Systematic literature review demonstrates food waste reduction through segregation in Asia-Pacific, highlighting effective sustainability methods.
Food waste is a critical global issue that scholars have widely debated due to its implications for sustainability. Many scholars suggest that adopting segregation practices has emerged as a credible and feasible strategy among those advocating to reduce food waste. However, insufficient studies led to systematically reviewed the existing literature on food waste segregation. Hence, this study conducts a systematic literature review on past studies to assess the food waste reduction method through food waste segregation among the food industry in Asia-Pacific countries. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was adopted to review the current research, which utilised two main journal databases, namely Scopus and Web of Science, and one supporting database, Google Scholar. Based on the thematic analysis, this review has resulted in three main themes, namely 1) responsibility for food waste segregation; 2) food waste reduction methods through food waste segregation; and 3) impacts of food waste reduction methods through food waste segregation. These themes have been further developed into several sub-themes, such as 1) food industry, 2) anaerobic digestion, 3) aerobic digestion, 4) animal feed, 5) food donation, 6) environmental impact, 7) social impact, and 8) economic impact. The findings explained the importance of sustainable waste reduction methods that are effectively supported by food waste segregation in reducing food waste, as follow: 1) to highlight the importance of food waste segregation and the role of stakeholders in developing effective policies for waste reduction; 2) to strategize an adaptation plan that aligns with the needs, capabilities, and interests to improve waste segregation practices; and 3) to inform on the specific areas and content of researches that should be the focus of the future studies on food waste segregation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ra-ibnulamin et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: