"/>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.
Using vegetables in the salad bar

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-05T04:04:02Z

ThomasLawson: /* FIGURES AND IMAGES TO BE INCLUDED: */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*"Even if just one-fourth of the food currently lost or wasted globally could be saved, it would be enough to feed 870 million hungry people in the world."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 4, 2017.</ref>
*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

-Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources, that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable because farmers can not match larger industries. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, which will affect products in various and possibly negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of waste. While trying to stay alive in a danger zone, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing, even more, harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.

-Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce product without any misconfigurations isn’t chosen by them. It is the result of factors farther along the path from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, consumer/ market relationship together, depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. (Susan- Gaurdian) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect. Another reason for the call of perfect food is the actual ability to afford this food, for example, the people who generate lots of waste are the same people in a financially stable position. http://www.foodwastemovie.com/about/ . Having the option to pick and choose where your money is spent relative to the fact that one can have a preference in what they consume greatly enhances waste.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and therefore although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref><ref name="FAO key"/>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

low cost of discarding food can lead to overstocking <ref name="EU"/>

- "two for one" promotions

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. And many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When organic waste is left to decompose in landfills it releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

-Farmers: Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources
The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 . Food waste is the 3 largest producer of ghg, following usa and china. (FAO) Ghg proudciton is just one environmental damage, the expansion of agro-land causes immense loss in biodiversity through various species.- http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf - The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometers, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. (FAo) Land that goes to waste for the production of wasted food is about 1.4 billion hectares. In other wrods, 30 percent of land that is used to produce food is wasted. FAO. The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. Thus farmers need to add fertlizers for soil to match the required harvestings, causing erosion and degreation. FAO. The impacts are severe, demand is rising, and so is population, with more peoples comes more thoughtful minds and the opportunity for innovation. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/food-wastage/

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

Farmers:
Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

-Farmers:
Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

==Remedial Actions==

Farmers:
The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

- insert EPA food recovery hierarchy-<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste <ref name="EPA"/>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.
Using vegetables in the salad bar

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-05T04:03:38Z

ThomasLawson: /* Remedial Actions */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*"Even if just one-fourth of the food currently lost or wasted globally could be saved, it would be enough to feed 870 million hungry people in the world."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 4, 2017.</ref>
*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

-Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources, that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable because farmers can not match larger industries. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, which will affect products in various and possibly negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of waste. While trying to stay alive in a danger zone, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing, even more, harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.

-Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce product without any misconfigurations isn’t chosen by them. It is the result of factors farther along the path from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, consumer/ market relationship together, depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. (Susan- Gaurdian) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect. Another reason for the call of perfect food is the actual ability to afford this food, for example, the people who generate lots of waste are the same people in a financially stable position. http://www.foodwastemovie.com/about/ . Having the option to pick and choose where your money is spent relative to the fact that one can have a preference in what they consume greatly enhances waste.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and therefore although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref><ref name="FAO key"/>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

low cost of discarding food can lead to overstocking <ref name="EU"/>

- "two for one" promotions

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. And many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When organic waste is left to decompose in landfills it releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

-Farmers: Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources
The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 . Food waste is the 3 largest producer of ghg, following usa and china. (FAO) Ghg proudciton is just one environmental damage, the expansion of agro-land causes immense loss in biodiversity through various species.- http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf - The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometers, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. (FAo) Land that goes to waste for the production of wasted food is about 1.4 billion hectares. In other wrods, 30 percent of land that is used to produce food is wasted. FAO. The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. Thus farmers need to add fertlizers for soil to match the required harvestings, causing erosion and degreation. FAO. The impacts are severe, demand is rising, and so is population, with more peoples comes more thoughtful minds and the opportunity for innovation. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/food-wastage/

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

Farmers:
Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

-Farmers:
Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

==Remedial Actions==

Farmers:
The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

- insert EPA food recovery hierarchy-<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste <ref name="EPA"/>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.
Using vegetables in the salad bar

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

=== FIGURES AND IMAGES TO BE INCLUDED: ===

-Waste image
https://globalpressjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy/6830/gpjnews-nepal-ykk-food-waste-7-web-jpg.jpg :)
-Variation of apple image
https://www.change.org/p/whole-foods-and-walmart-stop-contributing-to-massive-food-waste-in-the-us-31
-water melon waste
Discarded food is the biggest single component of US landfill and incinerators, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Photograph: Dan Tuffs/for the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1
-Dumped food waste image out of truck
https://biancajchadda.wordpress.com/2013/01/14/stop-fruit-and-veg-elitism/
-Squash left to rot:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-7

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-05T04:02:12Z

ThomasLawson: /* Farmers: */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*"Even if just one-fourth of the food currently lost or wasted globally could be saved, it would be enough to feed 870 million hungry people in the world."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 4, 2017.</ref>
*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

-Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources, that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable because farmers can not match larger industries. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, which will affect products in various and possibly negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of waste. While trying to stay alive in a danger zone, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing, even more, harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.

-Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce product without any misconfigurations isn’t chosen by them. It is the result of factors farther along the path from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, consumer/ market relationship together, depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. (Susan- Gaurdian) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect. Another reason for the call of perfect food is the actual ability to afford this food, for example, the people who generate lots of waste are the same people in a financially stable position. http://www.foodwastemovie.com/about/ . Having the option to pick and choose where your money is spent relative to the fact that one can have a preference in what they consume greatly enhances waste.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and therefore although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref><ref name="FAO key"/>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

low cost of discarding food can lead to overstocking <ref name="EU"/>

- "two for one" promotions

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. And many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When organic waste is left to decompose in landfills it releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

-Farmers: Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources
The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 . Food waste is the 3 largest producer of ghg, following usa and china. (FAO) Ghg proudciton is just one environmental damage, the expansion of agro-land causes immense loss in biodiversity through various species.- http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf - The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometers, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. (FAo) Land that goes to waste for the production of wasted food is about 1.4 billion hectares. In other wrods, 30 percent of land that is used to produce food is wasted. FAO. The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. Thus farmers need to add fertlizers for soil to match the required harvestings, causing erosion and degreation. FAO. The impacts are severe, demand is rising, and so is population, with more peoples comes more thoughtful minds and the opportunity for innovation. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/food-wastage/

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

Farmers:
Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

-Farmers:
Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

- insert EPA food recovery hierarchy-<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste <ref name="EPA"/>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.
Using vegetables in the salad bar

