Food waste prevention in Sustainable Public Procurement

The JRC’s approach to waste prevention extends beyond simple waste reduction targets to encompass comprehensive strategies that address the entire lifecycle of food products and services. This holistic perspective acknowledges that effective prevention requires intervention at multiple points, from product design and procurement specifications to service delivery and post-consumption management. As public institutions procure substantial volumes of food for schools, hospitals, government cafeterias, and other facilities, their procurement decisions can drive market transformation towards prevention-oriented practices, creating ripple effects throughout the food industry and influencing broader consumption patterns.

Food waste prevention: definition and scope

Waste prevention encompasses all measures and activities undertaken before a substance, material, or product becomes waste. Accordino to the European Union’s Waste Framework Directive 2008/98/EC, as lastly amended by Directive (EU) 2025/1892, prevention includes any action that reduces the quantity of waste generated and minimises the adverse impacts of waste on human health and the environment. In the context of food systems, this definition takes on particular urgency given that in the European Union food loss and waste (FLW) averages 132 kg per capita annually (EEA, 2025), representing enormous environmental, economic, and social costs.

The concept of food waste prevention extends beyond mere reduction, as it also encompasses proper product storage to maintain optimal durability, as well as reuse and redistribution. Prevention fundamentally challenges the linear ‘farm-to-fork-to-bin’ model, instead promoting circular approaches where food resources retain their value and nutritional potential for as long as possible. By intervening at the earliest stages of the food supply chain – from procurement specifications and menu planning to portion control and surplus redistribution – prevention addresses the root causes of food waste rather than merely managing its symptoms.

The food use hierarchy: prioritising prevention and redistribution

The food use hierarchy establishes a clear prioritisation framework for managing food resources, with prevention occupying the apex position. This hierarchy, increasingly adopted across European policy frameworks, ranks options from most to least preferable:

• first, preventing food surplus through better planning and procurement;

• second, redistributing surplus food fit for human consumption to food banks and charitable organisations;

• third, using food no longer suitable for humans as animal feed;

• fourth, employing food waste for industrial applications such as bio-based materials or biochemicals;

• fifth, recovering energy through anaerobic digestion or incineration;

• and finally, as a last resort, disposing of food waste in landfills.

From this perspective, the EU food use hierarchy could benefit from further refinement, particularly in how it positions animal feed relative to industrial upcycling into food, pharmaceutical, or cosmetic applications. Reconsidering this balance may help align economic efficiency with environmental performance.

Public procurement can operationalise the food use hierarchy through contractual specifications that require suppliers and food service operators to implement prevention measures before resorting to lower-hierarchy options. For example, procurement contracts might mandate accurate demand forecasting, flexible menu planning, surplus food donation partnerships, and transparent reporting on prevention outcomes.

Strategic measures for food waste prevention

Effective food waste prevention requires intervention across multiple stages of the food supply chain, beginning with procurement planning and extending through storage, preparation, service, and post-consumption management. Menu planning plays a particularly crucial role in public food services, as decisions about variety, portion sizes, and meal frequency directly influence both food purchasing volumes and waste generation. Evidence-based planning that incorporates historical consumption data, seasonal availability, and user preferences enables more accurate matching of supply to demand.

Procurement specifications themselves can embed prevention requirements by favouring suppliers with demonstrated waste prevention capabilities, requiring packaging that preserves freshness and enables portion control, or specifying delivery frequencies that reduce spoilage risks. For fresh produce and other perishable items, contracts might prioritise local and seasonal sourcing, which typically involves shorter supply chains with reduced transportation time and better preservation of product quality. Additionally, specifications can require suppliers to accept returns of products nearing expiration for redistribution or alternative use.

Storage and inventory management represent critical prevention opportunities often overlooked in food service operations. Implementing first-in-first-out (FIFO) systems, maintaining optimal temperature and humidity conditions, and conducting regular stock audits prevent spoilage and expiration losses. Digital inventory systems can track product lifecycles, trigger alerts for items approaching use-by dates, and provide data for improving purchasing accuracy over time. In institutional kitchens, proper storage extends to prepared foods through blast chilling, vacuum packing, and other preservation techniques that enable surplus production to be safely held for later use.

During food preparation and service, prevention strategies include accurate portion control, made-to-order or build-your-own meal options that reduce plate waste, and trayless dining systems that discourage over-serving. Training kitchen staff in efficient preparation techniques, such as whole-ingredient utilisation that incorporates typically discarded parts like vegetable stems or meat trim, reduces processing waste while potentially enhancing nutritional value and menu diversity. Flexible serving methods, such as offering multiple portion sizes or allowing diners to request smaller servings, accommodate varying appetites and preferences.

Innovative approaches for food waste prevention and monitoring

Emerging technologies and innovative methodologies offer new opportunities for enhancing food waste prevention in public procurement contexts. Artificial intelligence and machine learning applications can analyse historical consumption patterns, weather forecasts, local events, and other variables to generate highly accurate demand predictions, enabling procurement and production volumes to be optimised continuously. Some systems incorporate feedback loops that learn from prediction errors, improving accuracy over time and adapting to changing circumstances.

Smart packaging technologies, including time-temperature indicators and freshness sensors, provide real-time information about product condition, enabling food service operators to make informed decisions about product use, redistribution, or alternative applications before spoilage occurs. These technologies can be integrated with inventory management systems to prioritise items for use, trigger redistribution protocols for products nearing quality limits, or alert staff to storage condition problems.

Blockchain-based systems offer promising avenues to enhance transparency and accountability in waste prevention strategies. The Wasteless research project has developed a pilot, innovative monitoring methodology grounded in open innovation principles, using a blockchain-enabled questionnaire that institutions can adopt to systematically collect and assess data on stakeholders’ circular economy performance.

Beyond technological innovations, behavioural insights and nudging techniques offer cost-effective prevention approaches applicable in public food service settings. Interventions such as reducing plate sizes, repositioning serving utensils to encourage smaller portions, or using visual cues to communicate appropriate serving sizes can significantly reduce food waste without requiring substantial infrastructure investments. Public authorities can incorporate requirements for such behavioural approaches into procurement specifications, particularly for cafeteria-style or self-service operations.

Responsibilities and stakeholder roles in prevention

Successful food waste prevention depends on coordinated action from multiple stakeholders, each playing distinct but complementary roles within the procurement ecosystem. Procuring authorities bear primary responsibility for embedding prevention requirements into procurement specifications, evaluation criteria, and contract management processes. This includes establishing clear performance expectations, providing necessary infrastructure such as adequate storage facilities, and monitoring contractor compliance with prevention commitments.

Food suppliers and manufacturers influence prevention through product design decisions, packaging formats, and delivery systems. By offering products with appropriate shelf lives, developing packaging sizes suited to institutional use patterns, and providing technical support for optimal storage and handling, suppliers enable prevention at the point of use. Extended producer responsibility concepts increasingly apply to food packaging, encouraging manufacturers to consider end-of-life management and support recycling or reuse systems for packaging materials.

Food service contractors and operators implement prevention measures in daily operations through menu planning, procurement practices, food preparation techniques, and service delivery models. Their staff training programmes, operational procedures, and quality management systems determine the effectiveness of prevention interventions. Contractors demonstrating prevention competencies gain competitive advantages in procurement competitions, creating market incentives for capability development and innovation.

End users – whether students, hospital patients, office workers, or other beneficiaries of public food services – ultimately determine prevention success through their consumption behaviours and cooperation with prevention initiatives. User engagement strategies, including education about prevention rationales, opportunities for menu input, and feedback mechanisms about meal quality and portion appropriateness, enhance prevention effectiveness whilst maintaining satisfaction. Public authorities can facilitate this engagement through communication programmes and participatory governance approaches.

Charitable organisations and social enterprises play crucial roles in redistributing surplus food, effectively preventing waste while addressing food insecurity. Their capacity to collect, store, and distribute food safely requires support through appropriate infrastructure, regulatory frameworks that enable donation whilst ensuring food safety, and funding mechanisms that recognise their prevention contributions. Procurement processes can formalise these relationships through contractual requirements for contractor cooperation with redistribution partners.

Monitoring, measurement, and accountability

Despite clear benefits, food waste prevention faces significant challenges in measurement and monitoring. Unlike food sent for composting or disposal, which involves tangible waste streams that can be weighed and tracked, prevention activities often occur at diffuse points throughout procurement and service delivery processes. Measuring what has not been wasted requires different methodologies than quantifying what has been discarded, creating inherent difficulties in quantification and verification.

Data collection presents substantial obstacles, as prevention activities span diverse actors and locations, from supplier warehouses to institutional kitchens to end-user dining facilities. Establishing baseline measurements, attributing changes to specific prevention interventions, and distinguishing prevention effects from other factors such as menu changes or user population shifts all pose methodological challenges. The lack of standardised indicators and reporting frameworks further complicates efforts to track progress consistently across different institutions and procurement contexts.

Effective monitoring systems must account for both input and outcome indicators. Input indicators track prevention activities implemented, such as staff training hours, demand forecasting system adoption, or redistribution partnership establishment. Outcome indicators measure actual waste reduction achieved, typically expressed as waste generation per meal served or percentage reduction from baseline levels. Combining both indicator types provides comprehensive assessment of prevention efforts and effectiveness.

