Sustainability of surplus food redistribution systems
Aliaksandr Daradzeika*‘, Nuno Videira®“, Krystyna A. Stave
“Department of Geography, University of Bergen, Norway
'Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, NOVA University Lisbon, Portugal
‘School of Public Policy and Leadership, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, USA
“Corresponding authors, email: di :om, nmvc@fet.unl.pt and _krystyna.stave@unlv.edu
Keywords
Surplus food redistribution, Food insecurity Food banks, System Dynamics, Sustainability
Introduction
A large and growing number of people in many developed European countries in 2018 are food insecure (Michelini
et al., 2017; Oxfam, 2015). In these countries food insecurity is mainly related not to shortage of food supply or
inaccessibility of food distribution sources, but rather to poverty and low income (Michelini et al., 2017). In parallel
with food insecurity there also exists a great deal of produced food which is never consumed, but finishes its “life” in
a landfill. In 2012, Europe produced approximately 87.6 million tonnes of food waste (Stenmarck et al., 2016). While
food is a perishable product and some part of its produce will always get spoilt before reaching consumers, other part
of that wasted food can be considered as a surplus. Surplus food is defined as “edible food that is produced,
manufactured, retailed, or ready to be served, but which for various reasons is not sold to, or consumed by, its intended
customers” (Baglioni et al. 2017). Today, multiple non-profit charitable organizations provide food assistance by
collecting, sorting and redistributing surplus unmarketable food to people in need (Mousa et al., 2017). These food
charities form and subsequently operate in complex food redistribution systems with extensive supply chains and
multiple actors like food donors, beneficiaries and volunteers (Bramanti et al., 2017). Food banks represent the most
prominent and widespread type of surplus food redistributing initiatives in Western countries (Middleton et al., 2018).
Food banks are “non-profit organizations that collect, store and dist
bute donated and surplus food to hungry people,
” (Middleton et al., 2018, p.699). Recently food
banks have been attracting a lot of attention among scholars as they are establishing a more and more important role
in fighting food insecurity. Lambie-Mumford (2013) and Riches (2011) argue that these organizations have even
either directly or by going through front line social welfare agenci
become the main response to food insecurity in a range of high-income countries. Just in the UK, the number of food
banks increased from 54 in 2010 to 201 in 2012 (Middleton et al., 2018). However, it is still highly questionable
whether food redistributing organizations in general, and, food banks in specific are appropriate and sustainable
solution to tackle food insecurity. Some critics of food banks consider them merely as a “band-aid” short-term solution
which does not address the underlying causes of food insecurity (Middleton et al., 2018; Tarasuk, 2001). Others
believe that food banks can even worsen the situation with food in:
ecurity by becoming the main response to the
problem and distracting policy makers from creating sound policies aimed at improving the underlying unemployment
and income (Middl et al., 2018). Additi , in most cases the demand for charitable food is higher
than the amount of food which food redistributing organizations can provide (Lorenz, 2012). However, yet there has
been no holistic study which would address the existing criticism and examine effectiveness and sustainability of
surplus food redistribution systems as solution to the food insecurity problem. Thus, given the growing dependence
on food redistribution, there appears to be a need for such study. Moreover, because food banks have established the
role of primary players in the food redistribution sector (Middleton et al., 2018), it appears logical that the focus should
be on this type of initiative. Hence, the goal of the present study is to close the above described existing knowledge
gap by examining sustainability of surplus food redistribution systems. From the effectiveness point of view, it is
important to understand the extent to which food banks can fulfill the food security goals they announce.
Sustainability-wise, the question at stake is the following: even if food banks can meet the food demand of their
beneficiaries at a certain point in time, will they be able to maintain such performance in the long-term?
"The document presenis an extended abstract for the corresponding full research paper presented at 36° International System Dynamics Conference, Reykjavik, Iceland, 6-10 August 2018
Case study: The Re-Food food bank in Lumiar
In order to fulfil the above mentioned goal, the present research was made in collaboration with a currently operating
food bank in the Lumiar municipality of Lisbon, Portugal. The food bank is part of the Re-Food initiative — the biggest
food banks network in Portugal, which currently includes over 25 centres around the country (Re-Food, 2016). The
Lumiar’s food center has over 100 volunteers working in different shifts, around 200 beneficiaries and approximately
40 food donors (for example, restaurants, bakeries, supermarkets), Basically, the food bank’s volunteers collect
surplus food from food donors located within the municipality, sort it and eventually give it away to beneficiaries who
come directly to the food bank’s premises.
