Next Article in Journal
Sustainable Solutions for Metro Project Delays: Lean Practices for Enhanced Resource Efficiency and Cleaner Production
Previous Article in Journal
Evaluating the Impact of E-Governance on Public Service Improvement in Albania: A Quantitative Analysis
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 16
Issue 24
10.3390/su162410890
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Characterization and Analysis of Public Policies to Prevent and Manage Food Waste in Mexico

by
Verónica Mundo-Rosas
1,
Leydi Diana Morales-Díaz
2,*,
Rodolfo Rogelio Posadas-Domínguez
2,
Rosa María González-Victoria
3,
Miguel Galarde-López
4,* and
Armando García-Guerra
5
1
Center for Evaluation and Survey Research, National Institute of Public Health, Cuernavaca 62100, Mexico
2
Autonomous University of Hidalgo State, Zimapán 42330, Mexico
3
Institute of Social Sciences and Humanities, Autonomous University of Hidalgo State, Pachuca 42084, Mexico
4
National Center for Disciplinary Research in Animal Health and Safety, National Institute of Forestry, Agricultural and Livestock Research, Mexico City 05110, Mexico
5
Center for Nutrition and Health Research, National Institute of Public Health, Cuernavaca 62100, Mexico
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2024, 16(24), 10890; https://doi.org/10.3390/su162410890 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 23 October 2024 / Revised: 30 November 2024 / Accepted: 8 December 2024 / Published: 12 December 2024
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Every year, 20.4 million tons of food are wasted in Mexico, which is about 34% of the national production. To date, there is no official national strategy, nor is there a guide to prioritize the actions to be implemented. At the same time, the global trend to reduce food waste is based on solutions that follow the priorities established for waste management in general, focusing first on prevention and then on reuse and recycling. The aim of this work is to identify, characterize, and analyze Mexican public policies for the prevention and management of food waste, compare them with international guidelines, and provide recommendations. Our results show that the public policies and the analyzed initiatives are concentrated at the levels of recycle (40.0%), prevention (34.1%), and reuse (29.4%). The type of actions currently implemented in Mexico are weak because they do not generate structural changes in the food system to avoid food waste. In Mexico, as in the rest of the world, food production, transportation, and consumption require efficient and sustainable practices in the face of the devasting effects of climate change. Policies to counteract food waste are not enough to achieve structural changes in the food system, so it is necessary to strengthen prevention, which has the greatest potential to reduce environmental, economic and social impacts.

1. Introduction

Food waste refers to “all foods, and inedible parts of foods (e.g., skin, bones…) that are removed from the supply chain (e.g., production, harvest, transport, sale, consumption, etc.)” [1]. For the purposes of this study, we do not differentiate between the terms “food loss” and “food waste” because previous evidence suggests that the steps of the food supply chain cannot be universally applied to different food products [2].
Food waste is a global problem that has a negative impact on economic growth [3], and environmental impact [4]. Globally, one-fifth of the food produced for human consumption is wasted, generates up to 10 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, and costs USD 1 trillion [5]. Food waste also has a significant impact on human nutrition and food security. The latter is due to: (1) a reduction in global and local food availability; (2) financial losses for people involved in food harvesting and post-harvest processes; (3) reduced purchasing power for the most vulnerable populations; and (4) unsustainable use of natural resources for future food production [6].
Today’s dominant food production patterns put pressure on land, soil, and water through an intensive use of chemicals, an increase in cropland area, greenhouse gas emissions [7], and require 70% of the world’s total freshwater withdrawals [8]. Despite the fact that the scarcity of these resources threatens livelihoods, in 2016 it was estimated that around 15% of global food waste occurred between the post-harvest and distribution stages, while in Latin America and the Caribbean, this loss was around 12% [9].
In Mexico each year 20.4 million tons of food are wasted representing about 34% of national production and an economic loss of MXN 400 billion [10]. Food waste represents an ethical conflict because 18.2% of Mexicans (23.4 million people) do not have enough income to eat properly [11]. The amount of food sent to landfills places Mexico among the 10 countries with the highest GGE caused by food waste [12].
World population growth and rising incomes are expected to increase demand for agricultural products from 35% to 50% between 2012 and 2050 [9]. In this scenario, a country’s future ability to provide the food demanded by its population will depend on improvements in technology, equitable food distribution [13], strong public policies for efficient food consumption, and reduced environmental impacts [14,15].
Reducing food waste is a recommended strategy to increase the efficiency of the food system, improve food security, and contribute to environmental sustainability [9]. The global trend to reduce food waste is based on solutions that follow the priorities established for waste management in general, focusing first on prevention and then on reuse and recycling [16]. Food waste hierarchies follow these priorities and propose actions aimed at sustainable management of food waste in environmental, economic, and social terms [17]. In many developed countries, waste hierarchies are used to guide decision-making by communities, industries, and governments [18].
Mexican laws do not refer to the food waste hierarchy in order to prioritize their public policies or initiatives, but they have established the obligation to create a national strategy (or work agenda) that defines the list of actions to be implemented, their objectives, and evaluation (among other components) to reduce food loss and waste [19]. So far, there is no official national strategy that integrates the elements mentioned in the law, nor is there a guide to prioritize the actions to be implemented, but the interest of state governments, civil society, and private companies has grown through the application of a variety of public policies and initiatives in force.
Given the lack of guidelines on the type of actions that should be applied to reduce food waste and the absence of goals and indicators to evaluate them, the objective of this work is to identify, characterize, and analyze Mexican public policies to prevent and manage food waste and compare them with international guidelines. The results obtained will be a diagnosis of the choices made in Mexico and will help to provide recommendations for the prevention and sustainable management of food waste.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Search Strategy

A search was conducted for public policy instruments including laws, agreements, regulations, plans, programs, and strategies, as well as initiatives developed by civil society organizations, schools, or private companies such as hotels, restaurants, and supermarkets in Mexico.
Initially, the search targeted the websites of official institutions such as the Ministry of Social Inclusion and Development, the Ministry of the Environment, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, the Ministry of Economic Development, the Ministry of Tourism, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Fisheries, Aquaculture and Agricultural Development, at the national and state level, as they are the governmental institutions responsible for issuing recommendations on food production, feeding, nutrition, sustainable consumption habits or waste management. The current work plans of the governors of each state in Mexico were also reviewed. In addition, the PubMed and SciElo platforms were used to identify other public policies or initiatives by civil society and private companies to manage food waste. The search terms were (“food waste” OR “food loss”) AND (“strategies” OR “government plans” OR “public policies” OR “interventions” OR “initiatives”) AND (“government” OR “private companies” OR “civil society organizations” OR “schools”).
The strategy was then expanded by adding the following words: (“production” OR “distribution” OR “transport” OR “storage” OR “preservation” OR “sale” OR “consumption”), to identify initiatives developed in the most relevant links of the food supply chains. To include policies or strategies about food waste management (at the stage where food waste products are no longer fit for human consumption) we also used the search words “food waste management options” AND/OR (“landfill” AND/OR “composting” AND/OR “anaerobic digestion” AND/OR “incineration” AND/OR “disposal”). A snowball technique was used to identify mentions of other policies or strategies for further analysis. We analyzed all documents that referred to public policies or initiatives that could be considered “specific” in that the main objective was to prevent or manage food waste, as well as those that were designed to address other public problems but contained some intervention on our topic of interest. All documents in force in 2024 were analyzed. The criteria for excluding documents from the analysis were: not describing measures to prevent or reduce food waste or not being in force.

2.2. Data Extraction

The documents analyzed were published in Spanish and were read in their entirety by two of the authors of the study. Each reviewer separately identified and recorded in a data extraction matrix, the text fragments containing the elements to be classified, characterized, and analyzed. The results of each reviewer were then compared, and in the case of divergent results, the reasons were discussed, and a consensus was reached. Policies and initiatives could be classified in more than one category because the documents analyzed could cite more than one action.

2.3. Characterization and Classification

The themes that guided the analysis of the documents were:
(1) Characterization: the name of the document and the year of its creation were identified. They were then classified according to their type: regulatory (laws, regulations), programmatic (actions, plans, and programs), initiatives of civil society organizations, and private companies.
(2) Actions to prevent or manage food waste were identified in the texts extracted from the documents. The food waste hierarchy proposed by Papargyropoulou et al. [20] was used as a reference framework to analyze the consistency of these actions with international recommendations. This hierarchy illustrates, by means of an inverted pyramid, the most appropriate options for preventing and managing food waste. Its objective is to propose options that could provide better results, taking into account the shelf life of food and the three dimensions of sustainability: environmental, economic, and social [20]. Thus, the first level of the hierarchy corresponded to policies and interventions that prevent food waste at any stage of the food supply (production, processing or transformation, transport, distribution, and/or consumption of food). It has been documented that these interventions are more likely to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GGE) than the other levels of the hierarchy, as more than 80% of GGE are generated in these settings [21,22].
The second level is “reuse”. These actions consist of recovering surplus food from the supply chain for human consumption, generating social benefits by providing food to food insecure populations and reducing greenhouse gas emissions by about 40 times more as compared to recycling alternatives. After the “reuse” level, there are options for managing (reducing or treating) food waste that cannot be used for human or animal consumption. Among these options, “recycle” (the third level) is recommended, i.e., turning it into compost. If this is not possible, the next option is “recovery” (fourth level), where food waste can be converted into energy. Finally, the least advisable option is “disposal” of food waste in landfills, as this is where the most serious environmental impacts are recorded (fifth level) [20]. From an environmental and social perspective, preventing food waste is more beneficial than composting, anaerobic digestion, or landfilling [23] (Figure 1).
It was also analyzed whether the programmatic documents had defined objectives and evaluation indicators.
The frequencies and proportions of the policies were obtained according to the six-year presidential term in which they were created and based on the type of instrument and the level of the hierarchy in which they were classified.
(3) Finally, in Section 4, the scope of the main policies identified is analyzed according to what has been previously documented in the international literature.

3. Results

In total, 194 documents were identified. After reading the contents, 109 were excluded for one of the following reasons: they did not contain actions to prevent or reduce food waste (73 documents) or were not current (36 documents). Finally, 85 documents were analyzed: 77 public policy instruments and 8 initiatives and actions of private companies or civil society organizations related to food waste, at the national or state level. The list of policies and initiatives analyzed is attached (Supplementary Table S1).

3.1. Characterization of Public Policy and Initiatives

Figure 2 shows the proportion of public policies and initiatives distributed by presidential administrations in Mexico. It highlights that the interest in the issue of food has grown over time within government agendas. The largest proportion of the policies and initiatives analyzed are within the most recent government administration (43.5% in the 2019–2024 presidential term).
Most of the documents analyzed were regulatory (laws and regulations) (60.0%), 25.9% were programmatic (plans, programs, actions, and strategies), and 14.1% were initiatives and actions by civil society organizations and private companies (Table 1).