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

=== FIGURES AND IMAGES TO BE INCLUDED: ===

-Waste image
https://globalpressjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy/6830/gpjnews-nepal-ykk-food-waste-7-web-jpg.jpg :)
-Variation of apple image
https://www.change.org/p/whole-foods-and-walmart-stop-contributing-to-massive-food-waste-in-the-us-31
-water melon waste
Discarded food is the biggest single component of US landfill and incinerators, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Photograph: Dan Tuffs/for the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1
-Dumped food waste image out of truck
https://biancajchadda.wordpress.com/2013/01/14/stop-fruit-and-veg-elitism/
-Squash left to rot:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-7

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-05T04:01:45Z

ThomasLawson: /* Social */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*"Even if just one-fourth of the food currently lost or wasted globally could be saved, it would be enough to feed 870 million hungry people in the world."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 4, 2017.</ref>
*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

-Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources, that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable because farmers can not match larger industries. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, which will affect products in various and possibly negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of waste. While trying to stay alive in a danger zone, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing, even more, harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.

-Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce product without any misconfigurations isn’t chosen by them. It is the result of factors farther along the path from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, consumer/ market relationship together, depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. (Susan- Gaurdian) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect. Another reason for the call of perfect food is the actual ability to afford this food, for example, the people who generate lots of waste are the same people in a financially stable position. http://www.foodwastemovie.com/about/ . Having the option to pick and choose where your money is spent relative to the fact that one can have a preference in what they consume greatly enhances waste.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and therefore although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref><ref name="FAO key"/>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

low cost of discarding food can lead to overstocking <ref name="EU"/>

- "two for one" promotions

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. And many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When organic waste is left to decompose in landfills it releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

-Farmers: Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources
The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 . Food waste is the 3 largest producer of ghg, following usa and china. (FAO) Ghg proudciton is just one environmental damage, the expansion of agro-land causes immense loss in biodiversity through various species.- http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf - The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometers, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. (FAo) Land that goes to waste for the production of wasted food is about 1.4 billion hectares. In other wrods, 30 percent of land that is used to produce food is wasted. FAO. The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. Thus farmers need to add fertlizers for soil to match the required harvestings, causing erosion and degreation. FAO. The impacts are severe, demand is rising, and so is population, with more peoples comes more thoughtful minds and the opportunity for innovation. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/food-wastage/

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

Farmers:
Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

-Farmers:
Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

- insert EPA food recovery hierarchy-<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste <ref name="EPA"/>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.
Using vegetables in the salad bar

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

== Farmers: ==
=== The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle ===
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/
=== FIGURES AND IMAGES TO BE INCLUDED: ===

-Waste image
https://globalpressjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy/6830/gpjnews-nepal-ykk-food-waste-7-web-jpg.jpg :)
-Variation of apple image
https://www.change.org/p/whole-foods-and-walmart-stop-contributing-to-massive-food-waste-in-the-us-31
-water melon waste
Discarded food is the biggest single component of US landfill and incinerators, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Photograph: Dan Tuffs/for the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1
-Dumped food waste image out of truck
https://biancajchadda.wordpress.com/2013/01/14/stop-fruit-and-veg-elitism/
-Squash left to rot:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-7

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-05T04:01:15Z

ThomasLawson: /* Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*"Even if just one-fourth of the food currently lost or wasted globally could be saved, it would be enough to feed 870 million hungry people in the world."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 4, 2017.</ref>
*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

-Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources, that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable because farmers can not match larger industries. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, which will affect products in various and possibly negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of waste. While trying to stay alive in a danger zone, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing, even more, harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.

-Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce product without any misconfigurations isn’t chosen by them. It is the result of factors farther along the path from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, consumer/ market relationship together, depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. (Susan- Gaurdian) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect. Another reason for the call of perfect food is the actual ability to afford this food, for example, the people who generate lots of waste are the same people in a financially stable position. http://www.foodwastemovie.com/about/ . Having the option to pick and choose where your money is spent relative to the fact that one can have a preference in what they consume greatly enhances waste.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and therefore although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref><ref name="FAO key"/>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

low cost of discarding food can lead to overstocking <ref name="EU"/>

- "two for one" promotions

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. And many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When organic waste is left to decompose in landfills it releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

-Farmers: Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources
The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 . Food waste is the 3 largest producer of ghg, following usa and china. (FAO) Ghg proudciton is just one environmental damage, the expansion of agro-land causes immense loss in biodiversity through various species.- http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf - The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometers, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. (FAo) Land that goes to waste for the production of wasted food is about 1.4 billion hectares. In other wrods, 30 percent of land that is used to produce food is wasted. FAO. The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. Thus farmers need to add fertlizers for soil to match the required harvestings, causing erosion and degreation. FAO. The impacts are severe, demand is rising, and so is population, with more peoples comes more thoughtful minds and the opportunity for innovation. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/food-wastage/

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

Farmers:
Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

- insert EPA food recovery hierarchy-<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste <ref name="EPA"/>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.
Using vegetables in the salad bar

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

== Farmers: ==
=== The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle ===
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/
=== FIGURES AND IMAGES TO BE INCLUDED: ===

-Waste image
https://globalpressjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy/6830/gpjnews-nepal-ykk-food-waste-7-web-jpg.jpg :)
-Variation of apple image
https://www.change.org/p/whole-foods-and-walmart-stop-contributing-to-massive-food-waste-in-the-us-31
-water melon waste
Discarded food is the biggest single component of US landfill and incinerators, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Photograph: Dan Tuffs/for the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1
-Dumped food waste image out of truck
https://biancajchadda.wordpress.com/2013/01/14/stop-fruit-and-veg-elitism/
-Squash left to rot:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-7

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-05T04:00:52Z

ThomasLawson: /* Economic */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*"Even if just one-fourth of the food currently lost or wasted globally could be saved, it would be enough to feed 870 million hungry people in the world."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 4, 2017.</ref>
*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

-Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources, that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable because farmers can not match larger industries. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, which will affect products in various and possibly negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of waste. While trying to stay alive in a danger zone, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing, even more, harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.

-Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce product without any misconfigurations isn’t chosen by them. It is the result of factors farther along the path from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, consumer/ market relationship together, depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. (Susan- Gaurdian) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect. Another reason for the call of perfect food is the actual ability to afford this food, for example, the people who generate lots of waste are the same people in a financially stable position. http://www.foodwastemovie.com/about/ . Having the option to pick and choose where your money is spent relative to the fact that one can have a preference in what they consume greatly enhances waste.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and therefore although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref><ref name="FAO key"/>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

low cost of discarding food can lead to overstocking <ref name="EU"/>

- "two for one" promotions

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. And many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When organic waste is left to decompose in landfills it releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

-Farmers: Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources
The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 . Food waste is the 3 largest producer of ghg, following usa and china. (FAO) Ghg proudciton is just one environmental damage, the expansion of agro-land causes immense loss in biodiversity through various species.- http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf - The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometers, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. (FAo) Land that goes to waste for the production of wasted food is about 1.4 billion hectares. In other wrods, 30 percent of land that is used to produce food is wasted. FAO. The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. Thus farmers need to add fertlizers for soil to match the required harvestings, causing erosion and degreation. FAO. The impacts are severe, demand is rising, and so is population, with more peoples comes more thoughtful minds and the opportunity for innovation. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/food-wastage/

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

Farmers:
Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

- insert EPA food recovery hierarchy-<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste <ref name="EPA"/>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.
Using vegetables in the salad bar

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

== Farmers: ==
=== Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up ===
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

=== The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle ===
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/
=== FIGURES AND IMAGES TO BE INCLUDED: ===

-Waste image
https://globalpressjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy/6830/gpjnews-nepal-ykk-food-waste-7-web-jpg.jpg :)
-Variation of apple image
https://www.change.org/p/whole-foods-and-walmart-stop-contributing-to-massive-food-waste-in-the-us-31
-water melon waste
Discarded food is the biggest single component of US landfill and incinerators, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Photograph: Dan Tuffs/for the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1
-Dumped food waste image out of truck
https://biancajchadda.wordpress.com/2013/01/14/stop-fruit-and-veg-elitism/
-Squash left to rot:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-7

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-05T04:00:11Z

ThomasLawson: /* Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*"Even if just one-fourth of the food currently lost or wasted globally could be saved, it would be enough to feed 870 million hungry people in the world."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 4, 2017.</ref>
*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

-Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources, that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable because farmers can not match larger industries. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, which will affect products in various and possibly negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of waste. While trying to stay alive in a danger zone, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing, even more, harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.

-Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce product without any misconfigurations isn’t chosen by them. It is the result of factors farther along the path from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, consumer/ market relationship together, depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. (Susan- Gaurdian) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect. Another reason for the call of perfect food is the actual ability to afford this food, for example, the people who generate lots of waste are the same people in a financially stable position. http://www.foodwastemovie.com/about/ . Having the option to pick and choose where your money is spent relative to the fact that one can have a preference in what they consume greatly enhances waste.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and therefore although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref><ref name="FAO key"/>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

low cost of discarding food can lead to overstocking <ref name="EU"/>

- "two for one" promotions

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. And many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When organic waste is left to decompose in landfills it releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

-Farmers: Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources
The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 . Food waste is the 3 largest producer of ghg, following usa and china. (FAO) Ghg proudciton is just one environmental damage, the expansion of agro-land causes immense loss in biodiversity through various species.- http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf - The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometers, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. (FAo) Land that goes to waste for the production of wasted food is about 1.4 billion hectares. In other wrods, 30 percent of land that is used to produce food is wasted. FAO. The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. Thus farmers need to add fertlizers for soil to match the required harvestings, causing erosion and degreation. FAO. The impacts are severe, demand is rising, and so is population, with more peoples comes more thoughtful minds and the opportunity for innovation. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/food-wastage/

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

- insert EPA food recovery hierarchy-<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste <ref name="EPA"/>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.
Using vegetables in the salad bar

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

== Farmers: ==
=== Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up ===
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

=== The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle ===
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/
=== FIGURES AND IMAGES TO BE INCLUDED: ===

-Waste image
https://globalpressjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy/6830/gpjnews-nepal-ykk-food-waste-7-web-jpg.jpg :)
-Variation of apple image
https://www.change.org/p/whole-foods-and-walmart-stop-contributing-to-massive-food-waste-in-the-us-31
-water melon waste
Discarded food is the biggest single component of US landfill and incinerators, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Photograph: Dan Tuffs/for the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1
-Dumped food waste image out of truck
https://biancajchadda.wordpress.com/2013/01/14/stop-fruit-and-veg-elitism/
-Squash left to rot:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-7

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-05T03:59:35Z

ThomasLawson: /* Environmental */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*"Even if just one-fourth of the food currently lost or wasted globally could be saved, it would be enough to feed 870 million hungry people in the world."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 4, 2017.</ref>
*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

-Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources, that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable because farmers can not match larger industries. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, which will affect products in various and possibly negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of waste. While trying to stay alive in a danger zone, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing, even more, harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.

-Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce product without any misconfigurations isn’t chosen by them. It is the result of factors farther along the path from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, consumer/ market relationship together, depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. (Susan- Gaurdian) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect. Another reason for the call of perfect food is the actual ability to afford this food, for example, the people who generate lots of waste are the same people in a financially stable position. http://www.foodwastemovie.com/about/ . Having the option to pick and choose where your money is spent relative to the fact that one can have a preference in what they consume greatly enhances waste.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and therefore although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref><ref name="FAO key"/>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

low cost of discarding food can lead to overstocking <ref name="EU"/>

- "two for one" promotions

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. And many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When organic waste is left to decompose in landfills it releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

-Farmers: Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources
The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 . Food waste is the 3 largest producer of ghg, following usa and china. (FAO) Ghg proudciton is just one environmental damage, the expansion of agro-land causes immense loss in biodiversity through various species.- http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf - The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometers, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. (FAo) Land that goes to waste for the production of wasted food is about 1.4 billion hectares. In other wrods, 30 percent of land that is used to produce food is wasted. FAO. The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. Thus farmers need to add fertlizers for soil to match the required harvestings, causing erosion and degreation. FAO. The impacts are severe, demand is rising, and so is population, with more peoples comes more thoughtful minds and the opportunity for innovation. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/food-wastage/

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

- insert EPA food recovery hierarchy-<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste <ref name="EPA"/>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.
Using vegetables in the salad bar

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

== Farmers: ==
=== Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up ===
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

=== Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales ===
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

