IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/265137.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

FAO Food Loss Index methodology and policy implications

Author

Listed:
  • Koester, Ulrich
  • Galaktionova, Ekaterina

Abstract

In 2015, all 193 UN member countries agreed to halve global food losses and waste by the year 2030. In this article, we are going to explore why the first official study on food loss and waste (FLW) by Gustavsson et al. FAO, 2011 cannot be used as a reasonable basis for policymaking – even though it underlies Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 12.3. Then we will look at the new proposal by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), which aims to harmonise the methodology for FLW research employing the Food Loss Index (FLI). In particular, we are going to assess the suitability of the FLI as a tool for policymaking. We would like to highlight that although both papers have played an important role in raising awareness about the global problem of FLW and in encouraging further research, they do not solve such important issues as providing a unified definition of FLW, the aggregation of heterogeneous commodities within a single category, and the absence of a methodology and data, both of which are certainly needed for policymaking. The objective of the article is to start a discussion about those issues, as even the recent flagship FAO study (2019) openly presents such a dichotomy between on the one hand, the aggregated percentage number of the Food Loss Index and on the other hand, the call for specification and precision in shaping policy measures, based on cost/benefit analyses.

Suggested Citation

  • Koester, Ulrich & Galaktionova, Ekaterina, 2021. "FAO Food Loss Index methodology and policy implications," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 123(1), pages 1-7.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:265137
    DOI: 10.7896/j.2093
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/265137/1/Koester_2021_FAO_Food_Loss_Index.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.7896/j.2093?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ulrich Koester & Jens‐Peter Loy & Yanjun Ren, 2020. "Food Loss and Waste: Some Guidance," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 19(1), pages 17-21, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Henrike Hermanussen & Jens-Peter Loy & Bekhzod Egamberdiev, 2022. "Determinants of Food Waste from Household Food Consumption: A Case Study from Field Survey in Germany," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-22, October.
    2. Jun Igeta & Hiroki Nakamura, 2022. "Business Incentive to Reduce Food Losses in Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-19, February.
    3. Noelia S. Bedoya-Perales & Glenio Piran Dal’ Magro, 2021. "Quantification of Food Losses and Waste in Peru: A Mass Flow Analysis along the Food Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-15, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    food loss; waste; policy; methodology; SDG;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:265137. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.