Food waste at the household level accounts for a significant share of total food waste in developed economies, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization. Studies have shown that this share varies between 0.3 kg to 4.5 kg per person per week, depending on the definitions and methodologies applied. In Italy, quantities, behaviors, and attitudes regarding food waste have been solely explored through the use of questionnaires, typically leading to discrepant values of food waste. In this study, we estimate and analyse the determinants of food waste over a 388 units’ panel spread over the national territory, through a diary and questionnaire study. Moreover, by comparing food waste value that was declared in questionnaires and reported in diaries, we confirm that the awareness of food waste quantities is heavily biased. The results confirm that the average food waste value is significantly higher when gathered through diaries, while questionnaires are able to catch less than one-third of food waste determinants.

Food losses and waste are currently at the heart of academic debates, civil society initiatives, and political agendas. This paper investigates food waste in school catering services focusing on six schools located in the municipality of Verona (Italy). It aims to quantify food waste, as a measure of food catering inefficiency, to identify the main causes, and to suggest a set of prevention and reduction interventions. For these purposes food waste is defined as all the products discarded from the food chain while still preserving their nutritional value and complying with safety standards. The work shows a significant level of inefficiency in the school catering services, measured by the amount of food processed and still perfectly edible, but not served during the meals. On average more than 15% of the overall processed food is wasted. Among the causes identified in this study, four of them were more relevant than others because of their implications and impact on prevention: the lack of attention to dietary habits, the rigid food procurement specifications, the menu composition, and the meal presentation.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to assess the reliability of questionnaires as a method of quantifying household food waste (FW), thus providing context regarding the validity of existing Italian estimates. Design/methodology/approach: A total of 30 households were involved in a diary study that was conducted for one week. The participating households were first asked about their FW quantities in a questionnaire. Half of the households who filled their diaries properly were then audited through waste sorting analysis performed on their garbage. Non-parametric tests were used to test for differences in FW estimates between audited and non-audited households, as well as differences among estimates obtained through different quantification methodologies. Findings: Edible FW was estimated to be 489 grams per week based on questionnaires, and 1,035 grams per week based on diaries. In the audited sub-sample of households, FW estimates were 334 grams per week based on questionnaires, 818 grams per week based on diaries and 1,058 grams per week based on waste sorting analysis. Research limitations/implications: Given the small sample size in the present study, future studies can utilize larger samples to assess whether the differences identified in estimates can be replicated. Future studies can also inquire into the behavioral biases that led consumers to underestimate their FW. Practical implications: Results of the present study point against the use of questionnaires to quantify household FW, hence raising some doubt on the reliability of existent Italian estimates. Where waste sorting is unfeasible, the use of adjustment methods or diaries is suggested to better inform policies. Originality/value: This study is one of the first on FW quantification that tests three different methodologies on the same sample, and is the first to do so in Italy, where estimates are still very poor.

Reducing food waste is globally considered as a key challenge in developing sustainable food systems. Although most food waste is generated at the household level, consumers hardly recognize their responsibility, and the factors underpinning their perception of the quantity of food wasted at home are still unclear. This paper aims to fill this gap by analyzing the results of a large-scale survey conducted in Italy. The perceived quantity of household food waste was measured through a Likert scale and analyzed by means of a logistic regression against a set of predictors, including food waste motivations, perception of the effects of food waste, and sociodemographic variables. As expected, the perceived quantity of food waste declared by respondents was very low. Among the main determinants, food shopping habits and the level of awareness about the reasons why food is wasted played a key role. In contrast, the perception of the environmental effects of food waste seemed to be less important. Differences among subsamples recruited in different areas of Italy were detected, suggesting that further studies, as well as awareness-raising policies, should also consider context-related variables.

The increased relative poverty and migration crisis in Europe are determining a raise of food insecurity levels. Cities and regions are experiencing—and to some extent stimulating—a growth of food recovery initiatives. Food redistribution activities (FRAs) are acknowledged as a tool for addressing food insecurity and preventing food surplus wastage ensuring economic, environmental, and social benefits. This paper aimed to identify the characteristics of FRAs and their social impact in the context of the Emilia Romagna region (Italy). A literature review and two experts’ consultations were carried out to inventory and categorize relevant social impacts. A questionnaire was then drafted and submitted to a sample of FRAs operating in the region. Results provided a profile of the surveyed food redistribution activities in terms of type of food redistributed, service provided, and workforce. In addition, the qualitative investigation allowed the identification of hotspots in terms of social, economic, psychological, health, and political impacts as perceived by engaged stakeholders.