Table 3

Framework for food waste minimization in retail SCs

Area (how)Rationale (why)Related options1, 2
(I) Decreasing inbound lot sizesSmaller order volumes and minimum order quantities enable more frequent refreshing of inventories(a.4) Min. Order quantities and pack sizes
(a.5) Order cycles and volumes
(II) Decreasing total inventory by pooling demandDifferentiated service levels, streamlined assortments and transshipment across stores pool demand which enables lower total inventory levels(b.4) Transshipment between stores
(c.1) Assortment sizes
(c.3) Differentiating invent. service levels
(III) Decreasing safety stock levelsIncreasing SC transparency, reliability of suppliers and internal processes and forecasting accuracy reduce uncertainty in the SC and, consequently, safety stocks(a.1) Sourcing approach
(a.2) Supplier collaboration
(a.6) Quality inspection
(c.4) Forecasting store demand
(d.1) Food waste monitoring and analysis
(IV) Increasing the time window for sales at storesLimited warehouse storage, higher delivery frequencies and optimized stock allocation and picking reduce throughput time and ensure a higher remaining shelf life(a.3) Inbound product flows
(b.1) Delivery pattern
(b.2) Push allocation of warehouse stocks
(b.3) Picking operations
(c.5) Shelf merchandising
(V) Salvaging emerging overstocksForward-looking mitigation processes reduce accumulating inventories before they become waste(d.2) Discounting of overstocks
(e.1) Further processing internally
(e.2) Take-back agreements
(e.3) Secondary channels
(e.4) Donations

Note(s):1Some options impact multiple areas. To simplify the overview, options were only allocated to their main area

2Offering imperfect produce (c.2) increases inventory at the retail stage and is therefore not considered

Source(s): Created by authors

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal