A recent paper published in Science suggesting that state-level food waste bans are largely ineffective has been getting a lot of attention in the media and in our food waste industry. After a review, ReFED has identified significant flaws that challenge the validity of the study’s findings.

While the study makes claims about food waste, it assesses total disposed waste rather than just the organic fraction. Further, the study only evaluates policies from 2016 or earlier, a point not clearly defined in the study, and the data that anchors the analysis is not precise enough to warrant the overly strong claims made. Contrary to the study results, more recent reporting from California and Vermont suggest the bans are indeed working, as do the study’s own results for Massachusetts.

Similar to our peers, ReFED strongly believes that legislation designed to keep food out of landfills is a key tool to meet the 2030 Food Loss and Waste Reduction Goal. According to ReFED President Dana Gunders:

“The study’s faulty approach incorrectly threatens what we think is one of the strongest levers to successfully reduce food waste across the country. State-level food waste bans create a cascade of benefits—from incentivizing the creation of organics recycling infrastructure to promoting food recovery and even to enabling source reduction. At Climate Week, we were reminded that we are not on track to meet our global 2030 Food Loss and Waste Reduction Goal. Now is the time to focus on scaling the solutions we have available, including food waste bans, instead of hindering our efforts because of an incomplete assessment.”

To learn more about food waste policy at the federal and state levels and discover the best practices, visit ReFED’s Policy Finder.