AbstractGlobal food loss and waste continues to increase despite efforts to reduce it. Food waste causes a disproportionally large carbon footprint and resource burdens, which require urgent action to transition away from a disposal-dominated linear system to a circular bioeconomy of recovery and reuse of valuable resources. Here, using data from field-based studies conducted under diverse conditions worldwide, we found collective evidence that composting, anaerobic digestion and repurposing food waste to animal feed (re-feed) result in emission reductions of about 1 tCO2e t−1 food waste recycled compared with landfill disposal. Emission mitigation capacity resulting from no landfill disposal in the United States, the European Union and China would average 39, 20 and 115 MtCO2e, which could offset 10%, 5% and 17% of the emissions from these large agricultural systems, respectively. In addition, re-feed could spare enormous amounts of land, water, agricultural fuel and fertilizer use. Our findings provide a benchmark for countries developing food waste management strategies for a circular agrifood system.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access through your institution
Change institution
Buy or subscribe
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Learn more
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles
$119.00 per year
only $9.92 per issue
Learn more
Buy this article
Purchase on SpringerLink
Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Additional access options:
Log in
Learn about institutional subscriptions
Read our FAQs
Contact customer support
Fig. 1: Global–regional distribution of studies selected through comprehensive literature review.Fig. 2: Carbon footprint of food waste recycling treatment via AC, AD or re-feed compared with that of landfill disposal.Fig. 3: Transforming existing food waste management schemes in the United States, the EU and China can substantially offset emissions from their agricultural systems.
Data availability
The source data for the bootstrapping analyses used to compute the means and 95% CIs of the carbon footprints of the food waste treatments, landfill emissions and product metrics and for the impact analysis of the food waste management schemes of the United States, the EU and China are available on Zenodo at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14826061 (ref. 81). All other data that support the findings of this study are provided in the article. Source data are provided with this paper.
Code availability
The code used in the Stata statistical analysis is available on Zenodo at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14826061 (ref. 81).
ReferencesClark, M. A., Domingo, N., Colgan, K., Thakrar, S. K. & Hill, J. D. Global food system emissions could preclude achieving the 1.5° and 2 °C climate change targets. Science 370, 705–708 (2020).Article
ADS
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
UAE Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture, Resilient Food Systems, and Climate Action (COP28, 2023); https://www.cop28.com/en/food-and-agricultureThe State of Food and Agriculture: Revealing the True Cost of Food to Transform Agrifood Systems (FAO, 2023); https://www.fao.org/3/cc7724en/cc7724en.pdfRosenzweig, C. et al. Climate change responses benefit from a global food system approach. Nat. Food 1, 94–97 (2020).Article
PubMed
MATH
Google Scholar
Zurek, M., Hebinck, A. & Selomane, O. Climate change and the urgency to transform food systems. Science 376, 1416–1421 (2022).Article
ADS
CAS
PubMed
MATH
Google Scholar
Gatto, A. & Chepeliev, M. Global food loss and waste estimates show increasing nutritional and environmental pressures. Nat. Food 5, 136–147 (2024).Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Wang, X. et al. Global food nutrients analysis reveals alarming gaps and daunting challenges. Nat. Food 4, 1007–1017 (2023).Article
PubMed
MATH
Google Scholar
Crippa, M. et al. Food systems are responsible for a third of global anthropogenic GHG emissions. Nat. Food 2, 198–209 (2021).Article
CAS
PubMed
MATH
Google Scholar
Tubiello, F. N. et al. Pre- and post-production processes increasingly dominate greenhouse gas emissions from agri-food systems. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 14, 1795–1809 (2022).Article
ADS
MATH
Google Scholar
