Panel Paper:
Household Food Waste Generation and Organics Recycling: Too Time Consuming or for the Better [Public] Good?
Friday, November 9, 2018
Truman - Mezz Level (Marriott Wardman Park)
*Names in bold indicate Presenter
Over one third of the food produced and intended for human consumption goes uneaten in the United States. Households generate the highest proportion of food waste in the food supply chain (ReFED, 2016). Almost 95% of the food we discard is landfilled or incinerated (EPA, 2016). Food waste embeds significant economic, social, and environmental consequences, contributing to a profound burden on the food system and the environment. While food waste prevention is essential, re-utilization and recovery constitute attractive, complementary strategies. Specifically, recycling food scraps presents an opportunity to convert environmentally harmful materials into economic downstream resources, such as compost, animal feed, and biogas.
Recent statistics indicate that over 2.74 million households participate in variations of organics collection programs (Yepsen, 2015). However, there remains skepticism to whether households can meaningfully contribute high quality organics for re-use. For instance, Alameda County in California, where organics recycling is mandatory, saw an alarming rise in the amount of food scraps in residents’ garbage bins. Concurrently, outside the U.S., various food waste mitigation efforts have been framed as an economic resource opportunity (Stenmarck et al., 2016). Decreased compliance may suggest that households are just not properly informed of the value of their contributions.
The aim of this paper is to examine households’ behavioral response to how their foods scraps might be used as resources, specifically toward the production of biogas and compost. We investigate what behavioral, socioeconomic, and attitudinal factors are at play in household food waste generation and recycling tendencies, measured both in the quantity and quality of the discarded food. We examine behavior in response to different levels of information about downstream usage in a randomized control trial (RCT) setting. Interventions educate households on food waste and explain how their discarded food would be productively recycled.
In collaboration with the local government, for 6-weeks, we will simulate an organics collection program in a Minnesota county. A total of 270 resident households will be recruited and assigned treatment or control status. To examine the relationship between household food waste and downstream use, the collected materials will be weighed, sorted, and analyzed with regards to its suitability for further usage. Participants will respond to household surveys which identify socio-economic, cultural, and attitudinal factors that drive food waste generation and recycling behaviors. Overall, the rationale is that in the absence of framing recycling in a resource recovery context, behavior would be different. To conceptually model household choice for food waste prevention and recycling efforts, we develop a “public goods” approach and model. In this particular case, the public good is shared environmental quality.
This paper contributes to the literature by clarifying the missing connection between household food waste generation, recycling behaviors, and the role that policy nudges may play in mitigating the problem. Findings from the study have the capacity to offer a critical understanding of household responses to the productive usage of their food waste. Furthermore, findings can provide a basis for future policy interventions to ensure both successful food waste prevention and recycling outcomes.
Recent statistics indicate that over 2.74 million households participate in variations of organics collection programs (Yepsen, 2015). However, there remains skepticism to whether households can meaningfully contribute high quality organics for re-use. For instance, Alameda County in California, where organics recycling is mandatory, saw an alarming rise in the amount of food scraps in residents’ garbage bins. Concurrently, outside the U.S., various food waste mitigation efforts have been framed as an economic resource opportunity (Stenmarck et al., 2016). Decreased compliance may suggest that households are just not properly informed of the value of their contributions.
The aim of this paper is to examine households’ behavioral response to how their foods scraps might be used as resources, specifically toward the production of biogas and compost. We investigate what behavioral, socioeconomic, and attitudinal factors are at play in household food waste generation and recycling tendencies, measured both in the quantity and quality of the discarded food. We examine behavior in response to different levels of information about downstream usage in a randomized control trial (RCT) setting. Interventions educate households on food waste and explain how their discarded food would be productively recycled.
In collaboration with the local government, for 6-weeks, we will simulate an organics collection program in a Minnesota county. A total of 270 resident households will be recruited and assigned treatment or control status. To examine the relationship between household food waste and downstream use, the collected materials will be weighed, sorted, and analyzed with regards to its suitability for further usage. Participants will respond to household surveys which identify socio-economic, cultural, and attitudinal factors that drive food waste generation and recycling behaviors. Overall, the rationale is that in the absence of framing recycling in a resource recovery context, behavior would be different. To conceptually model household choice for food waste prevention and recycling efforts, we develop a “public goods” approach and model. In this particular case, the public good is shared environmental quality.
This paper contributes to the literature by clarifying the missing connection between household food waste generation, recycling behaviors, and the role that policy nudges may play in mitigating the problem. Findings from the study have the capacity to offer a critical understanding of household responses to the productive usage of their food waste. Furthermore, findings can provide a basis for future policy interventions to ensure both successful food waste prevention and recycling outcomes.
