Every year, 1.3 billion metric tonnes of food is wasted or lost — a third of the world’s annual food production. The sheer scale of the number makes it almost impossible to grasp, no matter how one approaches it. Try to imagine 143,000 Eiffel Towers stacked one on top of another, or a pile of 10 trillion bananas.
The figure is all the more unfathomable given that, alongside this massive wastage and loss, 840 million people experience chronic hunger on a daily basis. Many millions more suffer from “silent hunger” — malnutrition and micronutrient deficiencies.
For the more economically minded, here is another number: Food wastage and loss, expressed in producer prices, costs roughly US$750 billion per year. After adding retail prices and the wider impacts on the environment, including climate change, the figure is much higher.
Illustration: Tania Chou
In an era of austerity, it is difficult to understand how such a massive hemorrhage of resources could be neglected. In some places, the volume of food wastage is rising.
Now a new report by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization focuses on another troubling aspect of the problem: The negative consequences for the environment and the natural resources which are vital for human survival.
When food is lost or wasted, the energy, land and water resources that went into producing it are squandered as well. At the same time, large amounts of greenhouse gases are released into the atmosphere during production, processing and cooking.
From any perspective — ethical, economic, environmental or in terms of food security — the annual wastage of 1.3 billion tonnes of food cannot be tolerated. This is why serious reduction of food loss and wastage is one of the five elements of UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s “Zero Hunger Challenge” and a major focus of the UN High Level Task Force on Global Food Security. We are working together within the UN system and with a broad coalition of other partners to ensure universal access to adequate food all year round, eliminate childhood stunting, make all food systems sustainable and eradicate rural poverty.
On Monday and Tuesday, the Global Green Growth Forum in Copenhagen will allow for a deeper look at this issue. There is much that can be done. For starters, food loss and wastage needs to be seen as a cross-cutting policy issue, rather than a lifestyle choice to be left in the hands of individual consumers and their consciences. The world needs to wake up to the need for policies that address all stages of the food chain, from production to consumption.
Food loss — on farms, during processing, transport and at markets — undermines food security in most developing countries, where post-harvest losses can reach as high as 40 percent of production. Investment in infrastructure for transport, storage and marketing of food is badly needed, as are programs to train farmers in best practices.
In developed countries, food retailing practices require a rethink. For example, rejection of food products on the basis of aesthetic concerns is a major cause of wastage. Some supermarkets have already begun relaxing standards on fruit appearance, selling “misshapen” items at reduced prices and helping to raise awareness that ugly does not mean bad. More approaches like this — and concerted efforts to find markets or uses for surplus food — are needed.
Businesses and households alike should monitor where and how they waste food and take corrective steps, because prevention of wastage is even more important than recycling or composting.
Yes, 1.3 billion tonnes is a mind boggling figure, but these simple steps are easy enough to grasp — and within reach for everyone. The world confronts many seemingly intractable problems; food wastage is one issue that can be acted upon now.
Jose Graziano da Silva is director-general of the UN Food and Agriculture Organization. Achim Steiner is executive director of the UN Environment Program. Their organizations are founding partners of the Think Eat Save — Reduce Your Foodprint campaign, launched earlier this year.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with