Are We Buying Too Much Food — And Eating Too Much of It?
Are We Buying Too Much Food — And Eating Too Much of It?
Food waste is one of those environmental problems that seems almost absurd when you stop and think about it.
We grow food.
We irrigate fields.
We manufacture fertilisers.
We use machinery to harvest crops.
We refrigerate food.
We package it.
We transport it, sometimes thousands of miles.
We put it on supermarket shelves.
We drive to the supermarket and pay for it.
We take it home.
And then quite a lot of it ends up in the bin.
For years, the often-quoted figure has been that roughly one-third of the food produced for human consumption around the world is lost or wasted. That figure originated from FAO estimates and remains a useful indication of the extraordinary scale of the problem. More recent figures provide a little more detail: FAO estimates that around 13.2% of food is lost between harvest and retail, while UNEP estimates that another 19% of food available to consumers is wasted in retail, food service and households.
UNEP estimated that 1.05 billion tonnes of food were wasted in 2022 at the retail, food-service and household stages alone.
Most surprisingly, about 60% of that waste occurred in households.
So although governments, farmers, supermarkets and food manufacturers all have important parts to play, there is one part of the problem over which many of us have considerable control.
Our own kitchens.
And that raises another, slightly more uncomfortable question.
Are we not only buying too much food — are some of us eating too much as well?
The Extraordinary Cost of Throwing Food Away
Food waste is not simply a matter of wasting a few potatoes or throwing away half a loaf of bread.
When we discard food, we also discard everything that went into producing it.
We waste:
water;
agricultural land;
fertiliser;
energy;
animal feed;
fuel;
refrigeration;
packaging;
transport;
labour;
and our own money.
UNEP estimates that food loss and waste is associated with around 8–10% of global greenhouse-gas emissions.
That makes reducing food waste a genuine environmental action rather than merely a way of keeping the kitchen tidy.
The frustrating thing is that much of it should be avoidable.
The UK Problem Is Sitting in Our Kitchens
We sometimes imagine food waste as something happening behind supermarkets or in industrial warehouses.
But a great deal happens at home.
WRAP estimates that UK households throw away approximately 4.4 million tonnes of edible food each year, worth around £17 billion.
For a household of four, the average value of the edible food thrown away is around £1,000 a year.
That is an extraordinary amount of money.
Imagine coming home from the supermarket, putting several bags of groceries directly into the dustbin and then going back inside.
Nobody would deliberately do that.
Yet spread over hundreds of small decisions during the year, that is effectively what many households are doing.
A couple of slices of bread here.
Half a bag of salad there.
Some forgotten vegetables.
A yoghurt beyond its use-by date.
Too much rice cooked for dinner.
Leftovers nobody quite gets around to eating.
Individually they seem insignificant.
Collectively they become enormous.
Why Do We Buy Too Much?
There isn't one simple answer.
Modern supermarkets are extremely good at encouraging us to buy.
Large trolleys make modest amounts of shopping look small.
Multipacks appear cheaper.
Three-for-two deals are tempting.
Large packets seem better value.
We buy aspirationally too.
We buy vegetables because we intend to cook healthy meals all week.
Then Wednesday arrives, everyone is busy, and something quicker takes their place.
By Saturday those vegetables are looking considerably less attractive.
There is also the fear of running out.
When visitors are coming, we rarely ask:
"What is the minimum amount of food we need?"
We are much more likely to think:
"I'd better get some extra just in case."
Being generous is understandable.
But habitual overbuying can turn generosity into waste.
The Supermarket Bargain That Isn't a Bargain
Suppose a 500 g packet costs £2.50.
A 1 kg packet costs £4.
Clearly the larger packet offers better value per kilogram.
But that is only true if we actually eat it.
If we consume 600 g and throw away 400 g, the apparent bargain disappears.
This is an important principle:
The cheapest food is not necessarily the food with the lowest price per kilogram. It is the food we actually use.
Buying a smaller quantity for a slightly higher unit price may sometimes save money.
That principle applies particularly to fresh produce.
The Freezer May Be One of Our Best Green Technologies
We spend enormous amounts discussing solar panels, electric cars and heat pumps.
Yet there is another useful environmental technology sitting quietly in millions of kitchens.
The freezer.
Bread freezes extremely well.
So do many cooked meals.
Meat can be portioned before freezing.
Overripe fruit can be frozen for smoothies or desserts.
Leftover sauces can be frozen in smaller containers.
Batch cooking can turn ingredients approaching their limits into meals for another day.
The freezer essentially gives us something extremely valuable:
time.
Instead of thinking:
"I must eat this today or throw it away",
we can sometimes move the decision several weeks into the future.
Of course, freezers use electricity, but preventing substantial quantities of food from being wasted can make excellent environmental and financial sense.
Learn What Is Already in the House
One of the simplest food-waste strategies costs absolutely nothing.
Before shopping, look.
Check the fridge.
Check the freezer.
Check the cupboards.
Then make the shopping list.
