Food Lost on the Farm: Empirical Data and Good Ideas

July 3, 2018

July 3, 2018



Today’s Guest Blog is by Christine Grillo. It was originally posted on the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future Blog on May 25, 2018.

Let’s imagine we’re at a vegetable farm in rural Vermont. The weather has been so perfect this year for growing carrots, spinach and squash that our farmer can’t harvest everything she’s grown. She won’t want to risk the expense of harvesting and transporting the veggies that retailers won’t buy because they look a little funny; she won’t be able to sell them if the markets are saturated; and she may not be able to find affordable farm labor to help her pick the crops and get them to their destinations. Some of those veggies bursting with nutrients and fiber will go uneaten, becoming part of what we call “on-farm food loss.”


Now let’s visit the home of a family suffering from food insecurity. Perhaps an elderly couple isn’t getting quite enough to eat. Or maybe an older teen is skipping meals so his younger sister can have more. In Vermont there are about 80,000 people in these circumstances, and the state provides more than 19 million institutional meals every year. These meals are made from food grown outside of the state and purchased with Vermont dollars, flown or trucked in from thousands of miles away.


Getting those nutrient-dense veggies onto the plates of the food insecure—as well as onto the cafeteria trays at public schools, nursing homes, hospitals and detention facilities—seems like it would be a win-win. The surplus crops grown in Vermont could replace some of the food grown outside the state and shipped in. In Vermont, top crops include not only carrots, spinach and squash but also potatoes, blueberries, strawberries and raspberries. What if some of that food lost on the farm could be recovered and re-directed onto people’s plates? What if farmers could be compensated for that food, instead of turning it into (expensive) compost?


Vermont is not the only state with this conundrum. Re-thinking on-farm food loss in Vermont could provide valuable clues for other states with similar situations.


In the quest for the win-win, Salvation Farms in Morrisville has produced the first empirical data on farm-level food loss in New England. Using a survey to collect data, it quantifies on-farm losses and investigates reasons for the losses. One finding shows that in Vermont 16 percent of vegetables and 15 percent of berries were considered lost but salvageable in 2015.


Theresa Snow, executive director of Salvation Farms, conducted the study with input from 58 farmers representing all counties in Vermont. “Farmers are busy!” said Snow. “But they’re happy to provide perspective if it shows there could be an ultimate benefit to their business by providing input.”


In a research paper published this week in The Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems and Community Development, “Salvageable Food Losses from Vermont Farms,” lead author Roni Neff, PhD, and program director at the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future, suggests that this quantification can help identify strategies and motivate action. “There is a remarkable gap in data on waste and loss of food on farms in the US,” she said. “This study provides the first such data for Vermont and shares a relatively easy to use 4-question tool Salvation Farms created for estimating waste and loss from farms.”


Neff notes that this study’s findings may be especially applicable to other areas with many small- to midscale farms, although the tremendous variety of crops, environments, farm types and markets in Vermont may make generalization challenging.

In addition to gathering data, several stakeholders in Vermont—Salvation Farms, Vermont Farm to Plate, the Vermont Agency for Agriculture and others—are working toward creating a Vermont Surplus Crop Management Plan. The goal of the plan is to get the excess food to humans who will eat it.


According to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), on-farm food loss comprises about 16 percent of all the wasted food in the United States, although this estimate is based on minimal data. And according to the team’s paper, which used data from the Salvation Farms report, the biggest reasons for on-farm food loss are aesthetics (for example, the berries are blemished and retailers think people won’t buy them), demand fluctuations and market saturation (more berries than people can eat!), and labor availability and costs (can’t find farmworkers or can’t afford them). The paper acknowledges that there will always be some on-farm food loss. But it can be reduced, which, as the paper suggests, is the first priority.


Both Snow and Neff note that compensation for farmers is essential to reducing on-farm losses. If food is to be donated to food banks or similar programs, the farmer may be expected to harvest, package and transport it, which is expensive. Federal tax deductions for donated food are a small incentive for donating surplus crops, especially if the expenses associated with donating are not matched by tax savings. Snow believes farmers would be more incentivized by payments from the state or an opening up of new markets. Gleaning and food rescue programs, in which volunteers come onto the farm and do their own harvesting and transporting, offer farmers a way to have their excess crops eaten without incurring a lot of extra expense; unfortunately, the amounts gathered are often small in comparison to the loss. Experienced farmworkers can be even more effective at preventing on-farm food loss.


In farming, there will always be some degree of loss and waste (or some degree of deficit). But, as Neff suggests, if more entities across the US do as Salvation Farms has done—gathering empirical data—more food-system and supply-chain interventions become possible.

Christine Grillo is a Contributing Writer at Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future (CLF). She joined CLF in 2011 and writes about food system thinking—the intersection of food systems and public health. The work of the Center for a Livable Future is driven by the concept that public health, diet, food production and the environment are deeply interrelated and that understanding these relationships is crucial in pursuing a livable future. The article is reposted under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license.

NERC welcomes Guest Blog submissions. To inquire about submitting articles contact Athena Lee Bradley, Projects Manager at athena(at)nerc.org. Disclaimer: Guest blogs represent the opinion of the writers and may not reflect the policy or position of the Northeast Recycling Council, Inc.


For more information on Salvation Farms, see NERC’s Blog Fresh Produce Recovery Models and the Building Resiliency in Food Recovery webinar presentation by Theresa Snow and webinar recording.

Share Post

By Antoinette Smith April 1, 2025
In recent years, the recycling industry has seen negative media coverage that has not only perpetuated myths but also contributed to public mistrust of collection and recycling – and ultimately could be contributing to lower collection rates. To help counteract the misinformation, the Maryland Recycling Network presented a March 27 webinar featuring Gretchen Carey, president at MassRecycle, and Chaz Miller of Miller Recycling Associates. Misinformation about recycling was merely “background noise” to Carey until October 2022, when Greenpeace published a scathing report about the failings of plastic recycling. Soon NPR and The Boston Globe picked up the story and compounded the issue with statements like “not even plastic water bottles are recyclable,” Carey said, calling this “a patent lie.” Carey and her colleagues were “crushed,” but after overcoming her initial anger, she reached out to NPR and the Globe to rebut the story. She also tried to get other local publications to publish her written response to the negative coverage but was rebuffed. Seeing that these efforts weren’t going far, MassRecycle invited members of the media and the general public on MRF tours at several sites in Massachusetts and Connecticut. Providing real-time evidence of recycling infrastructure helped industry outsiders step out of the echo chamber and hear a contrasting perspective, Carey said in the webinar. “You can talk the game, but them seeing for themselves is the important part,” she explained. During the tours, the public attendees learned that throwing away recyclables deprives the community of valuable commodities, she said, and that state guidelines restrict what can be put in the landfill. Carey added that the tours brought home the message by explaining that recycled materials need a consistent end market to justify collection and processing. For example, Ardagh closed its glass bottling facility in Massachusetts in 2018. The closure eliminated a key end market for recycled glass and caused collector Strategic Materials to stop taking local recovered glass. Local MRFs subsequently lost that revenue stream. When residents don’t trust recycling infrastructure, they put fewer items in their curbside bins, and ultimately paper, metals and glass wind up as collateral damage, Miller said. So it’s vital to make sure the public knows where their recyclables and that end markets exist to use these materials. Read the full article.
By Sophie Leone March 26, 2025
The City of Laurel, Maryland, established in 1870, has a deep and rich history within the state. Its long-standing independence and stability have fostered a strong sense of community, providing residents with valuable resources and support. Laurel is deeply committed to sustainability, embedding green initiatives into its core values, creating a Sustainability Division and completing the City’s first Sustainability Plan as one of many ways to support a sustainable Laurel community. The city’s mission is guided by four foundational pillars: People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace and Partnership. Laurel defines sustainability as “meeting the environmental, social, and economic needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.” Residents can engage with their community in numerous ways, including joining local clubs, participating in municipal committees, and taking part in community surveys. The city also hosts in-person events such as parades, farmers markets, and sustainability initiatives, further strengthening community bonds. To make waste management, recycling and organics recycling more accessible, Laurel provides detailed information on its dedicated Green Living Resource page found on the City’s website and partners with Recycle Coach, an app that helps residents easily access tailored information on residential collections, recycling and organics recycling. The Recycle Coach app also notifies residents of changes to their service days and special sustainability events. The City of Laurel continues to lead by example in sustainability and community engagement. As environmentalist Wendell Berry once said, “The Earth is what we all have in common.” Laurel’s dedication to green living ensures that future generations will inherit a thriving, sustainable community. NERC is thrilled to welcome the City of Laurel to our growing list of municipality members. We look forward to working with them to help advance our collective missions in safeguarding the planet. For more information on the City of Laurel visit.
February 28, 2025
A Time to Learn, Reflect, and Celebrate
More Posts