Zhu, J. et al. Cradle-to-grave emissions from food loss and waste represent half of total greenhouse gas emissions from food systems. Nat. Food 4, 247–256 (2023).Article
ADS
CAS
PubMed
MATH
Google Scholar
What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050 (World Bank, 2018); https://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/pdf/10.1596/978-1-4648-1329-0Methane and Climate Change (International Energy Agency, 2024); https://www.iea.org/reports/methane-tracker-2021/methane-and-climate-changeRichardson, K. et al. Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries. Sci. Adv. 9, eadh2458 (2023).Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
MATH
Google Scholar
Dou, Z. & Toth, J. D. Global primary data on consumer food waste: rate and characteristics—a review. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 168, 105332 (2020).Article
MATH
Google Scholar
Dou, Z., Dierenfeld, E. S., Wang, X., Chen, X. & Shurson, G. C. A critical analysis of challenges and opportunities for upcycling food waste to animal feed to reduce climate and resource burdens. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 203, 107418 (2024).Article
Google Scholar
Shurson, G. C., Dierenfeld, E. S. & Dou, Z. Rules are meant to be broken—rethinking the regulations on the use of food waste as animal feed. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 199, 107273 (2023).Article
MATH
Google Scholar
Spang, E. S. et al. Food loss and waste: measurement, drivers, and solutions. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 44, 117–156 (2019).Article
ADS
MATH
Google Scholar
Pinotti, L. et al. Recycling food leftovers in feed as opportunity to increase the sustainability of livestock production. J. Clean. Prod. 294, 126290 (2021).Article
MATH
Google Scholar
Westendorf, M. Food Waste as Animal Feed: An Introduction (John Wiley & Sons, 2000).zu Ermgassen, E. K., Phalan, B., Green, R. E. & Balmford, A. Reducing the land use of EU pork production: where there’s swill, there’s a way. Food Policy 58, 35–48 (2016).Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Awasthi, S. K. et al. Changes in global trends in food waste composting: research challenges and opportunities. Bioresour. Technol. 299, 122555 (2020).Article
CAS
PubMed
MATH
Google Scholar
Blengini, G. A. Using LCA to evaluate impacts and resources conservation potential of composting: a case study of the Asti District in Italy. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 52, 1373–1381 (2008).Article
MATH
Google Scholar
Bong, C. P. C. et al. The characterisation and treatment of food waste for improvement of biogas production during anaerobic digestion—a review. J. Clean. Prod. 172, 1545–1558 (2018).Article
CAS
MATH
Google Scholar
Kim, M. H., Song, H. B. & Song, Y. Evaluation of food waste disposal options in terms of global warming and energy recovery: Korea. Int. J. Energy Environ. Eng. 4, 1 (2013).Article
MATH
Google Scholar
Baker, L. et al. Leveraging dairy cattle to upcycle culled citrus fruit for emission mitigation and resource co-benefits: a case study. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 203, 107452 (2024).Article
MATH
Google Scholar
Nakaishi, T. & Takayabu, H. Production efficiency of animal feed obtained from food waste in Japan. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 29, 61187–61203 (2022).Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
MATH
Google Scholar
Pinotti, L. et al. Pig-based bioconversion: the use of former food products to keep nutrients in the food chain. Animal 17, 100918 (2023).Article
CAS
PubMed
MATH
Google Scholar
Latka, C. et al. Competing for food waste—policies’ market feedbacks imply sustainability tradeoffs. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 186, 106545 (2022).Article
MATH
Google Scholar
Cusworth, D. H. et al. Quantifying methane emissions from United States landfills. Science 383, 1499–1504 (2024).Article
ADS
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (IPCC, 2006); https://www.ipcc.ch/report/2006-ipcc-guidelines-for-national-greenhouse-gas-inventories/Cherubini, F., Bargigli, S. & Ulgiati, S. Life cycle assessment (LCA) of waste management strategies: landfilling, sorting plant and incineration. Energy 34, 2116–2123 (2009).Article
CAS
Google Scholar
Eriksson, M., Strid, I. & Hansson, P.-A. Carbon footprint of food waste management options in the waste hierarchy—a Swedish case study. J. Clean. Prod. 93, 115–125 (2015).Article
MATH
Google Scholar
Gómez-Sanabria, A., Kiesewetter, G., Klimont, Z., Schoepp, W. & Haberl, H. Potential for future reductions of global GHG and air pollutants from circular waste management systems. Nat. Commun. 13, 106 (2022).Article
ADS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Shukla, K. A. et al. Food waste management and sustainable waste to energy: current efforts, anaerobic digestion, incinerator and hydrothermal carbonization with a focus in Malaysia. J. Clean. Prod. 448, 141457 (2024).Article
Google Scholar
Ruminant Methanogens as a Climate Change Target (American Society of Microbiology, 2023); https://asm.org/Articles/2023/June/Ruminant-Methanogens-as-a-Climate-Change-Target(USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2024); https://www.nass.usda.gov/Newsroom/Govoni, C., D’Odorico, P., Pinotti, L. & Rulli, M. C. Preserving global land and water resources through the replacement of livestock feed crops with agricultural by-products. Nat. Food 4, 1047–1057 (2023).Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Karlsson, J. O., Parodi, A., van Zanten, H. H. E., Hansson, P.-A. & Röös, E. Halting European Union soybean feed imports favours ruminants over pigs and poultry. Nat. Food 2, 38–46 (2020).Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Liu, Z. et al. Optimization of China’s maize and soy production can ensure feed sufficiency at lower nitrogen and carbon footprints. Nat. Food 2, 426–433 (2021).Article
PubMed
MATH
Google Scholar
SDG Target 12.3 on Food Loss and Waste: 2022 Progress Report (World Resources Institute, 2022); https://champions123.org/publication/sdg-target-123-food-loss-and-waste-2022-progress-reportDriven to Waste: The Global Impact of Food Loss and Waste on Farms (World Wildlife Fund, 2021); https://www.worldwildlife.org/publications/driven-to-waste-the-global-impact-of-food-loss-and-waste-on-farmsGustavsson, J., Cederberg, C., Sonesson, U., Van Otterdijk, R. & Meybeck, A. Global Food Losses and Food Waste: Extent, Causes and Prevention (FAO, 2011).SDG Target 12.3 on Food Loss and Waste: 2023 Progress Report (World Resources Institute, 2023); https://champions123.org/sites/default/files/2023-10/2023%20Champions%20Progress%20Report.pdfSDG Target 12.3 on Food Loss and Waste: 2024 Progress Report (World Resources Institute, 2024); https://champions123.org/2024-progress-reportMourad, M. Recycling, recovering and preventing “food waste”: competing solutions for food systems sustainability in the United States and France. J. Clean. Prod. 126, 461–477 (2016).Article
MATH
Google Scholar
Shigetomi, Y., Ishigami, A., Long, Y. & Chapman, A. Curbing household food waste and associated climate change impacts in an ageing society. Nat. Commun. 15, 8806 (2024).Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
MATH
Google Scholar
Stancu, V., Haugaard, P. & Lähteenmäki, L. Determinants of consumer food waste behaviour: two routes to food waste. Appetite 96, 7–17 (2016).Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Aye, L. & Widjaya, E. R. Environmental and economic analyses of waste disposal options for traditional markets in Indonesia. Waste Manage. 26, 1180–1191 (2006).Article
MATH
Google Scholar
Takata, M. et al. The effects of recycling loops in food waste management in Japan: based on the environmental and economic evaluation of food recycling. Sci. Total Environ. 432, 309–317 (2012).Article
ADS
CAS
PubMed
MATH
Google Scholar
Quirós, R. et al. Environmental assessment of two home composts with high and low gaseous emissions of the composting process. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 90, 9–20 (2014).Article
MATH
Google Scholar
Berglund, M. & Börjesson, P. Assessment of energy performance in the life-cycle of biogas production. Biomass Bioenergy 30, 254–266 (2006).Article
MATH
Google Scholar
Fontaine, J., Hörr, J. & Schirmer, B. Near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy enables the fast and accurate prediction of the essential amino acid contents in soy, rapeseed meal, sunflower meal, peas, fishmeal, meat meal products, and poultry meal. J. Agric. Food Chem. 49, 57–66 (2001).Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Noel, S. J., Jørgensen, H. J. H. & Knudsen, K. E. B. Prediction of protein and amino acid composition and digestibility in individual feedstuffs and mixed diets for pigs using near-infrared spectroscopy. Anim. Nutr. 7, 1242–1252 (2021).Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Wang, Y. et al. Evidence of animal productivity outcomes when fed diets including food waste: a systematic review of global primary data. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 203, 107411 (2024).Article
MATH
Google Scholar
Shurson, G. C. et al. New perspectives for evaluating relative risks of African swine fever virus contamination in global feed ingredient supply chains. Transbound. Emerg. Dis. 69, 31–56 (2022).Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Shurson, G. C. “What a waste”—can we improve sustainability of food animal production systems by recycling food waste streams into animal feed in an era of health, climate, and economic crises? Sustainability 12, 7071 (2020).Article
CAS
MATH
Google Scholar
Shurson, G. C., Urriola, P. E. & Ligt, J. L. G. Can we effectively manage parasites, prions, and pathogens in the global feed industry to achieve One Health? Transbound. Emerg. Dis. 69, 4–30 (2021).Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Balestreri, C. et al. Unexpected thermal stability of two enveloped megaviruses, Emiliania huxleyi virus and African swine fever virus, as measured by viability PCR. Virol. J. 21, 1 (2024).Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Mazur-Panasiuk, N., Żmudzki, J. & Woźniakowski, G. African swine fever virus—persistence in different environmental conditions and the possibility of its indirect transmission. J. Vet. Res. 63, 303–310 (2019).Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Taylor, D. Inactivation of transmissible degenerative encephalopathy agents: a review. Vet. J. 159, 10–17 (2000).Article
CAS
PubMed
MATH
Google Scholar
Georganas, A. et al. Redefining the future of catering waste application in animal diets—a review on the minimization of potential hazards in catering waste prior to application in animal diets. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 289, 115334 (2022).Article
CAS
MATH
Google Scholar
Eco-feed (Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Japan, 2024); https://www.maff.go.jp/j/chikusan/sinko/lin/l_siryo/ecofeed.htmlFood Conservation Action Plan (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs of China, accessed 3 November 2021); http://www.moa.gov.cn/gk/zcfg/xzfg/202111/t20211103_6381159.htmJames, K., Millington, A. & Randall, N. Food and Feed Safety Vulnerabilities in the Circular Economy (EFSA, 2022).Elleby, C., Jensen, H. G., Domínguez, I. P., Chatzopoulos, T. & Charlebois, P. Insects reared on food waste: a game changer for global agricultural feed markets? EuroChoices 20, 56–62 (2021).Article
Google Scholar
Mlambo, V. et al. Rethinking food waste: exploring a black soldier fly larvae-based upcycling strategy for sustainable poultry production. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 199, 107284 (2023).Article
MATH
Google Scholar
Pinotti, L., Giromini, C., Ottoboni, M., Tretola, M. & Marchis, D. Insects and former foodstuffs for upgrading food waste biomasses/streams to feed ingredients for farm animals. Animal 13, 1365–1375 (2019).Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Wehrens, R., Putter, H. & Buydens, L. The bootstrap: a tutorial. Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 54, 35–52 (2000).Article
CAS
MATH
Google Scholar
Wang, H. et al. Yield and water productivity of crops, vegetables and fruits under subsurface drip irrigation: a global meta-analysis. Agric. Water Manage. 269, 107645 (2022).Article
MATH
Google Scholar
Food: Material-Specific Data (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2023); https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-materials-waste-and-recycling/food-material-specific-dataFood Waste and Food Waste Prevention by NACE Rev. 2 Activity—Tonnes of Fresh Mass (Eurostat, 2023); https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/main/data/databaseXue, L. et al. China’s food loss and waste embodies increasing environmental impacts. Nat. Food 2, 519–528 (2021).Article
PubMed
MATH
Google Scholar
