The six worst food waste myths that need busting
Food waste is one of the most solvable sustainability challenges in the UK, yet the UK still faces staggering volumes and jaw-dropping economic and environmental impact. Wasted edible food costs the UK economy billions, estimated at around £22.3 billion between 2021 - 2022, with households responsible for roughly £17 billion of that total. Around 4.6 million tonnes of the food wasted in the UK is still edible, equivalent to roughly 10 billion meals lost across the supply chain. Beyond the economic and social implications, food waste is responsible for an estimated 8-10 percent of Global greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), and 6-7% of the UK's total GHGs.
The good news is that the system is starting to move in the right direction. A wave of policy is now pushing food waste higher up the hierarchy, from disposal towards prevention, redistribution and reuse. Measures such as Simpler Recycling, biogenic landfill bans, and the expansion of emissions pricing are reshaping how businesses manage food waste. But a major gap remains between food placed on the market that becomes waste and the amount redistributed. Closing this gap will require better infrastructure, better data and better collaboration across the supply chain.
The scale of the challenge means that change is needed at both an individual and societal level. This requires us to challenge some persistent myths about how food waste actually works. Here are the six worst food waste myths busted.
Myth 1: “Nothing I do will make a significant impact”
One of the most common assumptions about food waste is that it is largely a supply chain issue. Many people believe the real problem sits with the big players - supermarkets, manufacturers or farms, and that individual behaviour does not make a meaningful difference.
In reality, households represent one of the biggest opportunities to reduce food waste. According to WRAP, around 6.4 million tonnes of food are discarded in UK homes every year, and roughly 74 percent of that could have been eaten. That is 4.7 million tonnes of edible food lost through everyday habits such as overbuying, poor storage or misunderstanding date labels.
In today’s uncertain global climate, people can feel powerless to create change. But food waste is one area where small, simple changes add up fast. The truth is, when millions of households take action – even making small changes - the impact is enormous.
Myth 2: “Food surplus redistribution is only for charities”
Food redistribution is often seen purely as a charitable activity. The image most people have is surplus food being donated to food banks or community groups. While those organisations play a vital role, they are only part of a much broader system.
Over the past few years, redistribution has expanded rapidly across both charitable and commercial channels. According to WRAP, the volume of surplus food redistributed in the UK increased by 40% percent 2021 and 2023, adding around 43,000 tonnes or 102 million meals. Retail and manufacturing sectors account for the vast majority of this surplus, but new models are opening up additional routes for getting food to people rather than bins.
Organisations such as Company Shop Group work directly with manufacturers and retailers to prevent perfectly good food from becoming waste. Surplus products can be sold at reduced prices through membership stores or community outlets, creating environmental, social and financial value. At the same time digital platforms like Olio, a who have a strategic partnership with Biffa, are helping businesses redistribute same-day on site surplus food locally and quickly.
Company Shop Group
What iff surplus was saved?
Myth 3: “Consumers won’t accept upcycled products”
Another persistent myth is that consumers are uncomfortable with products made from food by-products. In reality the evidence increasingly shows the opposite. Shoppers want businesses to take visible action to reduce waste and are willing to support those that do.Upcycling uses edible by-products that would not otherwise reach consumers and transforms them into new ingredients or products. From breads made using surplus crusts to flour produced from oat milk by-products, companies are finding creative ways to unlock value from materials that would previously have been lost. Finding ways to retain value and reduce waste is of growing interest to businesses with the current economic climate. As innovation accelerates, this market is expected to grow steadily over the coming decade.
Research suggests 91 percent of consumers surveyed would prefer to buy from organisations actively tackling food waste. A majority were also open to new products created through upcycling, and this was particularly true if the price is comparable to or less than conventional products. However, acceptance could be improved with greater consumer awareness of food waste and education on the benefits of upcycled foods.
Myth 4: “All food waste not fit for humans can go to animals”
It often sounds like an obvious solution: if food cannot be eaten by people, surely it can simply be diverted into animal feed. In practice the situation is far more complex.
Strict biosecurity rules govern what materials can legally enter animal feed chains. These regulations exist to prevent the spread of serious animal diseases, and UK regulation is strict when it comes to certain areas of research such as insect bioconversion when compared with other regions. This means many forms of food waste as we collect them today cannot currently be used in the UK in this way.
That said, innovationis rife in this space. Insect farming is gaining attention as a potential way to convert certain food wastes into alternative proteins for animal feed, with a wide range of additional opportunities for circularity and sustainability gains if this sector scales. Industry groups such as the Insect Bioconversion Association are working to support the development of this sector while ensuring safety and environmental standards are maintained. Regulatory evolution could unlock new circular opportunities over time.
Myth 5: “Anaerobic digestion and composting are the new landfill”
Some critics argue that food waste recycling technologies simply replace landfillwith another form of disposal. This overlooks the important role these systems play when food is genuinely inedible.
Anaerobic digestion, for example, can process food that has become mouldy, contaminated or mixed with packaging. The process produces renewable biogas and nutrient-rich digestate that can be used as a peat-free soil improver. Compostingsystems perform a similar role in returning nutrients to the land. In addition, these technologies operate at scale in the UK, presenting genuine sustainability and efficiency benefits.
The ideal situation is that edible food is consumed by people. Our food system will always produce a certain volume of waste that is not fit for human consumption – these materials need to be managed in the most sustainable way possible. While prevention and redistribution must come first, anaerobic digestion and composting will continue to play an integral role in the management and decarbonisation of biogenic waste.
Myth 6: “Compostable packaging is always meant for composting”
Compostable packaging is often seen as a straightforward environmental solution. The assumption is that if a package is labelled compostable, it simply belongs in composting systems once used.
The reality is more nuanced. Many compostable materials require specific industrial conditions to break down properly, and those facilities are not always available. When incorrectly disposed of, compostable packaging can contaminate recycling streams or interfere with food waste processing.
Packaging decisions also need to consider a more fundamental question: how effectively does the packaging protect the food itself? In many cases, good packaging significantly extends shelf life and prevents food from spoiling. Sustainable packaging design must therefore balance material impacts with the crucial role packaging plays in reducing food waste.
Understanding the true cost of food waste
If we want to make meaningful progress on food waste, we need to move beyond myths and focus on the interventions that genuinely shift the system. One of the most important steps is improving the data we collect. Mandatory food waste reporting would provide a clearer picture of where losses occur across supply chains and help businesses target prevention efforts more effectively.
At the same time, infrastructure and redistribution models must continue to scale. Mandatory separate food waste collections will improve visibility of the problem and ensure unavoidable waste is treated properly. Expanding proven redistribution systems could redirect millions of tonnes of surplus food to people who need it.
Ultimately, solving food waste is not just about technology or regulation. It is about how we value food at both an individual and societal level. When we recognise the resources, labour and environmental impact behind every meal, preventing waste stops being a niche sustainability issue and becomes common sense. The cost goes way beyond what we pay for our weekly shopping at a supermarket, the more people who are aware of this, the more progress we will continue to make.