Methods and research design
System Dynamics (SD) was chosen as the primary method to holistically analyse sustainability of food redistribution
systems on an example of the Re-Food’s food bank in Lisbon, Portugal. Both qualitative CLD model and quantitative
SFD simulation models of the Lumiar’s food bank system were created based on the semi-structured interviews with
several volunteers from the center (please see Appendix A and B). Additionally, the researchers adopted participant
observation method to understand better how the food bank operates and to create more robust SD models.
Conclusions and Discussion
The main outcomes of this research were derived from the qualitative CLD model analysis as well as from the
simulation of four different scenarios of the computer model. Please refer to Appendix C for the behavior over time
graphs and descriptions of the scenarios.
One of the main conclusions from the present study is that the question about sustainability of food redistribution
systems can primarily be analysed through the lens of their food supply and demand. The simulation model outcomes
as well as the qualitative CLD explicitly show that food redistributing organizations have an inevitably limited food
supply. The limit is derived from the overall number of potential food donors located in a specific area as well as the
amount of surplus food they produce. This constraint will be present even for the large-scale food redistributing
in
‘ives and food banks. Moreover, it was discovered that food banks not only have no essential control of their
food supply, but they even unintentionally decrease it over time. By working with the Re-Food’s food bank, the
amount of generated surplus food becomes evident to food producers and they gradually start finding ways on how to
optimize their operations. Consequently, food banks constantly need to recruit new food donors to compensate for the
decrease in the supply caused by donor’s production optimization. On the one hand, this side-effect could be
considered as positive, as one of the goals of surplus food redistribution is to eliminate food waste. However, if the
question at stake is sustainability of food redistribution systems as a solution to food insecurity, this finding constitutes
another critical concern about the ability of surplus food redistributing systems to tackle the problem of hunger.
Previous studies in the field demonstrate that the demand for charitable food assistance has been ever-growing lately
(Middleton et al., 2018). Yet, there has been no substantial evidence found whether charitable food redistribution
systems by any means contribute to the reduction of the demand for food assistance. It appears that food demand is
intrinsically exogenous for the food redistribution systems. Therefore, the conclusion can be made that by no means
food banks or other kind of similar charitable food services can be considered as a primary solution for the food
insecurity problem or a substitute for real policies and governmental interventions aimed at food insecurity and
income-related problems.
Generally, based on the outcomes of this study, it can be stated that surplus food redistributing systems, and, food
banks in specific, cannot be considered as a sustainable solution to food insecurity by themselves, although they can
significantly affect the food w: problem by promoting a learning effect among food donors. Food redistribution
systems do not solve the underlying problems of food insecurity and have a lot of challenges with meeting a growing
stabilize
food demand with their supply. However, if paired with sound public policies which would help to at leas
the growing demand for charitable food, these systems could potentially provide an important bridge to help people
in difficult life circumstances until the food in:
urity problem could be eliminated completely.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the wonderful volunteers working at the Re-Food food bank in Lumiar district, Lisbon.
This research would not have been possible without their help.
Supplementary Materials
The full version of the research paper including SFD and CLD Stella software models’ files are available from the
authors as well as the conference committee on request.
Bibliography
Baglioni S., Calo F., Garrone P., Molteni M. (2017). Introduction—Food Security and Food Waste Reduction: A
Social Innovation Approach to Current Social, Environmental, and Political Concerns. Foodsaving in Europe, 1-9.
doi:10.1007/978-3-319-56555-2_1.
Bramanti V., Coeli A., Ferri L., Fiorentini G., Ricciuti E. (2017). A Model for Analysing Non-profit Organisations in
the Food Recovery, Management and Redistribution Chain. Foodsaving in Europe, 99-130. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-
56555-2_6.
Derrickson J., Spellman P., Rice J., Mahoney, C. (1999). Temporary emergency food assistance program: Perceptions
of benefits and effect of welfare reform. Journal of Nutrition Education, 31(1), 31-38.
Horst H. V., Pascucci S., Bol W. (2014). The “dark side” of food banks? Exploring emotional responses of food bank
receivers in the Netherlands. British Food Journal, 116(9), 1506-1520. doi:10.1108/bfj-02-2014-0081.
Justesen L., Mik-Meyer N. (2012). Qualitative research methods in organization studies. Kobenhavn: Hans Reitzel.
Lambie-Mumford H. (2013). 'Every town should have One': Emergency food banking in the UK. Journal of Social
Policy, 42(1), 73 - 89.
Lorenz S. (2012). Socio-ecological consequences of charitable food assistance in the affluent society: The German
Tafel. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 32(7/8), 386-400. doi:10.1108/01443331211249011.
Michelini L., Principato L., Iasevoli G. (2017). Understanding Food Sharing Models to Tackle Sustainability
Challenges. Ecological Economics, 145, 205-217. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.09.009.