Public procurement authorities should establish clear monitoring requirements in contracts, specifying what data must be collected, how it should be measured, and what reporting frequency is expected. Standardised reporting templates facilitate data aggregation and comparison whilst reducing compliance costs for contractors. Some advanced procurement frameworks include provisions for third-party verification of prevention performance, particularly for high-value contracts or where prevention represents a significant evaluation criterion.

Policy frameworks supporting waste prevention in public procurement

The European Union requires member states to establish waste prevention programmes as part of their waste management planning, with specific focus on food waste representing a priority area. These programmes must set prevention objectives, describe existing prevention measures, and evaluate their effectiveness in reducing waste generation and environmental impacts. Public procurement can serve as a key implementation mechanism for translating national prevention objectives into concrete actions within public sector operations.

Effective prevention programmes typically combine multiple policy instruments tailored to specific contexts and waste streams. Regulatory measures, such as requirements for public institutions to achieve specific waste reduction targets or mandatory surplus food donation, establish baseline expectations and create level playing fields. Economic instruments, including landfill taxes or waste collection charges based on actual volumes generated, create financial incentives for prevention behaviours and investments.

Sustainable Public Procurement (SPP) frameworks increasingly incorporate specific waste prevention criteria for food procurement. The JRC’s SPP voluntary guidelines for food and catering services include both core and comprehensive criteria addressing waste prevention, with comprehensive criteria requiring contractors to implement prevention plans, measure and report waste generation, and demonstrate year-on-year improvements. National adaptations of these criteria reflect local priorities and contexts while maintaining alignment with EU-level objectives.

Information and awareness programmes play vital roles in prevention policy by educating stakeholders about prevention opportunities and changing social norms around food consumption and waste. These programmes target various audiences, from procurement officers and kitchen managers to end users, providing tailored messages and practical guidance. Public sector leadership in implementing prevention measures, documented through transparent reporting and knowledge sharing, can influence broader societal attitudes and practices regarding food waste.

Conclusion: prevention as foundation for sustainable food systems

Waste prevention stands at the apex of the food use hierarchy not merely as a theoretical preference but as a practical imperative for sustainable food systems transformation. By addressing food waste before it occurs, prevention strategies deliver multiple benefits: reducing environmental pressures from agriculture, conserving valuable resources, lowering waste management costs, addressing food security challenges, and supporting economic innovation. The transition from linear to circular food systems fundamentally depends on embedding prevention principles throughout procurement and service delivery processes.

Public procurement’s substantial market influence positions it as a powerful driver for food waste prevention. The JRC’s Sustainable Public Procurement guidelines provide comprehensive frameworks for leveraging this influence, establishing clear expectations for prevention performance, and monitoring outcomes. As these guidelines gain adoption across European public institutions, they promise to transform market practices by creating consistent demand for prevention-oriented products and services.

Realising prevention’s full potential requires overcoming measurement challenges through innovative approaches such as the Wasteless blockchain-based pilot monitoring system, strengthening policy frameworks that prioritise prevention, and fostering cooperation amongst diverse stakeholders. Whilst obstacles remain, growing recognition of resource constraints, environmental limits, and food security challenges increasingly positions waste prevention not as an optional enhancement but as an essential component of sustainable food systems.

The integration of waste prevention into broader sustainability agendas, from Farm to Fork strategies to circular economy action plans, reflects its centrality to contemporary food policy. Future progress will depend on continued innovation in prevention approaches, improved monitoring and evaluation systems, sustained commitment from policymakers and practitioners, and recognition that every meal represents an opportunity to prevent waste and demonstrate respect for the resources invested in food production. In an era of climate change, biodiversity loss, and persistent hunger, food waste prevention offers not just a procurement strategy but a fundamental shift towards more sustainable, equitable, and resilient food systems.

Dario Dongo

Photo by simon peel on Unsplash

References

• Directive (EU) 2025/1892 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 September 2025 amending Directive 2008/98/EC on waste http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2025/1892/oj

• European Commission staff working document executive summary of the evaluation of the Public Procurement Directives Staff Working Document Evaluation of Directive 2014/23/EU on Concessions, Directive 2014/24/EU on Public Procurement and Directive 2014/25/EU on Utilities [SWD/2025/0333 final] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52025SC0333

• European Environment Agency, EEA. (2025). Preventing waste in Europe: Progress and challenges, with a focus on food waste (EEA Report 02/2025). https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/publications/preventing-waste-in-europe-progress-and-challenges-with-a-focus-on-food-waste/th-01-25-004-en-n-preventing-waste-report_final.pdf/

• García-Herrero, L., Pérez Cornago, A., Casonato, C., Sarasa Renedo, A., Bakogianni, I., Wollgast, J., Gama Caldas, M., Maragkoudakis, P., & Listorti, G. (2025). Criteria for sustainable public procurement (SPP) for food, food services, and vending machines (JRC139495). Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/0895877