It sounds ridiculously obvious, yet how many of us have returned home with another packet of something only to discover two already sitting at the back of the cupboard?
A useful weekly ritual might be:
Friday: inventory.
Saturday: meal plan.
Then: shopping list.
It doesn't need to become obsessive household administration.
Five minutes can be enough.
Try a "Use It First" Shelf
One practical idea is to reserve part of the fridge for food that needs using soon.
Perhaps:
USE ME FIRST
Anything approaching its use-by date goes there.
Suddenly the half packet of ham, opened cheese, mushrooms and remaining vegetables become visible rather than disappearing behind newer purchases.
Then ask:
What meal can I make from what needs using?
That reverses the normal process.
Instead of deciding what we fancy eating and buying everything required, occasionally allow the food we already have to determine the meal.
It can save money and sometimes encourages much more creative cooking.
Leftovers Are Ingredients, Not Rubbish
There is an important psychological difference between a "leftover" and an "ingredient".
Half a roast chicken might become sandwiches.
Then a curry.
Vegetables might become soup.
Cooked potatoes might become fried potatoes the following day.
Rice can be incorporated into another suitable dish if it has been cooled and stored safely.
Overripe bananas can become banana bread.
Slightly tired vegetables can often become soup, stew or sauce.
Obviously food safety matters, and food should never be eaten simply to avoid waste when it may be unsafe.
But there is a huge difference between unsafe food and food which simply isn't quite as visually perfect as it was yesterday.
Understand "Use By" and "Best Before"
Another source of waste is confusion over dates.
A use-by date relates to food safety and should be followed.
A best-before date is primarily about quality.
Food does not automatically transform into rubbish at midnight when its best-before date passes.
Depending on the product and how it has been stored, it may remain perfectly usable after that date.
Understanding the distinction could prevent a considerable amount of perfectly good food being discarded unnecessarily.
But There Is Another Question: Are We Eating Too Much?
Reducing food waste raises an interesting complication.
One way of preventing food going into the bin is obviously to eat it.
But that cannot be our environmental strategy.
Finishing an unnecessarily large meal simply because we do not want to waste it does not solve the underlying problem.
The real solution happened earlier.
We should have bought or prepared less.
And this leads into the health question.
Do we actually need as much food as we routinely serve ourselves?
For some people, probably not.
For others, absolutely.
Our food requirements differ substantially depending upon age, sex, body size, health, metabolism and physical activity.
The NHS gives broad average energy figures of around 2,000 kcal per day for women and 2,500 kcal for men, while making clear that individual energy requirements vary.
So "everybody should eat much less" would be poor advice.
Children are growing.
Some people perform heavy physical work.
Athletes can have substantial energy requirements.
Older people may need particular attention to adequate protein and nutrition.
People who are underweight certainly don't need an environmental campaign telling them to eat less.
The better question is:
Are we routinely eating more energy than our own bodies require?
Perhaps We Need to Eat Better, Not Simply Less
Healthy eating is not primarily a competition to see who can eat the smallest dinner.
What we eat matters enormously.
A smaller diet consisting mainly of highly processed foods does not automatically become healthy because the portions are reduced.
Likewise, foods can be relatively energy dense while still having nutritional value.
The NHS Eatwell Guide recommends a balanced diet containing fruit and vegetables, starchy carbohydrates, protein sources and dairy or suitable alternatives, while limiting foods high in fat, salt and sugar.
So perhaps the useful principle is:
Less excess, not simply less food.
For someone routinely consuming more energy than they need, modestly smaller portions may help.
For someone already eating the appropriate amount, there is no reason to reduce food simply in the name of Going Green.
Portion Size Has Quietly Grown
There is another interesting behavioural problem.
Our idea of a "normal portion" can be heavily influenced by what we are served.
Restaurants often pride themselves on huge meals.
Packets encourage us to consume several portions at once.
Large plates make moderate meals appear small.
When trying to lose weight, NHS advice specifically recommends paying attention to portion size and notes that larger portions can make it easier to eat more than we need.
There is a simple experiment worth trying at home.
Serve slightly less than usual.
Eat it.
Then wait ten minutes.
If you are still hungry, have some more.
That is very different from putting an enormous portion on the plate and feeling obliged to finish it.
Second helpings are always possible.
You cannot uneat the first helping.
The Smaller Plate Experiment
This is probably worth trying for a week.
Use a slightly smaller dinner plate.
Don't consciously diet.
Don't ban foods.
Don't count every calorie.
Simply serve what looks like a sensible meal on the smaller plate.
Then see what happens.
The NHS itself suggests using smaller plates and bowls as one possible way of managing portions when someone is trying to lose weight.
Some people will discover they are perfectly satisfied.
Others genuinely need more.
And that is fine.
The object is not deprivation.
It is awareness.
Don't Turn Food Waste Into Food Guilt
There is a danger in environmental campaigns becoming moral lectures.
People throw food away for many reasons.
Busy parents get plans disrupted.
Children suddenly decide they no longer like something they ate happily last week.
