The volume of food waste generated in the United States has been growing since 2016. In 2019, ***** million tons of food waste were generated in the country. This is an increase of almost **** million tons compared to the food waste generated in 2016.

In 2018, food waste in the United States was a significant issue with substantial environmental and economic consequences. Here are some key statistics:

Overall Waste Volume and Percentage:

Approximately 103 million tons (206 billion pounds) of food waste were generated in the US in 2018, according to the EPA.

This amounted to between 30-40% of the entire US food supply going uneaten.

On a per-person basis, it was roughly one pound of food wasted per person per day.

Economic Impact:

The annual food waste in America had an approximate value of $161 billion to $218 billion.

The average American family of four reportedly threw out $1,500 in wasted food per year (based on 2010 price data, which would be higher in 2018).

The restaurant industry alone incurred an estimated $162 billion in costs related to wasted food.

Environmental Impact:

Food waste was the number one material in American landfills, accounting for 24.1% of all municipal solid waste (MSW).

When food rots in landfills, it produces methane, a potent greenhouse gas that is 28 times more powerful than CO2 at trapping heat. Food waste was responsible for an estimated 58% of landfill methane emissions to the atmosphere.

The production of wasted food in the US was equivalent to the greenhouse gas emissions of 37 million cars.

Wasted food also means wasted resources like land, water, and energy. Annually, food loss and waste took up an area of agricultural land the size of California and New York combined, and wasted enough energy to power 50 million US homes for a year.

Approximately 21% of agricultural water resources and 19% of US croplands were wasted for food that was ultimately thrown away.

Sources of Food Waste:

Food waste occurs across the entire supply chain, with significant contributions from:

Households: An estimated 43% of food waste came from homes.

Grocery stores, restaurants, and food service companies: Accounted for about 40% of food waste.

Farms: Responsible for around 16% of food loss.

Manufacturers: Contributed about 2% of food waste.

Breakdown by Material (within MSW):

Food waste comprised the fourth largest material category in total MSW generation, estimated at 63.1 million tons or 21.6% in 2018.

These statistics highlight the significant scale of food waste in the US in 2018 and its wide-ranging negative impacts on the economy and the environment

Dataset's Link: https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/u-s-food-waste-flows-between-sectors-2018-v1-3-2

Food waste flows between waste-generating sectors and waste management routes are captured by these Flow-By-Sector (FBS) databases. Typically, the sectors use codes from the 2012 North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). Method 1 (m1 dataset file), the first dataset, assigns sectors to food waste creation and disposal statistics from the USEPA Wasted Food Report. The National Commercial Non-Hazardous Waste (CNHW) FBS dataset's discarded food data is attributed to sectors using the second approach, method 2 (m2 dataset file).

Column's Information

The CSV file "Food_Waste_national_2018_m2_v1.3.2_9b1bb41.csv" contains the following columns with their likely meanings:

Flowable: The type of material being tracked, in this case, "Food Waste".

Class: A classification for the "Flowable" material, here "Other".

SectorProducedBy: A numerical code indicating the sector that produced the food waste.

SectorConsumedBy: A numerical code indicating the sector that consumed or received the food waste.

SectorSourceName: The source of the sector classification, which is "NAICS_2012_Code" (North American Industry Classification System 2012 Code).

Context: This column appears to be empty in the provided data.

Location: This column seems to contain a location code, e.g., "=""00000""".

LocationSystem: The system used for location identification, which is "FIPS" (Federal Information Processing Standards).

FlowAmount: The quantity of food waste.

Unit: The unit of measurement for "FlowAmount", which is "kg" (kilograms).

FlowType: The type of flow, which is "WASTE_FLOW".

Year: The year the data pertains to, in this case, "2018".

MeasureofSpread: This column appears to be empty in the provided data.

Spread: A value related to the spread of the data, here "0.0".

DistributionType: This column appears to be empty in the provided data.

Min: Minimum value, here "0.0".

Max: Maximum value, here "0.0".

DataReliability: Data reliability value, here "0.0".

TemporalCorrelation: Temporal correlation value, here "0.0".

GeographicalCorrelation: Geographical correlation value, here "0.0".

TechnologicalCorrelation: Technological correlation value, here "0.0".