Padeyanda, Y., Jang, Y.-C., Ko, Y. & Yi, S. Evaluation of environmental impacts of food waste management by material flow analysis (MFA) and life cycle assessment (LCA). J. Mater. Cycles Waste 18, 493–508 (2016).Article
CAS
Google Scholar
Ritchie, H., Rosado, P. & Roser, M. CO2 and greenhouse gas emissions (Our World in Data, 2023); https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-greenhouse-gas-emissionsKamopas, W. & Kiatsiriroat, T. Regeneration of mono-ethanolamine solution after biogas purification by electrical heating with assisted ultrasonic wave. Waste Biomass Valorization 10, 3879–3884 (2018).Article
MATH
Google Scholar
Fung, L., Urriola, P. E., Baker, L. & Shurson, G. C. Estimated energy and nutrient composition of different sources of food waste and their potential for use in sustainable swine feeding programs. Transl. Anim. Sci. 3, 359–368 (2019).Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Fung, L., Urriola, P. E. & Shurson, G. C. Energy, amino acid, and phosphorus digestibility and energy prediction of thermally processed food waste sources for swine. Transl. Anim. Sci. 3, 676–691 (2019).Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Jinno, C. et al. Enzymatic digestion turns food waste into feed for growing pigs. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 242, 48–58 (2018).Article
CAS
MATH
Google Scholar
Heuzé, V., Tran, G., Bastianelli, D. & Lebas, F. Animal feed resources information system (Feedipedia, 2023); https://www.feedipedia.org/FAOSTAT (FAO, 2020); http://www.fao.org/faostat/zh/#dataWang, Y. Supplemental information of “Food waste utilized as resources can reduce climate and resource burdens in agrifood systems”. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14826061 (2025).Download referencesAcknowledgementsThis work was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2022YFD1901501, 2021YFD1901001, H.Y.), the Major Science and Technology Project of Yunnan Province (202202AE090034, H.Y.), the Major Science and Technology Project of Shandong Province (2023TZXD088, 2024CXPT075, Z.C.) and Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province, China (number LY22E080009, T.C.). This study also received funding from the following sources: University of Pennsylvania Global Engagement (Z.D.), Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture (Z.D.) and USDA-NIFA IDEAS Program (number 2022-68014-36664, project accession number 1028184; Z.D.).Author informationAuthor notesThese authors contributed equally: Yingcheng Wang, Hao Ying.Authors and AffiliationsState Key Laboratory of Nutrient Use and Management, College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, China Agricultural University, Beijing, ChinaYingcheng Wang, Hao Ying, Zihan Wang, Yulong Yin, Huifang Zheng & Zhenling CuiDepartment of Clinical Studies—New Bolton Center, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Kennett Square, PA, USAYingcheng Wang, Darko Stefanovski & Zhengxia DouDepartment of Animal Science, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN, USAGerald C. ShursonSchool of Environmental Science and Engineering, Zhejiang Gongshang University, Hangzhou, ChinaTing ChenSchool of Agriculture, Henan Institute of Science and Technology, Xinxiang, ChinaHuifang ZhengFaculty of Economics, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, JapanTomoaki NakaishiOrganic Recycling Research Institute, China Agricultural University, Suzhou, ChinaJi LiAuthorsYingcheng WangView author publicationsYou can also search for this author in
PubMed Google ScholarHao YingView author publicationsYou can also search for this author in
PubMed Google ScholarDarko StefanovskiView author publicationsYou can also search for this author in
PubMed Google ScholarGerald C. ShursonView author publicationsYou can also search for this author in
PubMed Google ScholarTing ChenView author publicationsYou can also search for this author in
PubMed Google ScholarZihan WangView author publicationsYou can also search for this author in
PubMed Google ScholarYulong YinView author publicationsYou can also search for this author in
PubMed Google ScholarHuifang ZhengView author publicationsYou can also search for this author in
PubMed Google ScholarTomoaki NakaishiView author publicationsYou can also search for this author in
PubMed Google ScholarJi LiView author publicationsYou can also search for this author in