=== The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle ===
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/
=== FIGURES AND IMAGES TO BE INCLUDED: ===

-Waste image
https://globalpressjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy/6830/gpjnews-nepal-ykk-food-waste-7-web-jpg.jpg :)
-Variation of apple image
https://www.change.org/p/whole-foods-and-walmart-stop-contributing-to-massive-food-waste-in-the-us-31
-water melon waste
Discarded food is the biggest single component of US landfill and incinerators, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Photograph: Dan Tuffs/for the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1
-Dumped food waste image out of truck
https://biancajchadda.wordpress.com/2013/01/14/stop-fruit-and-veg-elitism/
-Squash left to rot:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-7

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-05T03:59:05Z

ThomasLawson: /* Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*"Even if just one-fourth of the food currently lost or wasted globally could be saved, it would be enough to feed 870 million hungry people in the world."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 4, 2017.</ref>
*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

-Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources, that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable because farmers can not match larger industries. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, which will affect products in various and possibly negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of waste. While trying to stay alive in a danger zone, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing, even more, harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.

-Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce product without any misconfigurations isn’t chosen by them. It is the result of factors farther along the path from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, consumer/ market relationship together, depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. (Susan- Gaurdian) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect. Another reason for the call of perfect food is the actual ability to afford this food, for example, the people who generate lots of waste are the same people in a financially stable position. http://www.foodwastemovie.com/about/ . Having the option to pick and choose where your money is spent relative to the fact that one can have a preference in what they consume greatly enhances waste.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and therefore although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref><ref name="FAO key"/>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

low cost of discarding food can lead to overstocking <ref name="EU"/>

- "two for one" promotions

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. And many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When organic waste is left to decompose in landfills it releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

- insert EPA food recovery hierarchy-<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste <ref name="EPA"/>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.
Using vegetables in the salad bar

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

== Farmers: ==
=== Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up ===
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

=== Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales ===
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

=== The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle ===
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/
=== FIGURES AND IMAGES TO BE INCLUDED: ===

-Waste image
https://globalpressjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy/6830/gpjnews-nepal-ykk-food-waste-7-web-jpg.jpg :)
-Variation of apple image
https://www.change.org/p/whole-foods-and-walmart-stop-contributing-to-massive-food-waste-in-the-us-31
-water melon waste
Discarded food is the biggest single component of US landfill and incinerators, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Photograph: Dan Tuffs/for the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1
-Dumped food waste image out of truck
https://biancajchadda.wordpress.com/2013/01/14/stop-fruit-and-veg-elitism/
-Squash left to rot:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-7

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-05T03:58:33Z

ThomasLawson: /* Farmers */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*"Even if just one-fourth of the food currently lost or wasted globally could be saved, it would be enough to feed 870 million hungry people in the world."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 4, 2017.</ref>
*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

-Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources, that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable because farmers can not match larger industries. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, which will affect products in various and possibly negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of waste. While trying to stay alive in a danger zone, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing, even more, harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.

-Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce product without any misconfigurations isn’t chosen by them. It is the result of factors farther along the path from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, consumer/ market relationship together, depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. (Susan- Gaurdian) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect. Another reason for the call of perfect food is the actual ability to afford this food, for example, the people who generate lots of waste are the same people in a financially stable position. http://www.foodwastemovie.com/about/ . Having the option to pick and choose where your money is spent relative to the fact that one can have a preference in what they consume greatly enhances waste.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and therefore although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref><ref name="FAO key"/>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

low cost of discarding food can lead to overstocking <ref name="EU"/>

- "two for one" promotions

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. And many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When organic waste is left to decompose in landfills it releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

- insert EPA food recovery hierarchy-<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste <ref name="EPA"/>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.
Using vegetables in the salad bar

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

== Farmers: ==
=== Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up ===
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

=== Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales ===
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

=== Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources ===
The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 . Food waste is the 3 largest producer of ghg, following usa and china. (FAO) Ghg proudciton is just one environmental damage, the expansion of agro-land causes immense loss in biodiversity through various species.- http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf - The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometers, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. (FAo) Land that goes to waste for the production of wasted food is about 1.4 billion hectares. In other wrods, 30 percent of land that is used to produce food is wasted. FAO. The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. Thus farmers need to add fertlizers for soil to match the required harvestings, causing erosion and degreation. FAO. The impacts are severe, demand is rising, and so is population, with more peoples comes more thoughtful minds and the opportunity for innovation. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/food-wastage/

=== The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle ===
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/
=== FIGURES AND IMAGES TO BE INCLUDED: ===

-Waste image
https://globalpressjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy/6830/gpjnews-nepal-ykk-food-waste-7-web-jpg.jpg :)
-Variation of apple image
https://www.change.org/p/whole-foods-and-walmart-stop-contributing-to-massive-food-waste-in-the-us-31
-water melon waste
Discarded food is the biggest single component of US landfill and incinerators, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Photograph: Dan Tuffs/for the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1
-Dumped food waste image out of truck
https://biancajchadda.wordpress.com/2013/01/14/stop-fruit-and-veg-elitism/
-Squash left to rot:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-7

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-05T03:57:47Z

ThomasLawson: /* Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*"Even if just one-fourth of the food currently lost or wasted globally could be saved, it would be enough to feed 870 million hungry people in the world."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 4, 2017.</ref>
*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>
-Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce product without any misconfigurations isn’t chosen by them. It is the result of factors farther along the path from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, consumer/ market relationship together, depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. (Susan- Gaurdian) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect. Another reason for the call of perfect food is the actual ability to afford this food, for example, the people who generate lots of waste are the same people in a financially stable position. http://www.foodwastemovie.com/about/ . Having the option to pick and choose where your money is spent relative to the fact that one can have a preference in what they consume greatly enhances waste.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and therefore although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref><ref name="FAO key"/>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

low cost of discarding food can lead to overstocking <ref name="EU"/>

- "two for one" promotions

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. And many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When organic waste is left to decompose in landfills it releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

- insert EPA food recovery hierarchy-<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste <ref name="EPA"/>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.
Using vegetables in the salad bar

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

== Farmers: ==
=== Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up ===
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

=== Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales ===
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

=== Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources ===
The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 . Food waste is the 3 largest producer of ghg, following usa and china. (FAO) Ghg proudciton is just one environmental damage, the expansion of agro-land causes immense loss in biodiversity through various species.- http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf - The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometers, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. (FAo) Land that goes to waste for the production of wasted food is about 1.4 billion hectares. In other wrods, 30 percent of land that is used to produce food is wasted. FAO. The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. Thus farmers need to add fertlizers for soil to match the required harvestings, causing erosion and degreation. FAO. The impacts are severe, demand is rising, and so is population, with more peoples comes more thoughtful minds and the opportunity for innovation. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/food-wastage/

=== The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle ===
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/
=== FIGURES AND IMAGES TO BE INCLUDED: ===

-Waste image
https://globalpressjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy/6830/gpjnews-nepal-ykk-food-waste-7-web-jpg.jpg :)
-Variation of apple image
https://www.change.org/p/whole-foods-and-walmart-stop-contributing-to-massive-food-waste-in-the-us-31
-water melon waste
Discarded food is the biggest single component of US landfill and incinerators, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Photograph: Dan Tuffs/for the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1
-Dumped food waste image out of truck
https://biancajchadda.wordpress.com/2013/01/14/stop-fruit-and-veg-elitism/
-Squash left to rot:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-7

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-05T03:57:31Z

ThomasLawson: /* Farmers */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*"Even if just one-fourth of the food currently lost or wasted globally could be saved, it would be enough to feed 870 million hungry people in the world."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 4, 2017.</ref>
*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>
-Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain
The expectation that farmers need to produce product without any misconfigurations isn’t chosen by them. It is the result of factors farther along the path from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, consumer/ market relationship together, depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. (Susan- Gaurdian) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect. Another reason for the call of perfect food is the actual ability to afford this food, for example, the people who generate lots of waste are the same people in a financially stable position. http://www.foodwastemovie.com/about/ . Having the option to pick and choose where your money is spent relative to the fact that one can have a preference in what they consume greatly enhances waste.

=== Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected ===
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources, that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable because farmers can not match larger industries. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, which will affect products in various and possibly negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of waste. While trying to stay alive in a danger zone, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing, even more, harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.
===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and therefore although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref><ref name="FAO key"/>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

low cost of discarding food can lead to overstocking <ref name="EU"/>

- "two for one" promotions

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. And many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When organic waste is left to decompose in landfills it releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

- insert EPA food recovery hierarchy-<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste <ref name="EPA"/>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.
Using vegetables in the salad bar

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

== Farmers: ==
=== Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up ===
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

=== Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales ===
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

=== Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources ===
The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 . Food waste is the 3 largest producer of ghg, following usa and china. (FAO) Ghg proudciton is just one environmental damage, the expansion of agro-land causes immense loss in biodiversity through various species.- http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf - The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometers, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. (FAo) Land that goes to waste for the production of wasted food is about 1.4 billion hectares. In other wrods, 30 percent of land that is used to produce food is wasted. FAO. The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. Thus farmers need to add fertlizers for soil to match the required harvestings, causing erosion and degreation. FAO. The impacts are severe, demand is rising, and so is population, with more peoples comes more thoughtful minds and the opportunity for innovation. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/food-wastage/

=== The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle ===
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/
=== FIGURES AND IMAGES TO BE INCLUDED: ===

-Waste image
https://globalpressjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy/6830/gpjnews-nepal-ykk-food-waste-7-web-jpg.jpg :)
-Variation of apple image
https://www.change.org/p/whole-foods-and-walmart-stop-contributing-to-massive-food-waste-in-the-us-31
-water melon waste
Discarded food is the biggest single component of US landfill and incinerators, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Photograph: Dan Tuffs/for the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1
-Dumped food waste image out of truck
https://biancajchadda.wordpress.com/2013/01/14/stop-fruit-and-veg-elitism/
-Squash left to rot:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-7

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-05T03:57:02Z

ThomasLawson: /* Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*"Even if just one-fourth of the food currently lost or wasted globally could be saved, it would be enough to feed 870 million hungry people in the world."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 4, 2017.</ref>
*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>
=== Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected ===
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources, that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable because farmers can not match larger industries. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, which will affect products in various and possibly negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of waste. While trying to stay alive in a danger zone, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing, even more, harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.
===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and therefore although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref><ref name="FAO key"/>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

low cost of discarding food can lead to overstocking <ref name="EU"/>

- "two for one" promotions

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. And many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When organic waste is left to decompose in landfills it releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

- insert EPA food recovery hierarchy-<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste <ref name="EPA"/>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.
Using vegetables in the salad bar

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

== Farmers: ==
=== Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up ===
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

=== Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales ===
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

=== Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources ===
The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 . Food waste is the 3 largest producer of ghg, following usa and china. (FAO) Ghg proudciton is just one environmental damage, the expansion of agro-land causes immense loss in biodiversity through various species.- http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf - The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometers, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. (FAo) Land that goes to waste for the production of wasted food is about 1.4 billion hectares. In other wrods, 30 percent of land that is used to produce food is wasted. FAO. The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. Thus farmers need to add fertlizers for soil to match the required harvestings, causing erosion and degreation. FAO. The impacts are severe, demand is rising, and so is population, with more peoples comes more thoughtful minds and the opportunity for innovation. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/food-wastage/

=== The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle ===
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/
=== FIGURES AND IMAGES TO BE INCLUDED: ===

-Waste image
https://globalpressjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy/6830/gpjnews-nepal-ykk-food-waste-7-web-jpg.jpg :)
-Variation of apple image
https://www.change.org/p/whole-foods-and-walmart-stop-contributing-to-massive-food-waste-in-the-us-31
-water melon waste
Discarded food is the biggest single component of US landfill and incinerators, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Photograph: Dan Tuffs/for the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1
-Dumped food waste image out of truck
https://biancajchadda.wordpress.com/2013/01/14/stop-fruit-and-veg-elitism/
-Squash left to rot:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-7