DataCollection: Data collection method or source, here "CalRecycle_WasteCharacterization".

**MetaSources...

These Flow-By-Sector (FBS) datasets capture food waste flows between waste-generating sectors and waste management pathways. The sectors are generally North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 2012 codes. The first dataset, method 1 (m1), attributes food waste generation and disposition data from the USEPA Wasted Food Report to sectors. The second method, method 2 (m2), attributes wasted food data from the National Commercial Non-Hazardous Waste (CNHW) FBS dataset to sectors. These food waste datasets were generated with FLOWSA v1.3.2 (https://github.com/USEPA/flowsa/tree/v1.3.2). M1 is generated with https://github.com/USEPA/flowsa/blob/v1.3.2/flowsa/methods/flowbysectormethods/Food_Waste_national_2018_m1.yaml and m2 is generated with https://github.com/USEPA/flowsa/blob/v1.3.2/flowsa/methods/flowbysectormethods/Food_Waste_national_2018_m2.yaml. The metadata text files included as a supporting document records the FLOWSA tool version and input dataset bibliographic details. The CNHW data were generated in FLOWSA v1.3.0, with the method file https://github.com/USEPA/flowsa/blob/v1.3.0/flowsa/methods/flowbysectormethods/CNHW_national_2018.yaml.

In 2019, the largest amount of food waste in the United States was generated within the industrial sector, which encompasses food manufacturing and processing. It generated approximately ***** million tons of food waste. The entire rest of the country generated an estimated ***** million tons, spread all other sectors.

This statistic shows the share of produced food that was wasted in the United States in 2016. In 2016, roughly **** percent of fresh fruit was wasted.

Introduction

Food Waste Statistics: When we talk about food, most of us think about meals, nutrition, and the joy of eating. But rarely do we stop to consider how much of this food never even reaches a plate. Food waste is a problem that affects every corner of the world, from homes and restaurants to farms and supermarkets.

According to the latest food waste statistics available online, the world wastes around 1.05 billion tonnes of food every year, which is nearly one-fifth of all the food produced for human consumption.

Now, imagine the scale of this loss. Every day, 1 billion meals are thrown away, water that could have nourished crops is wasted, and greenhouse gas emissions increase because discarded food ends up rotting in landfills. This isn’t just an environmental issue anymore; it’s an economic drain, a social problem, and an ethical challenge.

Recently, reports say, countries spend billions of dollars producing food that never gets eaten, while millions of people around the world remain hungry. In this article, I’ll walk you through the latest food waste statistics, breaking down region by region, exploring which sectors contribute the most, and highlighting the economic, environmental, and social impacts.

We’ll also look at strategies that are working to reduce waste and what the future might hold if we take action. By the end of this, you’ll have a clear picture of just how serious the food waste problem is and why it matters to all of us. Let’s get into it.

This Excel-based life cycle inventory (LCI) model develops LCI data for management of wasted food via anaerobic digestion (AD), windrow and aerated static pile (ASP) composting, landfilling and incineration. The inventory model is run for the following scenario options: >AD biogas fate: flare, combined heat and power (CHP) and renewable natural gas (RNG) >Landfill gas fate: flare, electric engine, and RNG >Compost method: windrow and ASP >Incineration technology: Grate furnace - mass burn >Digestate management: compost + land application, land application of whole digestate and digestate landfilling >Land application modeling is limited to avoided fertilizer credits and carbon sequestration benefit. Estimating emissions associated with land application is beyond the scope of this model. Implicitly, emissions associated with compost and digestate are assumed to be equivalent to those from avoided synthetic fertilizer, leading to a net zero change in impact when changing nutrient sources. The output is stored in the 'LCI' tab which can be exported into a csv or other text-based file. Definitions for the field names in the LCI sheet is included in the 'LCI Key' tab.

How big of a problem is food waste in the United States? 1,000 United States adult citizens responded to this question. Around ** percent of those surveyed said it is "a very big problem." Notably, ** percent of respondents were unsure if food waste is a big problem.

This data set is the result of a systematic review of studies on food waste disposed in the United States, an issue which major consequences for social, nutritional, economic, and environmental issues. It was created to determine how much food is discarded in the U.S., and to determine if specific factors drive increased disposal. By applying meta-analytic tools on it this dataset, it was found that the aggregate proportion of food waste in U.S. municipal solid waste from 1995 to 2013 was 0.147 (95% CI 0.137–0.157) of total disposed waste, which is lower than that estimated by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the same period (0.176). Further, that the proportion of food waste increased significantly with time, and there were no significant differences in food waste between rural and urban samples, or between commercial/institutional and residential samples. These results are published in the study titled Quantification of Food Waste Disposal in the United States: A Meta-Analysis (Thyberg et al., 2015).

In 2018, the largest share of food waste in the United States was generated within the industrial sector, which generated approximately ***** percent of the total food waste of all the analyzed segments. Restaurants generated ***** percent.

These data were used to generate the results in the article “Household Food Waste Trending Upwards in the United States: Insights from a National Tracking Survey,” by Ran Li, Yiheng Shu, Kathryn E. Bender & Brian E. Roe, which has been accepted for publication in the Journal of the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association (doi – pending). The Stata code used to generate results is available from the authors upon request. U.S. residents who participate in consumer panels managed by a commercial vendor were invited by email or text message to participate in a two-part online survey during four waves of data collection: February and March of 2021 (Feb 21 wave, 425 initiated, 361 completed), July and August of 2021 (Jul 21 wave, 606 initiated, 419 completed), December of 2021 and January of 2022 (Dec 21 wave, 760 initiated, 610 completed), and February, March and April of 2022 (Feb 22 wave, 607 initiated, 587 completed). We are not able to determine if any respondents participated in multiple waves, i.e., if any of the observations are repeat participants. All participants provided informed consent and received compensation. Inclusion criteria included age 18 years or older and performance of at least half of the household food preparation. No data was collected during major holidays, i.e., the weeks of the Fourth of July (Independence Day), Christmas, or New Years. Recruitment quotas were implemented to ensure sufficient representation by geographical region, race, and age group. Post-hoc sample weights were constructed to reflect population characteristics on age, income and household size. The protocol was approved by the local Internal Review Board. The approach begins with participants completing an initial survey that ends with an announcement that a follow-up survey will arrive in about one week, and that for the next 7 days, participants should pay close attention to the amounts of different foods their household throws away, feeds to animals or composts because the food is past date, spoiled or no longer wanted for other reasons. They are told to exclude items they would normally not eat, such as bones, pits, and shells. Approximately 7 days later they received the follow-up survey, which elicited the amount of waste in up to 24 categories of food and included other questions (see supplemental materials for core survey questions). Waste amounts in each category are reported by selecting from one of several ranges of possible amounts. The gram weight for categories with volumetric ranges (e.g., listed in cups) were derived by assigning an appropriate mass to the midpoint of the selected range consistent with the food category. For the categories with highly variable weight per volume (e.g., a cup of raw asparagus weighs about 7 times more than a cup of raw chopped arugula), we use the profile of items most consumed in the United States to determine the appropriate gram weight. For display purposes, the 24 categories are consolidated into 8 more general categories. Total weekly household food waste is calculated by summing up reported gram amounts across all categories. We divide this total by the number of household members to generate the per person weekly food waste amount.

The raw data for this paper have been received by individual states in PDF or Excel files. (For each state, there might be several PDF or Excel files for each year.) In the data we uploaded on GitHub, we transferred these raw data (the various PDFs and Excel files) into a single CSV file and have created a standardized waste outcome---specifically, state-generated, municipal solid waste (MSW) disposal. In the README file, we include more details regarding all the other supporting data and code we have used.

Dataset for Biodegradation Journal Manuscript "Effects of Landfill Food Waste Diversion- a Focus on Microbial Populations and Methane Generation" Excel file. This dataset is associated with the following publication: Chickering, G., M. Krause, and A. Schwarber. Effects of Landfill Food Waste Diversion: a Focus on Microbial Populations and Methane Generation. BIODEGRADATION. Springer, New York, NY, USA, 1-12, (2023).

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has collected and reported data on the generation and disposal of waste in the United States for more than 30 years. We use this information to measure the success of waste reduction and recycling programs across the country. Our trash, or municipal solid waste (MSW), is made up of the things we commonly use and then throw away. These materials include items such as packaging, food scraps, grass clippings, sofas, computers, tires, and refrigerators. MSW does not include industrial, hazardous, or construction waste. The data on Materials Discarded in the Municipal Waste Stream, 1960 to 2009, provides estimated data in thousands of tons discarded after recycling and compost recovery for the years 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, 2005, 2007, 2008, and 2009. In this data set, discards include combustion with energy recovery. This data table does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial process wastes, or certain other wastes. The "Other" category includes electrolytes in batteries and fluff pulp, feces, and urine in disposable diapers. Details may not add to totals due to rounding.

The data archived here are the raw data required to reproduce all analysis presented in a manuscript currently in press at Resources, Conservation & Recycling.Read, Q. D. & Muth, M. K. (2020). Cost-effectiveness of four food waste interventions: is food waste reduction a "win-win?" Resources, Conservation & Recycling, in press.This dataset is intended for use with the code archived at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4021655 . Please refer to the README.md file in that repository for instructions on how to download the data and reproduce the analysis.The data archived in this repository are from a variety of different sources. As much as is practicable, they are presented here in their raw form as they were downloaded, without any processing. All processing steps can be replicated using the code archived in the accompanying code repository.Abstract of manuscriptAt least 30% of food is wasted during the journey from farm to processor to retailer to consumer in the United States, accounting for an estimated 20% of the environmental impact of the food system. The food waste problem is well characterized, but solutions are not: there has been little rigorous comparison of the costs and potential benefits of food waste reduction interventions. Food waste reduction is often described as a “win-win,” benefiting consumers, the environment, and businesses’ bottom line. We present a method for evaluating this claim by accounting for the costs and environmental benefits of food waste reduction. The procedure involves assembling data on costs and efficacy of the intervention, scaling the costs up to the national level, estimating the quantity and value of food waste averted, and finally estimating the potential averted environmental impact. We apply our method to four representative nationwide interventions: consumer education and public awareness campaigns, spoilage prevention packaging for produce and meat, standardization of date labels, and foodservice waste tracking systems. The estimated annual cost of each intervention varied from $126 to $595 million. The environmental cost-effectiveness of the interventions varied two- to threefold (for example, 6 to 16 kg CO2 reduced per $1 invested). Outstanding questions include how to scale interventions to the national level and how to address the mismatch between who incurs the costs of implementation and who benefits. Our method can be adapted to waste interventions across the food system and in countries beyond the United States.

In 2020, U.S. survey respondents were asked "What best describes your attitude towards food waste?" The results show that in the United States, approximately more than half of respondents believe that they do not waste food. Almost *********** would like to waste less food but struggles to do so.

Snapshot img

Food Waste Management Market Size 2024-2028

The food waste management market size is valued to increase by USD 9.13 billion, at a CAGR of 4.25% from 2023 to 2028. Food waste management gaining traction owing to growing concerns of carbon emissions will drive the food waste management market.

Market Insights

North America dominated the market and accounted for a 38% growth during the 2024-2028.
By Method - Landfill segment was valued at USD 13.80 billion in 2022
By Application - Feed segment accounted for the largest market revenue share in 2022

Market Size & Forecast

Market Opportunities: USD 42.31 billion 
Market Future Opportunities 2023: USD 9128.70 billion
CAGR from 2023 to 2028 : 4.25%

Market Summary

Food waste management has emerged as a critical issue in today's global food system, driven by increasing awareness of the environmental impact of food waste and the associated carbon emissions. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, one-third of the food produced for human consumption is lost or wasted globally. This issue is further compounded by the rising number of startups and innovations aimed at addressing food waste through various solutions, such as smart supply chain optimization and food recovery programs. One real-world business scenario illustrating the importance of food waste management is the case of a large food retailer. This retailer, in an effort to improve operational efficiency and reduce costs, implemented a food waste reduction strategy. By implementing a more efficient inventory management system and optimizing their supply chain, they were able to significantly reduce the amount of food waste generated. Moreover, they partnered with local food banks and charities to donate unsold food items, thereby reducing their environmental footprint and contributing to the community. Despite these advancements, food waste management faces several challenges, including the complexities of the global food supply chain and the logistical challenges of redistributing surplus food to those in need. Additionally, food waste management requires a significant investment in technology and infrastructure, making it a costly endeavor for many businesses. Nevertheless, the growing awareness of the environmental and social implications of food waste, coupled with the increasing availability of innovative solutions, is expected to drive the continued growth of the market.

