It has been estimated that one-third of global food is lost or wasted, entailing significant environmental, economic, and social costs. The scale and impact of food loss and waste (FLW) has attracted significant interest across sectors, leading to a relatively recent proliferation of publications. This article synthesizes existing knowledge in the literature with a focus on FLW measurement, drivers, and solutions. We apply the widely adopted DPSIR (Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response) framework to structure the review. Key takeaways include the following: Existing definitions of FLW are inconsistent and incomplete, significant data gaps remain (by food type, stage of supply chain, and region, especially for developing countries), FLW solutions focus more on proximate causes rather than larger systemic drivers, and effective responses to FLW will require complementary approaches and robust evaluation.

No abstract

Near-infrared (NIR) spectroscopy has been used to non-destructively and rapidly evaluate the quality of fresh agricultural produce. In this study, two commercially available portable spectrometers (F-750: Felix Instruments, WA, USA; and SCiO: Consumer Physics, Tel Aviv, Israel) were evaluated in the wavelength range between 740 and 1070 nm to non-invasively predict quality attributes, including the dry matter (DM), and total soluble solids (TSS) content of three fresh table grape cultivars (‘Autumn Royal’, ‘Timpson’, and ‘Sweet Scarlet’) and one peach cultivar (‘Cassie’). Prediction models were developed using partial least-square regression (PLSR) to correlate the NIR absorbance spectra with the invasive quality measurements. In regard to grapes, the best DM prediction models yielded an R2 of 0.83 and 0.81, a ratio of standard error of performance to standard deviation (RPD) of 2.35 and 2.29, and a root mean square error of prediction (RMSEP) of 1.40 and 1.44; and the best TSS prediction models generated an R2 of 0.97 and 0.95, an RPD of 5.95 and 4.48, and an RMSEP of 0.53 and 0.70 for the F-750 and SCiO spectrometers, respectively. Overall, PLSR prediction models using both spectrometers were promising to predict table grape quality attributes. Regarding peach, the PLSR prediction models did not perform as well as in grapes, as DM prediction models resulted in an R2 of 0.81 and 0.67, an RPD of 2.24 and 1.74, and an RMSEP of 1.28 and 1.66; and TSS resulted in an R2 of 0.62 and 0.55, an RPD of 1.55 and 1.48, and an RMSEP of 1.19 and 1.25 for the F-750 and SCiO spectrometers, respectively. Overall, the F-750 spectrometer prediction models performed better than those generated by using the SCiO spectrometer data.

No abstract

No abstract