Food spoils unexpectedly.
Plans change.
Guests cancel.
And sometimes something gets forgotten at the back of the fridge.
The objective shouldn't be to feel guilty every time a carrot reaches the bin.
It should be to notice patterns.
If the same foods are being thrown away every week, something can probably change.
Perhaps buy fewer.
Buy frozen instead.
Choose smaller packets.
Freeze half immediately.
Cook smaller portions.
Or simply stop buying something because we think we ought to eat it when experience tells us we won't.
Ten Changes Almost Any Household Can Try
Here is my practical food-waste challenge:
1. Check before shopping
Look through the fridge, freezer and cupboards first.
2. Plan perhaps five meals rather than seven
Leave space for leftovers and changed plans.
3. Make a shopping list
And try to stick to it.
4. Be suspicious of bulk bargains
Only buy the larger packet if it will genuinely be used.
5. Freeze food earlier
Don't wait until something is nearly unusable before deciding what to do with it.
6. Create a "use first" area
Make vulnerable food visible.
7. Cook slightly less
You can always make more next time.
8. Turn leftovers into tomorrow's ingredients
Think creatively rather than automatically throwing them away.
9. Understand date labels
Particularly the difference between "use by" and "best before".
10. Measure your waste for one week
This could be the most revealing experiment of all.
Keep a simple record.
Bread.
Vegetables.
Fruit.
Cooked meals.
Meat.
Dairy.
After seven days, you will know far more about where your household's food budget is disappearing.
What About Composting?
Composting is certainly better than sending suitable food waste to landfill or residual waste where appropriate collection alternatives exist.
Food-waste collections can also allow unavoidable waste to be processed through systems such as anaerobic digestion.
But there is an important hierarchy.
Preventing edible food waste is better than recycling edible food waste.
If we buy a bag of carrots, throw half away and proudly compost them, we have still wasted the land, water, energy, transport, packaging and money required to produce those carrots.
Composting is excellent for unavoidable material such as peelings and other suitable scraps.
It should not become an excuse for overbuying.
Could Buying Less Actually Improve Our Diet?
Perhaps this is where environmentalism and personal health can reinforce one another.
Buying food more deliberately can mean:
fewer impulse purchases;
fewer oversized portions;
less processed snack food sitting around the house;
more deliberate meal planning;
more vegetables actually being used;
fewer takeaways caused by having "nothing to eat" despite a full refrigerator;
and greater awareness of what we consume.
There is no requirement for everyone to eat dramatically less.
But many of us might benefit from buying more intelligently, wasting less and paying more attention to whether our portions match our actual needs.
Food Should Be Valued Again
Perhaps the deeper problem is that food has become too easy for many of us to take for granted.
Previous generations knew the effort required to produce it.
More people grew vegetables.
Food was preserved.
Leftovers were routinely transformed into another meal.
Throwing edible food away felt genuinely wasteful.
Modern agriculture and supermarkets have performed something extraordinary: they have made an enormous variety of food available throughout most of the year.
But convenience has perhaps weakened our appreciation of what lies behind it.
A tomato isn't simply a 30p object from a supermarket shelf.
It represents soil, water, sunlight, fertiliser, labour, transport, refrigeration, packaging and land.
Throwing it away throws all of those resources away too.
The Going Green Challenge: Buy 10% Less
Here is an experiment I would like households to try.
For one month, don't try to achieve zero food waste.
That is unrealistic for most families.
Instead:
Try to buy roughly 10% less perishable food.
Not less nutritious food.
Not fewer vegetables because they might spoil.
Simply slightly less excess.
Plan meals.
Use the freezer.
Cook sensible portions.
Eat leftovers.
Keep track of what still gets thrown away.
Then compare the supermarket bills.
You may discover something rather interesting.
Unlike many environmental improvements, this one doesn't require purchasing a new technology.
There is no installation.
No payback calculation.
No government grant.
No expensive equipment.
The financial saving begins the moment you stop buying food that would otherwise have ended up in the bin.
Conclusion: Perhaps the Greenest Meal Is the One We Actually Eat
The scale of global food waste is difficult to comprehend.
More than a billion tonnes of food are wasted each year at retail, food-service and household level, while substantial additional losses occur earlier in the supply chain.
We are not going to solve all of that from our kitchens.
But household waste is a remarkably large part of the problem.
And that means individual behaviour really can matter.
We don't all need to eat less.
We certainly shouldn't turn environmentalism into a competition in deprivation.
We should eat enough for our individual needs and aim for a healthy, balanced diet.
But many households could probably buy less excess, cook more appropriate portions and throw far less away.
That would save money.
It would reduce environmental damage.
It would make better use of agricultural land and energy.
And perhaps it would encourage us to value food a little more.
Before asking:
"How do I dispose of this sustainably?"
there is an even better question:
"Why did I buy enough for this to become waste in the first place?"
That may be one of the simplest — and cheapest — Going Green questions we can ask.
Comments
Post a Comment