PubMed Google ScholarZhenling CuiView author publicationsYou can also search for this author in
PubMed Google ScholarZhengxia DouView author publicationsYou can also search for this author in
PubMed Google ScholarContributionsZ.D. and Z.C. designed and directed the study. Z.W., Y.Y., H.Z. and T.N. contributed to the literature search and data acquisition. T.C. and J.L. participated in project planning and discussion. D.S. conducted bootstrapping and Monte Carlo statistical simulations and analysis, wrote the description of the statistical methods, and reviewed the results. Z.D., Y.W., H.Y. and Z.C. collaborated on data management and organization and paper development. Z.D. and Y.W. wrote the paper, and G.C.S. contributed to the paper review, editing and revision. All authors contributed to the discussion of the study and development of the paper.Corresponding authorsCorrespondence to
Zhenling Cui or Zhengxia Dou.Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review
Peer review information
Nature Food thanks Prajal Pradhan and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Additional informationPublisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.Extended dataExtended Data Fig. 1 Flow chart of literature search and selection processes for studies on food waste treatment via aerobic composting (AC), anaerobic digestion (AD), re-purposing to animal feed (Re-Feed), or landfill disposal, in terms of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and product for recycling-reuse.Of 91 studies selected, 50 included two or more food waste treatment methods.Extended Data Fig. 2 The system starts with food waste collection and coupled with transport, then followed by processing, and ends with the production of the final product.Standardized system boundaries to cover food waste collection, transport, and processing through AC, AD, or Re-Feed.Extended Data Table 1 Model-adjusted means and 95% CIs of carbon footprint for food waste treatment via composting (AC), anaerobic digestion (AD), and re-purposing to animal feed (Re-Feed), as well as food waste landfillFull size tableExtended Data Table 2 End-of-life food waste management schemes in the US, EU, China, and total greenhouse gas emissionsFull size tableExtended Data Table 3 Emission mitigation capacity for US, EU, and China under a zero-landfill scenario (S1) and a zero-disposal scenario (S2)1Full size tableExtended Data Table 4 Model-adjusted means and 95% CIs of product metrics for 1 t food waste treated via aerobic composting (AC), anaerobic digestion (AD), or re-purposing to animal feed (Re-Feed)Full size tableExtended Data Table 5 Total amounts of compost, biogas (expressed as renewable energy), digestate, upcycled feed, and nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) contained in compost and digestate under zero-landfill scenario (S1) and zero-disposal scenario (S2)Full size tableExtended Data Table 6 Amounts of maize and soybeans substitution with upcycled feed produced from 1/3 of the food waste amounts allocated to Re-Feed under zero-landfill scenario (S1) and zero-disposal scenario (S2)Full size tableExtended Data Table 7 Protocol for systematic literature review of studies on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of food waste treatment via aerobic composting (AC), anaerobic digestion (AD), re-purposing to make animal feed (Re-Feed), or landfill disposalFull size tableSupplementary informationSupplementary InformationSupplementary Tables 1–3.Reporting SummarySource dataSource Data Fig. 1Source data for Fig. 1.Source Data Fig. 2Source data for Fig. 2.Source Data Fig. 3Source data for Fig. 3.Rights and permissionsSpringer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.Reprints and permissionsAbout this articleCite this articleWang, Y., Ying, H., Stefanovski, D. et al. Food waste used as a resource can reduce climate and resource burdens in agrifood systems.
Nat Food (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-025-01140-zDownload citationReceived: 26 June 2024Accepted: 11 February 2025Published: 11 March 2025DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-025-01140-zShare this articleAnyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:Get shareable linkSorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.Copy to clipboard
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative