Summary
This systematic review of 8318 studies examined food waste reduction interventions across low- and middle-income countries, classifying them by value chain stage and mechanism (preventive versus mitigative). The authors identified a critical structural gap: preventive measures were only studied at early stages (production, storage, transportation) whilst mitigative approaches were confined to later stages (wholesale, consumption), with no studies integrating both strategies. The review also found a pronounced bias towards material-based interventions, with limited evidence for knowledge-based or capacity-building approaches.
UK applicability
Whilst this review focuses on LMICs, the identified disconnect between preventive and mitigative interventions may inform UK food waste policy design, particularly in development aid and international supply chain engagement. The documented underinvestigation of knowledge-based and capacity-building alternatives could prompt consideration of similar gaps in UK agricultural and consumer-facing food waste programmes.
Key measures
Number of studies reviewed (8318); classification of interventions by value chain stage (production, storage, transportation, wholesale, consumption); intervention mechanism (prevention vs. mitigation); study assessment of effectiveness and design bias
Outcomes reported
The systematic review classified food waste interventions by value chain stage and mechanism of action (prevention versus mitigation), and assessed evidence of impact. The study identified patterns in intervention design and implementation across LMICs, revealing significant gaps in integrated approaches.
Topic tags
Dig deeper with Pulse AI.
Pulse AI has read the whole catalogue. Ask about this record, its theme, or how the findings apply to UK farming and policy — every answer cites the underlying studies.