What will be the size of the Food Waste Management Market during the forecast period?

Get Key Insights on Market Forecast (PDF) Request Free SampleThe market continues to evolve, with a growing emphasis on waste reduction, segregation, and valorization. According to recent research, approximately 1.3 billion tons of food are wasted annually, equating to around one-third of the world's food production (1). This staggering figure highlights the business relevance of implementing effective waste management solutions. Waste processing plays a crucial role in this context, with enzyme technology and improved waste management practices leading the way. For instance, enzyme technology can enhance waste treatment processes, resulting in higher biogas yields and improved waste composition analysis (2). Moreover, waste stream diversion rates have been on the rise due to the increasing popularity of waste treatment technologies and sustainable practices. Waste characterization and composition analysis are essential components of any comprehensive waste management strategy. By understanding the nature of the waste, waste audit metrics can be established, enabling companies to optimize their waste reduction programs and recycling efficiency (3). Furthermore, bioreactor design and treatment technologies can facilitate waste minimization and energy recovery, contributing to a more sustainable business model. In conclusion, the market is a dynamic and evolving landscape, with a strong focus on waste reduction, segregation, and valorization. By adopting advanced waste processing techniques, such as enzyme technology and improved waste management practices, companies can make significant strides in reducing their waste disposal and increasing their material recovery.

Unpacking the Food Waste Management Market Landscape

In the realm of sustainable business practices, food waste management emerges as a critical area of focus. The environmental and economic implications of municipal and industrial food waste are significant. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization, approximately one-third of the food produced globally for human consumption is lost or wasted. In the context of businesses, this translates into a missed opportunity for cost reduction and resource recovery.

The adoption of advanced waste management strategies, such as anaerobic digestion, composting systems, and recycling inf

United States Exports of residues, wastes of food industry, animal fodder was US$14.43 Billion during 2024, according to the United Nations COMTRADE database on international trade. United States Exports of residues, wastes of food industry, animal fodder - data, historical chart and statistics - was last updated on November of 2025.

This dataset provides estimated tons generated and recycled by U.S. zip code and material. It relies on materials management reports and surveys from various states and regions, State Measurement Program (SMP) data, Ball Corporation’s Fifty States of Recycling report, EPA’s Excess Food Opportunities Map, and the U.S. Census Bureau’s American County Survey dataset. Quantities generated and recycled by zip code were estimated by dividing state reported generation and recycled quantities by the population for each state and for each material to arrive at state-specific per capita rates and then those per capita rates were applied to the population of each zip code in each corresponding state. Estimated recycling potential for each material is the difference between estimated tons generated and estimated tons recycled. Those zip codes with the greatest difference in generated and recycled tons have higher estimated recycling potential. The data was then integrated with a U.S. Census Bureau Tiger Database zip code shapefile to create the resulting data layer. The zip code shapefile was simplified to remove vertices. This dataset includes 16 recyclable material types: aluminum, cardboard, electronics, food waste, glass, HDPE bottles #2, PET bottles #1, PET other #1, PP (polypropylene) containers #5, rigid plastics #3 to #7, steel cans, tires, paper, textiles, yard trimmings, and wood. Note that there are certain materials for which data are not available for every state. In these cases, the layer will only display zip codes where data is available. This dataset is a snapshot of U.S. recycling quantities, infrastructure, and materials markets as of 2019-2021. The map was created by Industrial Economics, Inc. (IEc), a consultancy supporting EPA to develop the Recycling Infrastructure and Market Opportunities Map. The map is managed by EPA’s Office of Land and Emergency Management. This project was supported in part by an appointment to the Research Participation Program at the Office of Land and Emergency Management, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, administered by the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education through an interagency agreement between the U.S. Department of Energy and EPA.

United States Imports from China of Residues, wastes of food industry, animal fodder was US$271.32 Million during 2024, according to the United Nations COMTRADE database on international trade. United States Imports from China of Residues, wastes of food industry, animal fodder - data, historical chart and statistics - was last updated on December of 2025.