Critical review reveals variable efficacy of digital tools in preventing agri-food waste, indicating that operational success requires integration with organizational and governance strategies.
Background Food loss and waste (FLW) remains a major challenge for global agri-food systems, generating substantial environmental, economic, and social impacts. Digitalization has emerged as a promising strategy to improve resource efficiency and support FLW prevention, yet the effectiveness of different digital technologies remains uneven and often insufficiently evaluated. Scope and approach This critical review examines the contribution of Industry 4.0 and Agriculture 4.0 technologies, including the Internet of Things (IoT), artificial intelligence (AI), big data analytics, blockchain, and consumer-oriented digital platforms, to FLW prevention across the entire agri-food supply chain. Rather than cataloguing technological applications, the review critically distinguishes between demonstrated reductions in FLW and improvements in technical performance that are frequently assumed to translate into waste prevention, while evaluating technological maturity, implementation barriers, and future research priorities. Key findings and conclusions IoT-enabled monitoring and smart logistics provide the strongest direct evidence for reducing spoilage risks; among AI applications, inventory management is comparatively well supported, although much of the broader AI/ML evidence remains based on operational proxies. Evidence for blockchain applications, dynamic pricing, and consumer-facing technologies remains limited or highly context dependent. Persistent barriers include fragmented data infrastructures, interoperability constraints, unequal digital capabilities, uncertain economic returns, and rebound effects. Digital technologies can contribute meaningfully to FLW prevention only when integrated with organizational, behavioural, and governance strategies. Future research should prioritize standardized impact metrics, longitudinal system-level evaluations, and integrated environmental assessments capable of quantifying real reductions in FLW and associated sustainability trade-offs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pérez-García et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: