During the global 2020 COVID-19 outbreak, the advantages of online food delivery (FD) were obvious, as it facilitated consumer access to prepared meals and enabled food providers to keep operating. However, online FD is not without its critics, with reports of consumer and restaurant boycotts. It is, therefore, time to take stock and consider the broader impacts of online FD, and what they mean for the stakeholders involved. Using the three pillars of sustainability as a lens through which to consider the impacts, this review presents the most up-to-date research in this field, revealing a raft of positive and negative impacts. From an economic standpoint, while online FD provides job and sale opportunities, it has been criticized for the high commission it charges restaurants and questionable working conditions for delivery people. From a social perspective, online FD affects the relationship between consumers and their food, as well as influencing public health outcomes and traffic systems. Environmental impacts include the significant generation of waste and its high carbon footprints. Moving forward, stakeholders must consider how best to mitigate the negative and promote the positive impacts of online FD to ensure that it is sustainable in every sense.

Although food loss and waste (FL&W) is high on China's national policy agenda, there is still little scientific information published about how much FL&W exists in China, what its impacts are, and what needs to be done to reduce it. Furthermore, what is known about FL&W across the various hotspots of China's food supply chain is not accessible in one place due to the tendency of scholars to focus on one part of the food chain depending on their disciplinary backgrounds, thereby making it difficult to obtain a 'comprehensive whole supply chain perspective'. Thus, this review provides an interdisciplinary collation of what is already known about FL&W in China. A systematic review of both English and Chinese databases followed PRISMA guidelines further complemented with a qualitative content analysis process uncovered 57 articles. The view revealed confounding factors such as an inconsistency of the definitions and calculation methods used to measure FL&W, and research gaps such as a lack of focus on the behavioral factors pertaining to waste, and the limited range of social innovations studied to reduce it. Thus, this review will help in the development of research agendas designed to advance efforts in this field.