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-05T03:56:33Z

ThomasLawson: /* Farmers */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*"Even if just one-fourth of the food currently lost or wasted globally could be saved, it would be enough to feed 870 million hungry people in the world."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 4, 2017.</ref>
*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>
=== Introduction: How Farmers Are Affected ===
Currently, there is a mentality that only cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables are appropriate to be consumed in many developed countries. The push from various sources, that only flawless produce is sufficient to fulfill the dietary needs of consumers creates a major backlash on the people who grow these products. Additionally, producing immaculate products is unsustainable because farmers can not match larger industries. The push of competition has detrimental effects on land. Furthermore, factors that are out of their hands, like weather, which will affect products in various and possibly negative ways. The insufficiencies of this situation result in the accumulation of massive amounts of waste. While trying to stay alive in a danger zone, farmers indecently end up harassing natures resources, therefore causing, even more, harm. The environmental impacts due to farmers matching the demand, competition and dynamic factors result in a destructive cycle. Although the current situation is not looking good, new ideas and technologies are becoming more and more attainable for farmers. With dedication, time and effort, society can work together to create change.
=== Underlying Problem: Perfect Produce and The Food Chain ===
The expectation that farmers need to produce product without any misconfigurations isn’t chosen by them. It is the result of factors farther along the path from production up to one’s dinner plate. In many cases markets, won’t accept produce because it won’t sell. According to Roni Neff who is a director at the Johns Hopkins school of public health, consumer/ market relationship together, depict what is appropriate to be brought to the table. (Susan- Gaurdian) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect. Another reason for the call of perfect food is the actual ability to afford this food, for example, the people who generate lots of waste are the same people in a financially stable position. http://www.foodwastemovie.com/about/ . Having the option to pick and choose where your money is spent relative to the fact that one can have a preference in what they consume greatly enhances waste.

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and therefore although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref><ref name="FAO key"/>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

low cost of discarding food can lead to overstocking <ref name="EU"/>

- "two for one" promotions

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. And many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When organic waste is left to decompose in landfills it releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

- insert EPA food recovery hierarchy-<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste <ref name="EPA"/>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.
Using vegetables in the salad bar

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

== Farmers: ==
=== Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up ===
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

=== Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales ===
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

=== Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources ===
The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 . Food waste is the 3 largest producer of ghg, following usa and china. (FAO) Ghg proudciton is just one environmental damage, the expansion of agro-land causes immense loss in biodiversity through various species.- http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf - The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometers, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. (FAo) Land that goes to waste for the production of wasted food is about 1.4 billion hectares. In other wrods, 30 percent of land that is used to produce food is wasted. FAO. The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. Thus farmers need to add fertlizers for soil to match the required harvestings, causing erosion and degreation. FAO. The impacts are severe, demand is rising, and so is population, with more peoples comes more thoughtful minds and the opportunity for innovation. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/food-wastage/

=== The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle ===
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/
=== FIGURES AND IMAGES TO BE INCLUDED: ===

-Waste image
https://globalpressjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy/6830/gpjnews-nepal-ykk-food-waste-7-web-jpg.jpg :)
-Variation of apple image
https://www.change.org/p/whole-foods-and-walmart-stop-contributing-to-massive-food-waste-in-the-us-31
-water melon waste
Discarded food is the biggest single component of US landfill and incinerators, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Photograph: Dan Tuffs/for the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1
-Dumped food waste image out of truck
https://biancajchadda.wordpress.com/2013/01/14/stop-fruit-and-veg-elitism/
-Squash left to rot:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-7

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]

Course:CONS200/2016w2/Wiki Projects/Insistence on Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables

2017-04-05T03:56:12Z

ThomasLawson: /* Farmers: */

Introduction'

'''Cosmetically Perfect Fruits and Vegetables''' are produce that meet superficial standards of size, shape, and color along with being unblemished. In comparison to all foods, fruits and vegetables have the highest wastage rate (FAO). Globally, the stats are _________.

*"Even if just one-fourth of the food currently lost or wasted globally could be saved, it would be enough to feed 870 million hungry people in the world."<ref name="FAO key">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction, http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/, accessed April 4, 2017.</ref>
*Food losses and waste amounts to roughly US$ 680 billion in industrialized countries and US$ 310 billion in developing countries."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*"Global quantitative food losses and waste per year are roughly 30% for cereals, 40-50% for root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% for oil seeds, meat and dairy plus 35% for fish."<ref name="FAO key"/>
*Per capita waste by consumers is between 95-115 kg a year in Europe and North America, while consumers in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-eastern Asia, each throw away only 6-11 kg a year"<ref name="FAO key"/>

Some food loss is unavoidable for health and safety reasons... However, the demand for cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables is creating unsustainable waste throughout the food supply chain. This has substantial consequences economically, socially, and environmentally.

Scope: North America (mainly The United States and Canada)

Actors: Farmers, Supermarkets, Consumers

"deals with the topic of edible food which was designated to be wasted due to different reasons such as wrong size, colour or shape, overproduction, low prices on the market, small blemishes and exaggerated attitudes with respect to freshness"<ref name="Schneider">Schneider, F., The evolution of food donation with respect to waste prevention, Waste Management, 2013, p. 755-763.</ref>

"In recent years, growing concern about hunger, resource conservation, and the environmental and economic costs associated with food waste have raised public awareness of food loss. This in turn has accelerated public and private efforts to make better use of available food supplies by recovering safe and nutritious food that would otherwise be wasted. Of course, not all food that is lost is suitable for consumption (fig. 1). Some losses—like the condemnation of diseased animals at the slaughtering house, or the discard of moldy fruit from the produce shelf at the supermarket—are necessary to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of the U.S. food supply. Such foods are not recoverable for human use. Likewise, plate scraps are appropriately discarded at eating establishments out of health considerations. In addition, not all food that is lost is economically recoverable. Food recovery efforts are often limited by financial and logistical constraints that make it difficult to match recovered food with potential recipients."<ref name="Kantor">Kantor, L. S., Lipton, K., Manchester, A., & Oliveira, V., Estimating and addressing America’s food losses, Food Review, 1997, p. 2-12.</ref>

==Who is involved? How are they contributing?==
The food supply chain consists of three principle actors who all contribute/generate food waste at various levels.
===Farmers===
Up to 20 percent of fruit and vegetable waste occurs in agricultural production<ref name="FAOloss">Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Global food loss and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention, 2011</ref>

===Retail===

Supermarkets act as an intermediary between farmers and consumers and therefore although they do not contribute directly to a majority of the food wasted, the standards set by markets play an important role in the amount of food wasted; in this case, fruits and vegetables.

