Food waste reduction, corporate responsibility and national policies: evidence from Europe

Abstract

Purpose

This paper investigates strategies for addressing the global challenge of food loss and waste (FLW) within the food industry. It examines the relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives and state regulatory interventions for reducing FLW.

Design/methodology/approach

This mixed method study utilizes a unique panel dataset which includes the 150 largest food industry companies in Italy, Norway and the UK. It combines quantitative data analysis with qualitative insights derived from corporate strategies and corporate communications.

Findings

The analysis reveals that food companies with an established CSR strategy and in particular companies whose CSR reports highlight their environmental and social achievements are more likely to achieve in effective FLW reduction. Additionally, national-level regulatory interventions guided by European Union waste strategies act as pivotal benchmarks and encourage stricter corporate food waste management policies.

Practical implications

This research underscores the significance of CSR strategies and effective state regulation in the fight against FLW and offers policymakers and businesses valuable insights enabling development of robust strategies.

Social implications

By emphasizing the interplay between CSR and regulatory intervention, this research contributes to the achievement of a more sustainable and efficient global food system that addresses both economic and ethical concerns and could have far-reaching societal and environmental implications.

Originality/value

The paper sheds light on the interplay between CSR initiatives and regulatory interventions for tackling FLW and emphasizes their synergistic impact on sustainable practices within the food industry.

Citation

Biggi, G., Principato, L. and Castellacci, F. (2024), "Food waste reduction, corporate responsibility and national policies: evidence from Europe", British Food Journal, Vol. 126 No. 13, pp. 470-485. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-11-2023-0982

1. Introduction

Similar to other sustainability challenges, reducing food loss and waste (FLW) is an urgent and crucial objective for both public organizations and businesses (Ocicka and Raźniewska, 2018). Approximately one-third of food produced globally, around 1.3 billion tons, is either lost or wasted across the food supply chain (Gustavsson et al., 2011), with significant portions lost or wasted at various stages, including farming, post-harvest, processing, retail and consumption (UNEP, 2021; FAO, 2019). The implications of FLW are profound, not only in terms of wasted resources but also in its environmental, economic and social costs, estimated at $2.6tn annually. This issue is exacerbated by the fact that it occurs alongside global hunger, affecting hundreds of millions (FAO, 2023).

The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDGs) address this issue directly, aiming to halve global FLW by 2030 (Target 12.3), highlighting the urgent need for collaborative efforts among all stakeholders to mitigate FLW (Chang et al., 2021). Corporate social responsibility (CSR) emerges as a strategic avenue for companies, especially in the agri-food sector, to incorporate FLW reduction into their sustainability goals (Peretz and Strønen, 2022; Kim, 2017). The literature underscores the importance of CSR in addressing environmental and social sustainability, with an increasing focus on the role of CSR in food security and waste reduction (Franco et al., 2020; Russo and Perrini, 2010; Morea et al., 2023; Fuchs et al., 2009).

Despite the established connection between CSR and environmental performance, the link between CSR and FLW reduction strategies remains underexplored. This study aims to bridge this gap by investigating the relationship between CSR policies and the adoption of FLW reduction strategies within the food industry, building on recent research that hints at a beneficial interconnection (Ng and Sia, 2023). Additionally, the role of governmental intervention in promoting FLW reduction through both regulatory measures and incentives for voluntary compliance is examined, noting the sparse research in this area despite recent regulatory efforts (Chang et al., 2021; Wang et al., 2018; Jackson and Apostolakou, 2010; Marquis et al., 2007).

Focusing on Italy, Norway and the UK, this study analyzes national strategies and legislation aimed at FLW reduction, highlighting the varied approaches these countries take towards regulation and voluntary initiatives (Principato, 2021; Szulecka and Strøm-Andersen, 2021; WRAP, 2022). It argues for a synergistic relationship between national policies and CSR initiatives in tackling FLW, suggesting that while CSR can raise awareness and set the groundwork for reduction efforts, regulatory measures are critical for driving significant action within the industry.

This study makes several original contributions to the existing literature on corporate responsibility and national food policies aimed at addressing FLW. Firstly, it provides a comprehensive analysis of the synergistic effects of CSR initiatives and regulatory interventions on FLW reduction, which has been underexplored in previous research. Secondly, by focusing on Italy, Norway, and the UK, it offers insights into the diverse regulatory frameworks and CSR practices across different national contexts. This research thus bridges a critical gap by examining the interplay between corporate actions and national policies in the food industry, contributing to both theoretical understanding and practical applications in sustainability practices (Secondi et al., 2015; Michelini et al., 2018).

The paper is organized as follows: section 2 provides a review of the literature, section 3 describes the methodology and the data, section 4 presents the results and section 5 offers a discussion, some conclusions and some implications for theory and practice.

2. Background

Despite extensive research on CSR and food waste reduction, there is a noticeable gap in understanding the combined impact of CSR initiatives and regulatory interventions. Previous studies have largely focused on these aspects in isolation. This literature review addresses this gap by exploring the intersection of CSR and national policies in the context of FLW. Specifically, the study examines how these two factors jointly influence FLW reduction strategies within the food industry, an area that has been under-explored in existing literature.

2.1 Companies’ efforts to address FLW

The relevance of FLW along the supply chain has attracted scholarly attention (Chauhan et al., 2021). However, most of this work focuses on the later supply chain stages, such as distribution (Yetkin Ozbük and Cokun, 2020), retail (de Moraes et al., 2020) and consumption (Principato et al., 2021a, b; Reynolds et al., 2019). However, food production involves a range of intricate practices which result in huge amounts of FLW (Garcia-Garcia et al., 2019). The industrial processing stage produces FLW caused for example, by production failures, poor handling, equipment defects and processing scrappages (Garrone et al., 2016; Ocicka and Raźniewska, 2018). In addition, inadequate packaging methods (Spang et al., 2019; Nicastro and Carillo, 2021), logistical operations (Raak et al., 2017), inappropriate product storage and transportation, packaging defects and labeling errors cause losses. Lastly, samples taken for quality analysis must also be considered food losses in this stage (Raak et al., 2017). In the distribution phase, food waste can be caused by numerous factors including among others, the high quality demanded by the market, aesthetic requirements, damage to packaging and poor sales forecasting and order management (Spang et al., 2019; Ocicka and Raźniewska, 2018). There is a tendency also in the food sector to continuously increase the range of products on offer in order to attract more customers which results in overfilled shop shelves and scrapping of unsold products that have passed their use date (Bhattacharya et al., 2021). It is important that products are stored and displayed appropriately to reduce product deterioration and ultimately more waste (Nicastro and Carillo, 2021).

The Waste Framework Directive came into force in 2008 (Directive 2008/98/EC) and its 2018 (EU Directive 2018/851, Art 4) revision was designed to address FLW problems. These directives represent one of the most advanced FLW policy frameworks. In this framework, the preferred waste management option is prevention, that is avoiding the generation of surplus food. The next best option is reuse of surplus food for human consumption and its redistribution via networks and food banks that comply with safety and hygiene norms. The third option is reuse of certain waste food items for animal feed. This framework promotes revalorization through re-use of by-products from food processing and recycling of food waste to transform it into value-added products. It also includes recovery of certain substances or recycling of nutrients in food waste for low-value applications such as compost and digestate derived from anaerobic digestion (recycle of nutrients) and recovery of energy through anaerobic digestion. The least preferred option is disposal of food waste via landfill or incineration.

Despite the good intentions of the food directive, it does not always respect the waste hierarchy priorities, and especially if other environmental or economic aspects are prioritized. For instance, companies often see it as more economically efficient to reuse, recycle or recover energy from food waste rather than adopting the more radical solution of zero waste (Cristobal et al., 2018). Goossens et al. (2019) highlight that firms’ FLW activities are conditional on the economic benefits generated for the firm; others suggest that companies are more likely to adopt FLW policies if the related economic gains are higher than the costs involved in implementing FLW policies (Cattaneo et al., 2021). Hanson and Mitchell conducted a study of more than 700 companies representing a range of sectors including food manufacture, food retail, hospitality and food service, and found that companies that invested in FLW reduction enjoyed substantial economic benefits. They found that over a three year period, for every $1 (or other unit of currency) invested in FLW reduction, the average site-based company realized a return of $14. The financial benefits mainly include reduced food procurement and disposal costs, reduced food handling and storage costs and an overall improvement in operational efficiency. However, the scale of the economic impacts achieved through adoption of FLW reduction policies has not been proven. Some studies show that the cost of reducing FLW are not recovered in the short term and that firms reap the benefits of their FLW investments only in the long run (Aramyan et al., 2021). It has been suggested also that firms adopting FLW reduction policies may not benefit directly due to the complex interconnections within the agri-food supply chain (Cattaneo et al., 2021). Interestingly, Hanson and Mitchell suggest that investing in FLW can provide non-financial benefits by strengthening the corporate brand and fostering goodwill within the community (Pearce and Berkenkamp, 2017), hinting at a positive reputational impact for firms that adopt FLW policies.

2.2 FLW management within a CSR approach

The increased importance of FLW in the business sector has resulted in firms highlighting FLW reduction as part of their CSR strategy (Devin and Richards, 2018; Peretz and Strønen, 2022; Kim, 2017). As already mentioned, CSR is a voluntary policy involving implementation of measures that protect and enhance societal well-being and the interests of the firm. CSR is beneficial for promoting positive engagement with key stakeholders, and has been found also to contribute to the firm’s share value and long-term economic value. A CSR strategy implies that alongside pursuit of profit firms also feel compelled to act responsibly towards society and the environment (Crane et al., 2008). Other studies, specifically identify CSR as a vital driver of environmentally responsible behavior in various industries (e.g. Korschun et al., 2014). In the stream of literature that focuses on FLW and in the context of the restaurant industry Ng and Sia (2023) find a positive correlation between CSR and food waste separation activity. Similarly, Morea et al. (2023) highlight how CSR promotes a circular economy within the agri-food sector. However, the stream of work on the relationship between CSR and FLW reduction activities is small (Rehman et al., 2022) and more knowledge about this relationship would help to identify and characterize firms more likely to adopt FLW policies. We add to this stream of work by investigating whether food companies that have an active CSR policy are more likely to implement FLW strategies and explore their FLW engagement using the EU food waste hierarchy as a benchmark. We predict that companies already committed to CSR activities will be more likely to implement FLW reduction strategies. We hypothesize also that CSR activities are significant for fostering anti-waste strategies at the lower levels of EU food waste hierarchy. CSR has been described as a process by which managers define “their roles in relation to the common good, along with their behavioral disposition with respect to the fulfillment and achievement of these roles” (Basu and Palazzo, 2008, p. 124), and therefore the company’s engagement in CSR activities implies the definition of new organizational routines, the transformation of cultural values and re-framing of corporate goals (Aguinis and Glavas, 2012). These processes are likely to establish a fertile cultural and organizational environment that facilitates FLW policy adoption by the company.

2.3 Influence of national regulation on the implementation of FLW strategies

As already noted, policy interest in FLW reduction has increased since not all firms are engaging in voluntary FLW reduction activities. However, despite the several food waste reduction policy initiatives launched in the last few years, assessment of their impacts is at an early stage (De Laurentiis et al., 2020; Chang et al., 2021; see also Ng and Sia, 2023). To address this gap, we investigate whether food companies are more likely to engage in FLW reduction activities if national regulation causes institutional pressure to conform to certain FLW standards. Earlier research has explored the influence of institutional pressure for influencing CSR behavior (Campbell, 2007; Zhang et al., 2022a, b; Jackson and Apostolakou, 2010; Marquis et al., 2007; Marano and Kostova, 2016), and others have investigated the relevance of environmental regulation on firm-level engagement in green or otherwise defined pro-environmental business conduct (see among many others, Daddi et al., 2016; Wang et al., 2018). While the evidence is not always conclusive, most studies suggest that government regulation plays a crucial role in guiding firms’ environmental initiatives and shaping their environmental decisions and actions. Some studies have theorized about the influence of regulation and corporate behavior norms based on neo-institutional theory (Di Maggio and Powell, 1983), and suggest that adherence to norms of conduct grant organizations the legitimacy they need to survive in their particular field. Neo-institutional theory provides a lens to understand how regulatory pressures and normative expectations influence corporate behavior. The research addresses a significant gap in the literature by exploring how CSR and national policies jointly impact FLW reduction at the macro (national policies), meso (industry practices) and micro (individual firm strategies) levels. This multi-level analysis highlights the interactions between different actors and the regulatory environment. In the case of FLW, we suggest that national policy interventions create favorable conditions for firms already predisposed to address FLW to extend their agendas. We conjecture that the existence of national FLW policies increases the inclination of firms to adopt FLW reduction strategies because they feel compelled to do so by law and want to avoid social or legal penalties, and also because the presence of national norms encourages proactive address of FLW. We predict also that state level anti-waste policies have a positive effect on adoption of higher-level food waste hierarchy activities.

3. Data and methods

3.1 Sample and data

To address our research questions, we rely on unique hand collected longitudinal data. Our sample is composed of 150 of the largest publicly listed and private companies in Italy, Norway and the UK, selected to achieve a balanced sample of top food manufacturing and processing firms in each country by size [1]. The selection of Italy, Norway and the UK for this study is based on their distinct structural characteristics and diverse approaches to CSR and regulatory frameworks in the food industry. Italy has a rich tradition of CSR in the food industry, with many companies integrating sustainability into their business models. Italy’s strong cultural emphasis on food quality and tradition also influences corporate practices and consumer behaviors, making it an interesting case for studying the impact of CSR on FLW. Norway is known for its robust regulatory frameworks and high levels of environmental awareness. The Norwegian government has implemented comprehensive policies aimed at reducing FLW, and the country’s businesses are generally proactive in adopting sustainable practices. The UK is recognized for its advanced CSR practices and progressive policies on food waste reduction. The UK’s strong institutional support for sustainability initiatives and its dynamic food industry provide a contrasting context to Italy and Norway. The presence of organizations like Waste and Resources Action Program (WRAP) further underscores the UK’s commitment to addressing FLW through both regulatory measures and industry collaboration. We chose to include the largest companies since they possess the resources and capacities to invest in CSR (Gray et al., 1995) and generally have a higher impact on society. The sample companies operate in the food sector, specifically in the manufacturing and processing of meat (32%), fish (26%), frozen food (17%), beverages (13%) and dairy products (12%).

For each company and each year, we collected their CSR reports (or if the firm did not publish a specific CRS report, the CSR section in the company’s annual report), resulting in a total of 589 documents published between 2000 and 2020. The reports collected include 34.7% from UK companies, 34% from Italian companies and 31.3% from Norwegian companies’ use of companies’ reports to gather information about their food waste strategies was based on the idea that firms publicize their actions related to implementation of a given strategy, or their commitment to implement it in the near future. We coded data on companies’ descriptions of their activities, policies, achievements, etc. related to the management of “food waste”. We rely on CSR reports in the absence of other systematic data to measure companies’ actions to reduce food waste. We applied both manual and automated content analysis. The latter is in line with recent advances in text analytics (Pennebaker et al., 2007) and uses Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) 2015 software to search the reports using series of key words, code them and build variables to be used in the regression analysis. Below, we discuss the operationalization of the variables used.

3.2 Dependent variables

We estimate our models considering three related dependent variables measured using automatic (for the first two variables) or manual (for the third variable) content analysis of CSR reports. The first dependent variable is presence of a food waste strategy in the company, measured by the dummy variable Food Loss and Waste which takes the value 1 if the keywords of interest are included in the firm’s CSR report and is 0 otherwise. FLW encompasses all food produced for human consumption that is not consumed, including losses during production, processing, retail and consumption stages. This study focuses on corporate strategies and policies aimed at minimizing FLW. To measure food waste strategy, we employed a validated dictionary of food waste-related keywords. This dictionary was developed using a key informant advice methodology which involves gathering insights and recommendations from knowledgeable individuals in the field. These key informants provided guidance on relevant keywords to include in the dictionary. The keywords included in the dictionary are specific terms or combinations of words associated with food waste such as “food loss”, OR “food” AND “waste”, OR “food reuse”, OR “food recyc*” [2]. We applied Boolean logic to check whether these keywords or combinations of words were present in the text analyzed. This allowed us quantitatively to assess the occurrence and prevalence of food waste-related content in the dataset, providing valuable insights into the extent of food waste, potential solutions or areas that require attention. The second dependent variable is intensity of the company’s food waste strategy, measured by the variable Intensity of Food Loss and Waste which was constructed by counting the occurrence of food waste dictionary words in the CSR document analyzed. These variable measures the extent to which the company considers FLW important and is committed to FLW reduction, proxied by the number of occurrences of our key words of interest in the CSR report (normalized by the report’s total number of words). The third dependent variable is also a measure of the extent to which a company considers FLW important, and the extent to which the company has implemented its own food waste strategy. To measure this, the variable classifies companies’ food waste strategies at three levels based on the EU Food Waste Framework Directive. To classify each company’s report into one of the three groups, one of the authors performed a manual content analysis which was cross validated by a second coder. During the manual content analysis, the coders carefully reviewed the individual company reports paying attention to the actions, initiatives, technologies, goals, partnerships and overall approaches mentioned. Based on this analysis, the coders assigned each company to the appropriate category (Level A, Level B or Level C), ensuring consistency and accuracy. Cross-validation by the second coder enhanced classification reliability. Specifically, Level A includes the most advanced activities aimed at preventing and minimizing food waste through a frontier waste management approach. This category includes companies that invest in the best technologies and innovative packaging solutions, and discuss measurements, activities and reduction targets which allow monitoring of progress over time. These companies are involved also in partnerships and supply chain agreements enabling collaborations in line with a circular economy approach. Some companies in this category are being proactive in the voluntary labeling of good or provision of supplementary information such as expiry dates. Level B includes activities aimed at measuring reductions in food waste and setting specific and quantitative goals to make further reductions. Companies in this category generally are involved in partnerships and agreements with relevant stakeholders and try to address food waste at the consumer level. This category represents a good level of commitment by the firm to reducing food waste. Level C includes firms with minimal waste management policies that involve reuse/recycling of food waste which coincides with the lowest level in the waste hierarchy and includes recovery and disposal for animal feed, energy recovery and composting. Some of the companies in this category are involved in single or small initiatives aimed at educating and increasing consumer awareness or reusing food waste for human consumption. This category also includes activities aimed at reducing food waste based on generic and vague goals.

3.3 Main explanatory variables

The first explanatory variable (Policy) accounts for the presence of a national policy, measured by a country-specific indicator for the adoption of at least a FLW reduction policy initiative. This refers to policies and regulations enacted by national governments to reduce FLW, including mandates, incentives and guidelines. The Online Supplementary Materials provides a list of the policy initiatives in our dataset. The second explanatory variable accounts for the presence of a company CSR strategy which will affect the probability of implementing a FLW strategy. CSR strategy is measured using proxies for firm CSR policy based on the activities described in the firm’s CSR report. CSR refers to the voluntary actions undertaken by companies to address social, environmental and economic issues. In this study, CSR is conceptualized as activities and policies that aim to reduce FLW and enhance sustainability within the food industry. Given that companies can emphasize different CSR aspects (e.g. environmental, social, economic), we employ dictionaries to capture these three dimensions using LIWC 2015 analytical software. Environmental CSR includes terms related to interest in addressing environmental-related issues (e.g. climate change, biodiversity, water, waste, pollution, etc.) Social CSR is based on a dictionary of terms describing societal issues (e.g. workers’ rights, diversity, equity, community support, disadvantaged people, human rights, etc.) Economic CSR emphasizes the firm’s role in terms of promotion of positive economic impacts and the firm’s positive contribution to society via economic-related activities such as innovation, growth, wages, employment, investments, etc.). We also include the composite indicator CSR based on principal component analysis (PCA) to take account of the environmental, social, and economic dimensions captured using the CSR dictionaries. CSR provides a consolidated measure of the firm’s efforts related to ’communicating its CSR activities and policies.

3.4 Control variables

To control for potential confounding variables and ensure robust analysis, the regression model includes several control variables, constructed using BvD ORBIS data which provides reliable company-level financial and organizational information. The control variables included in our regression analysis are company size (Size), return on assets (Roa) and slack resources (Slack resources) measured as the ratio of total debt to equity, to account for potential confounding factors. We also include year-, sector- and country-fixed effects to control for time trends and variations across sectors and countries. Fixed effects take account of factors that might influence adoption of CSR policies and publication of CSR reports on the firm’s website. The inclusion of the control variables and fixed effects is aimed at identifying the specific relationship between CSR in terms of food waste strategies, and the outcomes of interest. Controlling for these factors helps to minimize potential bias and ensure that the observed effects are attributable to CSR practices rather than to other confounding factors.

3.5 Estimation procedure

To address our research questions, we leveraged the panel structure of our dataset and rely on multinomial panel probit and logit estimations. The dependent variables are Food Loss and Waste, Intensity of Food Loss and Waste and Levels B and C in the EU food waste hierarchy. These dummies are potentially time varying since assignment to a group is re-evaluated annually. In terms of the explanatory variables and the controls, the estimated models include 1-year lags for the firm characteristics described above in order to tackle simultaneity, and a full set of year, sector and industry fixed-effects to control for aggregate and macro-level dynamics over time. To address potential biases that might arise from serial correlation in the dataset we estimate robust standard errors clustered at firm level.

4. Empirical results

Tables 1 and 2 present the results of regressions for the three dependent variables.

Table 1 shows that in all four regressions for the first main explanatory variable (Policy) the estimated coefficient is positive and large in magnitude (models 1–4), indicating the important role of country-specific policies for firm-level adoption of food waste strategies. Model 1 shows a positive and significant relationship between the overall indicator for CSR and food waste strategy. While this result was expected, models 2, 3 and 4 suggest that different emphases in the firms’ CSR reports on environmental, societal and economic issues suggest different propensity for engagement in FLW reduction. Social and environmental CSR have strong and positive estimated coefficients, but the coefficient of economic CSR is smaller in magnitude and not statistically significant. Overall, these results indicate that the more companies emphasize the social and environmental dimensions of their CSR the more likely they will have a FLW policy in place. Table 2 reports the estimation results for Food Waste Hierarchy which measures the extent to which the company is actively committed to reducing food waste by matching the EU food waste hierarchy targets. Note that owing to the very small number of firms in “Category A” (see also Table 1), we decided to exploit the variability between classifications B and C (Level B and Level C), by running a split sample analysis for these two groups of firms. Recall that Level B firms demonstrate active commitment to and have in place a clear strategy related to food waste although devoting fewer resources and less R&D investment compared to Level A firms; Level C firms show modest commitment to food waste management, that is they claim an interest in food waste issues but lack concrete and quantifiable reduction targets and specific commitment and FLW strategies.

When we estimated our model for these two sub-samples separately, we found that the variable CSR was positive and significant only for companies in the Level C group (Table 2, column 1), and that Policy was positive and statistically significant only for the Level B group (Table 2, column 2). These contrasting results show some heterogeneity among food industry firms suggesting that while CSR might be considered an important dimension and a pre-condition for claims of an initial interest in food waste reduction (level C in the EU food waste hierarchy), national policies seem to be associated mostly to firms associated to level “B” in the hierarchy. We conducted some further tests to check the robustness of our regression results. First, we included industry dummies for different sectors, ranging from NACE (Rev. 2) to Bureau van Dijk sector classifications. Second, we added a new categorical variable to distinguish the firms and sectors in our sample based on their product labeling (e.g. “use by date” and “best before date”) since it is reasonable to assume that the labeling will affect consumer behavior and FLW. These additional results confirm the findings from our main analysis (results not reported here for reasons of space but available on request from the authors). Overall, although our analysis was not meant to test for causal effects, it suggests that CSR active companies are likely to take some initial steps to address FLW, and that more advanced FLW policies are more likely in countries with specific FLW policies in place.

5. General discussion

FLW reduction is integral to the UN SDGs for 2030, yet the challenge persists and intensifies. Key actors in addressing FLW are companies within the food sector, where many are still determining their approach to this issue. Notably, Italy, Norway and the UK are leading with national regulations and guidelines that promote FLW reduction among companies. This study explores how large food companies in these countries adopt FLW strategies, influenced by national regulations and their CSR initiatives. We hypothesized that firms would respond positively to both regulatory pressure and their CSR commitments, focusing on their alignment with the EU food waste hierarchy.