Middl G., Mehta K., Mi D., Booth S. (2018). The experiences and perceptions of food banks amongst
usi in high-income countries: An _ international scoping review. Appetite, 120, 698-708.
doi:10.1016/j.appet.2017.10.029.
Mousa T., Freeland-Graves J. (2017). Organizations of food redistribution and rescue. Public Health, 152, 117-122.
doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2017.07.031.
Nair D.J., Rashidi T.H., Dixit V.V. (2017). “Estimating surplus food supply for food rescue and delivery
operations.” Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, vol. 57, pp. 73—83., doi:10.1016/j.seps.2016.09.004.
Olin D. (2014). Paradox. Chesham: Acumen.
Oxfam. (2015). An Economy for the 1%. How privilege and power in the economy drive extreme inequality and how
this can be stopped. Available online at. https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/file_attachments/bp210-
economy-onepercent-
tax-havens-180116-en_0.pdf.
Pieri B. D., Baglioni S., Bramanti V., Carlo S. D. (2017). Best Practices in Europe for Developing Food Recovery in
Non-profit Organisations. Foodsaving in Europe, 131-151. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-56555-2_7.
Re-food. (2016). Re-food Movement. How it works. Available at: http://www.refood.org [accessed 10 March 2018].
Riches G. (2011). Thinking and acting outside the charitable food box: Hunger and the right to food in rich societies.
Development in Practice, 21(4-5), 768 — 775.
Sedlacko M., Martinuzzi A., Repke I., Videira N., Antunes P. (2014). Participatory systems mapping for sustainable
consumption: Discussion of a method promoting systemic insights. Ecological Economics, 106, 33-43.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.07.002.
Stenmarck A., Jensen C., Quested T., Moates G. (2016). Estimates of European food
waste levels. Technical report. doi: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4658.4721.
Stepman E., Uyttendaele M., Boeck E., Jacxsens L. (2017) "Needs of beneficiaries related to the format and content
of food parcels in Ghent, Belgium", British Food Journal, https://doi-org/10.1108/BFJ-03-2017-0161 .
Sterman J. (2000). Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World. Boston:
Inwin/McGraw-Hill.
Tarasuk V. (2001). A Critical ination of C ity-Based Responses to H hold Food Insecurity in
Canada. Health Education & Behavior, 28(4), 487-499. doi:10.1177/1090198 10102800408.
Tarasuk V., Eakin J.M. (2005). “Food assistance through ‘surplus food: Insights from an ethnographic study of food
bank work”, Agriculture and Human Values, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 177-186.
Yin R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods. London: Sage Publication.
Appendix A: Causal loop diagram of the Re-Food food bank’s system
Average time
donors working
with Re-For
Food
Total N of
donors in
the area
Donors yet
not onboarded
in the area
3 > Available
ae Os food
produced by
% ‘ Nof regular sat
erage distance
rom donors to sors
food banks i
Nof ears necessary
to collect food
Nota from donors
‘hich ean be covered
by Tear per I shift iensasia
donors contacted
fe. vistance
‘effect
Ability to onboard
Pore donors
tion Pressure to
contact n
do
BT. Supply!
Demand
regulates cars,
Not volunteers
with ears working at Pressure to onboard
‘the food bank volunte
On
Total N of food insecure
Average surplus
food production
dono.
Food donated
by irregular donors
ind events
Food available * Amount of
at the food bank food needed per
beneficiary
per day
a Foe demand a
Supply/Demand
balance
Ability to
Nof
onboard new beneficiaries
bene
Average N of food
families in the area ————_ assistance requests
received by the food bank
Appendix B: Stock and flow diagram of the Re-Food food bank’s system
Appendix C: Simulation outcomes
Scenario 1: Base run
The base run parametrization includes the actual “conditions” of the food bank present on the moment of the study. It
also includes its main food supply constraints identified during the interviews. The model simulation is made with the
duration of one year. It is also assumed that donors would start learning about their surplus food production only from.
the start of the simulation.
ae
Daye Daye
Scenario 2: “Food donors do not optimize and have a constant food waste production rate”
This simulation scenario uses the same parametrization as the base run with only one difference — the “learning effect”
is switched of. In this scenario, food donors do not optimize their production and generate surplus food on a constant
level.
Scenario 3: “The food bank has no transportation shortage”
In “Scenario 3”, the food bank would have unlimited transportation capacity, and, hence would be able to recruit as
many donors as the food demand would require. The duration of the simulation run is two years.
Scenario 4: “The food bank has no transportation shortage and constant food demand”
However, it also appears reasonable to test an even more idealistic scenario in which the food bank would not only
have unlimited transportation capacity, but also constant food demand. The simulation duration is two years.