According to the FAO, 12 percent of fruit and vegetable loss comes from retail<ref name="FAOloss"/>. The three main factors of this food waste include supply chain inefficiencies, marketing standards, and marketing strategies, with standards being the main factor of cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

'''Standards''' provided by public authorities establish food safety and quality objectives<ref name="Henson">Henson. S., & Reardon, T., Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system, Food Policy, 2005, p. 241-253.</ref>but private standards are set by businesses for product differentiation<ref name="Henson"/><ref name="Buzby">Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States, Food Policy, 2012, p. 561-570.</ref><ref name="EU"/>. The supermarkets use these standards to compete with other retailers and to meet the expectations of the consumer. Setting a high standard creates consumer confidence in the brand. Consumers have expectations of what fruits and vegetables should look like, and markets are concerned that if they sell produce that do not meet the cosmetic standard then they will lose business.

Standards include no blemishes, size, shape, color.

'''Supply chain inefficiencies''' between farmers and retail create waste due to incorrect predictions of consumer demand<ref name="EU">European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment, Preparatory study on food waste across EU 27, 2010</ref><ref name="FAO key"/>.

'''Stock management and Marketing strategies'''

low cost of discarding food can lead to overstocking <ref name="EU"/>

- "two for one" promotions

Markets overstock because consumers won't buy products if the shelves look empty. And many times, they throw perfectly good produce out because of the best by date. Consumers are often confused by these labels and assume that it is not good for consumption after these dates, this causes markets to throw this food out before these dates pass so they do not appear to consumers as selling near-expired produce.

===Consumers===

-nice fruits/vegs more convenient (easier to peel, chop, etc)

The majority of edible produce that goes to waste occurs at the consumer level (***source). Consumers are the main force that drive demand, therefore they expect supermarkets and farmers to provide a plentiful amount of produce that adhere to specific aesthetic requirements.

Since supermarkets compete with one another to provide quality products, they aim to supply the most visually pleasing fruits and vegetables. Because buyers have never had a selection that includes misshapen and imperfect produce, consumers have become accustomed to a specific grade of harvest. Consequently, they are more critical of produce and less inclined to purchase outside of their comfort zones, which reinforces the standards of perfection set for suppliers.

As a result of a culture that emphasizes mass consumerism, households shop for groceries with a mindset of ‘more is more’. This behaviour is encouraged by supermarkets through strong advertising, the promotion of deals and discounts on bulk items, such as ‘buy two, get one free’.

With high market demand and a consumerist mindset, consumers tend to overbuy and then fail to eat all the produce they purchased. Because fruits and vegetables are perishable, they are either left uneaten too long or are thrown out prematurely. With a lack of proper disposal systems, much of this once perfectly edible produce ends up in landfills.

This means that all of the water, fuel, and labour put into the production and transport of fruit and vegetables was for nothing. This potential unnecessary environmental impacts derived from produce waste is an unsustainable practice, which threatens the environmental food as well as food availability to consumers in the future (c4).

Consumers are responsible for 28 percent of the fruit and vegetable waste<ref name="FAOloss"/>.

==Costs==

===Environmental===

When organic waste is left to decompose in landfills it releases methane, which contributes to harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions (http://compostingcouncil.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Keeping-Organics-Out-of-Landfills-Position-Paper.pdf). Methane is 25 times more efficient at trapping radiation than carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases).

===Economic===

"[In the United States] the annual cost to businesses and organizations at the retail level is nearly $65 billion."<ref name="Venkat">Venkat, K., The climate change and economic impacts of food waste in the United States, International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 2011, p. 431-446.</ref>

"For example, if 5 percent of retail, foodservice, and consumer food losses in 1995 were recovered rather than discarded as solid waste, about $50 million dollars annually could be saved in solid waste disposal costs for landfills alone."<ref name="Kantor"/>

consumers:
As more and more shoppers are becoming aware of waste statistics, they are more driven to make a change for economic reasons. In the United States, approximately $936 food is purchased but not consumed per household per year (c3). This number is shown to increase with the number of occupants per household. Because consumers are largely overestimating the amount of actual food they eat, they continue to support the supermarkets' profits and prolong personal losses.

===Social===
Consumers have reported feeling guilty about food waste, as it is a loss of edible food that could have been allocated elsewhere.

==Remedial Actions==

[[File:EPA Food Recovery Hierachy 3.JPG|frame|right|EPA Food Recovery Hierarchy]]

- insert EPA food recovery hierarchy-<ref name="EPA">Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainable management of food, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/food-recovery-hierarchy, accessed April 4, 2017</ref>

source reduction
*conduct a waste audit - find out reasons for generating waste. This can save money by finding ways to avoid waste <ref name="EPA"/>.
feeding hungry people<ref name="EPA"/>
*Legal basics - protection from liability under Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act
*Tax benefits - tax deductions are available to businesses that donate food
feeding animals<ref name="EPA"/>
*it is cheaper to feed animals food scraps than having the food waste delivered to the landfill although there are state regulations and guidelines
industrial use<ref name="EPA"/>
*anaerobic digestion - produces two useful products: biogas and soil amendment
composting<ref name="EPA"/>
*Reduces methane, reduces use of chemical fertilizers, etc..

Consumers: Many consumers shop out of routine patterns, for this reason, it requires a conscious shift in buying habits to ensure more efficient consumption behaviours.
The majority of the problems created at the consumer level can be solved with better information on how to buy and consume fruits and vegetables. The FOA, the EPA, and food journals suggest that change requires action from both grocery stores and consumers. If households spent more time meal planning and creating appropriate shopping lists, they could benefit themselves by spending less money while also reducing the amount of produce being discarded and wasted resources. Consumers must also be informed on how to read labels and manage the produce in their fridge before it becomes expired or unusable. Supermarkets could ensure that product information and packaging is clear in order to help educate and inform purchasers, and also begin to incorporate a variety of produce to widen consumer expectations.
Because it is not a realistic expectation to eliminate one hundred percent of consumer food waste, citywide compost initiatives ensure more responsible waste management practices. Through proper disposal, composting at a consumer level contributes to reducing overall emissions.
Consumers are often unaware of the unsustainable practices that result from their everyday habits. A shift in cultural attitudes and purchasing patterns is key to mediating demands that result in environmental degradation throughout the supply chain. With proper exposure and educational actions, consumers could become more willing to deviate from cosmetically perfect fruits and vegetables.