Our findings indicate that companies are more likely to adopt and intensively communicate FLW strategies when they are regulated by the state and have robust CSR practices. This supports the notion that CSR influences pro-environmental actions (Afsar and Umrani, 2020; Ng and Sia, 2023; Morea et al., 2023) and that regulatory frameworks are pivotal in fostering more definitive food waste management commitments. While firms with strong CSR backgrounds but lacking regulatory mandates show moderate interest in FLW, those under national regulation demonstrate concrete strategies and commitments towards food waste reduction. These observations underscore the essential role of regulation in driving significant FLW reduction efforts and advancing companies' food waste strategies, affirming the synergistic impact of CSR and legislative measures on environmental stewardship.

5.1 Theoretical implication

In response to the call for further research to integrate the interconnected themes of CSR, food waste and governmental involvement (Chang et al., 2021), this paper conducts a comprehensive examination of how CSR and national policies influence the adoption of food waste strategies in companies. Indeed, while previous research has delved into the influence of institutional pressure and CSR initiatives on firms' environmental activities (e.g. Morea et al., 2023; Korschun et al., 2014), there remains a noticeable gap in the literature, specifically examining the influence of these variables on FLW companies’ activities.

Therefore, the present research sheds light on the diversity and extent of companies' engagement in food waste reduction, providing valuable insights into the factors that prompt companies to reduce food waste, specifically whether they are primarily motivated by voluntary goodwill initiatives or by the presence of national-level policies. Our results point to the relevance of pre-existing CSR activities for companies’ sensitivity and attention to FLW issues. Hence, encouraging the adoption of CSR policies might be more likely to lead to activities related to other socio-environmental issues as part of the firm’s CSR. Companies keen to demonstrate their CSR are likely to be better able to address new CSR-related issues such as FLW and incorporate and emphasize them in their CSR policies and reporting. Our research makes a significant contribution to the current body of literature addressing CSR and FLW, which has predominantly treated these two themes as separate. Notably, prior research has predominantly centered on external outcomes and consumer perspectives (Huang et al., 2021; Tsalis et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2022a, b), leaving ample room for further investigation into the internal dynamics and corporate strategies that influence the relationship between CSR and food waste. In alignment with the findings of earlier research (e.g. Morea et al., 2023; Ng and Sia, 2023), our study highlights the interconnection between them, shedding light on a previously overlooked aspect of CSR. Moreover, our findings suggest that a greater tendency for interest in food waste reduction among companies with appropriate policies in place and among companies in countries where national regulation requires and supports efforts to reduce food waste. Notably, we found that national regulation may push companies to achieve more advanced FLW reductions using the EU food waste hierarchy benchmark. Corroborating prior studies that have linked environmental regulation on firm-level engagement in pro-environmental business conduct (e.g. Daddi et al., 2016; Wang et al., 2018), our investigation stands out as a valuable contribution to the existing literature on FLW and food policies (Porter, 2020; Lin and Guan, 2021; Secondi et al., 2015; Reisch et al., 2013). Indeed, through the analysis of the influence of national policies on shaping companies' FLW activities and the examination of engagement levels based on the EU food waste hierarchy, our research offers a distinctive and innovative perspective within this field too.

5.2 Practical/managerial implications

Our investigation has some interesting policy and societal implication and should inform future policymakers and industry practitioners in order to tackle FLW while promoting sustainable practices in the food sector. Firstly, the positive and significant relationship between national policies and the adoption of food waste strategies, emphasizes the importance of regulatory frameworks. On the one hand, companies operating in regions with specific FLW policies are encouraged to align their strategies with these regulations, also if these are still on a voluntary base, recognizing the potential positive impact on the effectiveness and success of their food waste reduction initiatives. On the other hand, policymakers can leverage this finding to design regulations that nudge more companies to engage in effective food waste reduction strategies.

Secondly, the relevance of pre-existing CSR activities for companies’ attention to FLW issues highlights how firms should strategically leverage their existing CSR activities as a foundation for addressing FLW issues. Incorporating FLW considerations into established CSR activities allows companies to capitalize on existing organizational structures and values. This integration ensures a more holistic and seamless approach to FLW reduction, aligning with the broader socio-environmental responsibilities embedded into their CSR initiatives. Companies can streamline efforts, optimize resource allocation and communicate a consistent commitment to sustainability by integrating FLW issues into their ongoing CSR strategies. This practical approach enhances overall corporate sustainability and resilience in the face of emerging socio-environmental challenges. Finally, the categorization of firms into Levels A, B, and C based on the EU Food Waste Framework offers a practical tool for companies to self-assess their initiatives. By aligning with this classification, firms can better understand their position in the broader context and identify areas for improvement, thereby contributing to a standardized approach within the industry.

5.3 Limitations and future research

While the findings from our study provide valuable insights into the relationship between CSR activities and national policies on FLW strategies, our sample included only large food industry companies in Italy, Norway, and the UK and may not be representative of smaller enterprises and other geographical contexts. We suggest that future research should explore the impact of national policies on a larger scale in order to identify the types of initiatives for example tax benefits or subsidies to encourage companies to prioritize food waste reduction – more likely to have a higher impact on FLW reduction. Companies should be required to be more accountable and more transparent in relation to data on FLW since data availability is a barrier to more robust impact assessments of these initiatives policies. Finally, we suggest that policymakers should regularly evaluate the effectiveness of existing regulations and voluntary agreements. Continuous monitoring and data-driven assessments would inform policymakers about the impact of the measures implemented and allow for adjustments and improvements to maximize their effectiveness.

Table 1

Regression results: dependent variable: “Food Loss and Waste” dummy. Logit estimations

	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)
Variables	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4
Policy-1	21.85***	23.42***	17.39***	22.12***
	(1.217)	(1.038)	(1.250)	(1.153)
CSRt−1	0.624***
	(0.200)
Environmental CSRt−1		6.227**
		(2.530)
Social CSRt−1			26.72***
			(6.347)
Economic CSRt−1				0.408
				(3.160)
Roat−1	−0.0755	−0.0706	−0.0760	−0.0627
	(0.0801)	(0.0807)	(0.0784)	(0.0748)
Sizet−1	0.333	0.252	0.299	0.420
	(0.362)	(0.311)	(0.323)	(0.354)
Slackt−1	0.0580	0.0633	0.0789	0.0118
	(0.236)	(0.210)	(0.222)	(0.267)
Constant	−6.083*	−5.674*	−6.811**	−5.847
	(3.270)	(3.072)	(2.823)	(3.899)
Country dummies	YES	YES	YES	YES
Time dummies	YES	YES	YES	YES
Industry dummies	YES	YES	YES	YES
Observations	286	286	286	286

Note(s): Robust standard errors in parentheses. ***p < 0.01, **p < 0.05, *p < 0.1

Source(s): Authors’ work

Table 2

Regression results: dependent variable: food waste strategy categories (EU hierarchy classification). Logit estimations

	(1)	(2)
Variables	C_HIERARCHY	B_HIERARCHY
Policy-1	0.275	3.293***
	(0.474)	(0.622)
CSRt−1	0.226**	0.138
	(0.0952)	(0.106)
Roat−1	0.00423	−0.193**
	(0.0285)	(0.0899)
Sizet−1	0.235**	0.573*
	(0.116)	(0.315)
Slackt−1	−0.210	0.0603
	(0.162)	(0.139)
Constant	−3.866***	−5.527**
	(0.928)	(2.397)
Country dummies	YES	YES
Time dummies	YES	YES
Industry dummies	YES	YES
Observations	324	64

Note(s): Robust standard errors in parentheses

***p < 0.01, **p < 0.05, *p < 0.1

Source(s): Authors’ work

Notes

1. The panel used for the analysis was constructed by selecting companies which had been among the top 50 (for sales) in their respective countries for a continuous period of 20 years, based on data from BvD Orbis. This ensured inclusion of companies that have demonstrated sustained economic significance and market presence over the period analyzed. It should be noted that the sample may not include all businesses in the respective country but focuses on those with consistent outstanding sales performance.

2. The asterisk () in “food recyc” represents a wildcard character which allows matching keyword variations such as “food recycling” or “food recyclable”.

Supplementary material

The supplementary material for this article can be found online.