This shift in standards is not going to happen overnight. It's about gradually breaking preconceptions about the taste and nutrition of the fruits and vegetables based on their looks.
Using vegetables in the salad bar

==Global Stuff ??==
Industrialization of agriculture has completely transformed our world in a matter of generations. As globalization spread like a disease through the modern world, so did the ideals of “economy of scale” and efficiency determined business, which was willing to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of increased profit. In the 1930’s, a time described as the “Green Revolution”, agriculture became subject to large scale streamlining by large corporations such as ___, who pushed themselves into the market formerly occupied by small scale, local farms. These corporations outsourced crop production to countries with a more optimal climate for growth, relaxed legislative regulation, and inexpensive labor force. They simultaneously maximized the efficiency of the production cycle with the aid of fertilizers, hormones, and pesticides. This farming methodology is known as intensive farming, where a higher crop yield is obtained, often through the application of synthetic fertilizers to increase nutrient availability to plants, growth hormones and antibiotics to induce greater plant yield and reduce the effects of natural disease, and pesticides to fight against natural or invasive pests such as insects or weeds.

There are certainly many benefits associated with the efficiencies of large scale production, such as land use outside of rich urban markets, etc. If it weren't for the globalization of our food production, western societies would not have access to the vast quantities of food products that we have so readily available at our closest supermarket. The negative externalities, however, often go unnoticed by the consumer living in the Northern hemisphere who is able to purchase a ripe avocado in December. This consumer is often not aware of the social and economic costs that come with the $0.99 avocado.

Environmental costs:
There are many environmental factors which can be used to asses the sustainability of large scale food production. One method is to asses the carbon cost of the process. Another is to look at the direct physical effects that the industry has on our planet such as fertilizer runoff, soil degradation, and fossil fuel emissions.

To effectively assess the true environmental cost of produce, the ___ can be used. This simply tracks the carbon cost of the produce for every step of production, from seed to your table
(and after, landfill= methane) The largest factors in the ___ carbon cost is often the cost of transportation, and fertilization production

Fertilizers are a fundamental cog in the Industrialized Agriculture machine. These Intensive farming practices require the use of synthetic

== Farmers: ==
=== Competition: Small Scale Sustainability Can't Keep Up ===
Since the suppliers are working to match the consumers demand, we can trace these grave effects that shake the farming community. Small local farmers have a very difficult time selling to markets because they can’t keep up with large industrial producers. The call for perfect food can’t be promised by small local producers due to the factors such as bad weather. High winds or intense sun rays can alter the asthetic of produce that will ruin the opportunity to make it to the market, regardless of its high nutritional value-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-4. Another factor is strict food audits, farmers that don’t have large scale production loose much of their nutritious products due to small bruises. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Other factors that affect local farmers is simply the amount expected to be harvested. The organic and environmentally less harsh methods don’t yield enough harvest. The likelihood of a local farmer who can only produce for a few months of the year is very unlikely to sign a contract as opposed to imported products from massive plantations, which produce year-round. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2013/02/04/171051906/can-small-farms-benefit-from-wal-mart-s-push-into-local-foods Recap: Local farmers can’t match import prices and volume and audits.

=== Waste: More Than Just a Loss In Sales ===
There are many parts along the food chain where produce is wasted, from audits, to packaging, to markets and consumer choice. At the start of production, the amount of wasted produce that doesn’t even leave the farm is about 20 percent. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/files/www/Gravely_ERS412_FinalThesis.pdf At the farming level, this is due to unintentionally producer surplus. The cost of excess produce is directly laid on farmers. The impact of excess produce doesn’t stop at the loss of sales, the wave ripples through farmers as land, fertilizer, labour, space, water and other products that went into producing the product are lost. http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/blog/the-hidden-cost-of-perfect-produce . The excess fruits and vegetables that don’t get consumed often end up in the various places; some used for nutrient cycling, others left to rot, but most in the landfill. According to https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 , 1/5 of excess product is sent to degrade in the dump. The wasted product is just a slice of the many detriments surplus production causes.

=== Environmental Effects: More Than a Loss of An Individuals Resources ===
The impact on the environment from excess farming is harmful. Our current farming practices are creating excessive amounts of greenhouse gasses which are a driving factor of global warming. Additionally, land is being destroyed due to the constant use without periods of rest. The addition of food surplus to landfills is a moving factor of methane production. Methane is far more worse than CarbonDioxide-https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1 . Food waste is the 3 largest producer of ghg, following usa and china. (FAO) Ghg proudciton is just one environmental damage, the expansion of agro-land causes immense loss in biodiversity through various species.- http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3347e/i3347e.pdf - The amount of water that is used to produce food that is wasted is approximately 250 cubic kilometers, usa uses the same amount in a per unit of time. (FAo) Land that goes to waste for the production of wasted food is about 1.4 billion hectares. In other wrods, 30 percent of land that is used to produce food is wasted. FAO. The constant yielding of farms without breaks stresses and degrades soil. Thus farmers need to add fertlizers for soil to match the required harvestings, causing erosion and degreation. FAO. The impacts are severe, demand is rising, and so is population, with more peoples comes more thoughtful minds and the opportunity for innovation. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/food-wastage/

=== The Future: Applying Sustainable Methods To a Unsustainable Cycle ===
With production loss in all steps of the food chain, there are many opportunities to reconsider and change our current applications. Until demands are modified, it is up to the farmers to change their production methods while still producing current amounts. The two general producers of fruits and vegetables are usually local small companies or large scale modern producers. The current practices by small companies are usually less harmful but don’t yield a feasible harvest. Although, if local producers applied the land-sharing concept into their production, wildlife will be conserved and the stress on land will greatly be lessened. This requires more land but promises less damage. However, a different method is also being implemented. Land sparing is the intensification of growing crops in denser areas while saving other areas for conservation. The idea is like a plus one minus one theory, which will balance out for sustainable success. http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/new-postnote-provides-summary-of-land-sharing-vs-land-sparing-debate/
=== FIGURES AND IMAGES TO BE INCLUDED: ===

-Waste image
https://globalpressjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy/6830/gpjnews-nepal-ykk-food-waste-7-web-jpg.jpg :)
-Variation of apple image
https://www.change.org/p/whole-foods-and-walmart-stop-contributing-to-massive-food-waste-in-the-us-31
-water melon waste
Discarded food is the biggest single component of US landfill and incinerators, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Photograph: Dan Tuffs/for the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-1
-Dumped food waste image out of truck
https://biancajchadda.wordpress.com/2013/01/14/stop-fruit-and-veg-elitism/
-Squash left to rot:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect#img-7

==Conclusion==
"Understanding where and how much food is lost is an important step in reducing waste and increasing the efficiency of food recovery efforts."<ref name="Kantor"/>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Conservation]]