3.2. Classification of Options for Food Waste Prevention and Management

According to the hierarchy of options for the prevention and management of food waste, the analyzed public policies and initiatives were mainly concentrated in recycling (40.0%) and prevention levels (34.1%). It highlights that one-third of the Mexican public policies and interventions were found at the re-use tier (29.4%) (Figure 3a).
Analyzing each level of the hierarchy at the “prevention” and “re-use” levels, a greater variety of instruments were used: regulatory (laws and regulations), programmatic (actions, plans, and programs), and actions by civil society organizations and private companies. At the prevention level, there was a higher proportion of instruments (86.2%) translated into concrete actions by the federal government, and private companies such as hotels, restaurants, schools, and international organizations. At the re-use and recycle tiers, regulatory public policies predominate, and a small percentage are actions by the state governments, private companies, and civil society organizations (Figure 3b).
Table 2 describes the public policies and initiatives in Mexico at each level of the food waste hierarchy. At the “prevention” level, one of the most important actions being developed in Mexico is the initiative of international organizations such as the World Bank and the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) [24], public, academic, and research institutions to measure food waste in the supply chain [10,23,24]. These initiatives documented the amount of food that is lost and wasted at the national level and in two states in the center of the country, its causes, in addition to calculating the associated environmental, social, and economic impacts [25,26]. These efforts led to the establishment of public policy recommendations [19,27,28,29]. Similar proposals have been implemented in food sector companies such as processed food manufacturers, restaurants, hotels, and supermarkets in addition to reporting on the negative impacts of food waste and recommendations to avoid it [23,30,31,32,33,34,35].
Other notable actions include supporting sustainable production and promoting fair trade for small and medium producers, encouraging the consumption of regional products, and marketing surplus agri-food production both within and outside the country. These actions are targeted at rural areas with high levels of poverty [36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46]. Other important actions include the communication strategy to promote responsible food consumption and reduce food waste that has been proposed in Mexico City [47], and laws regulating hygienic practices for food processing, and storage in restaurants and the food industry [48]. Cold chains, used to preserve the shelf life of food during storage, transport, and distribution, are also very measures; however, the infrastructure for their operation (warehouses and refrigerated transport) is concentrated in 15 states of the country, including the most densely populated cities [49].
At the food “re-use” level, 19 states have laws that promote and regulate food donation activities to improve the food security of the population in poverty [50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68]. Actions complement these laws—often carried out by civil society organizations—that enter into voluntary agreements with food producers, food industry companies, supermarket chains, hotels, and restaurants to recover surplus food and then donate it to populations in situations of poverty or food insecurity. These donations are made through food banks and community kitchens located in thirty states of the country and Mexico City [69,70].
Continuing with the “recycle” level, the General Law for Waste Prevention and Comprehensive Management, which operates at the national level [71], 26 state laws [72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97], propose guidelines for the separation of waste into organic (mainly garden and food waste) and inorganic waste in order to improve its management and final disposal. In addition, ten states are implementing measures for the separation, collection, and transportation of organic waste and for the production, marketing, and use of compost [72,77,83,85,88,89,91,93,95,98].
With respect to the penultimate level, “recovery”, there are nine laws, and two state work plans that propose the use of organic waste, including food waste, to produce bioenergy or biogas only if they have technologies to extract, collect, and distribute biogas or bioenergy, as well as to treat leachate [76,77,84,86,91,92,94,96,99,100,101,102,103,104,105].
Finally, at the “disposal” level, the General Law for Waste Prevention and Comprehensive Management, in addition to four state laws, establishes criteria to justify sending organic waste to a landfill [71,84,90,91,96]. These criteria are the lack of technology or the unreasonable cost of waste management and treatment. This general law also provides the basis for the creation of an information system on the inventory of urban solid waste (USW) and the available infrastructure for its treatment. Other regulations restrict the disposal of organic waste in landfills and allow only 15% of the total production to be managed in this way [76,77,84,86,91,92,94,96,100]. At this level is also the 2019 National Census of Municipalities Governments, which reports the type and amount of solid waste (including food waste) that each state collects annually from households, businesses, and public roads [106].
Table 2. Public policies and initiatives undertaken by governments, civil society organizations, or private initiatives that correspond to each level of the food waste hierarchy.
Table 2. Public policies and initiatives undertaken by governments, civil society organizations, or private initiatives that correspond to each level of the food waste hierarchy.
LevelPublic Policies and InitiativesStakeholders
PreventionTraining tools and resources on why and how to quantify food waste in the food supply chain [23,24,30,31,32,33,34]Multinational food companies and international organizations promoting the sustainable use of natural resources
Agreements to quantify food waste, provide information about the economic impact of food waste and outline recommendations to avoid it [35]Private companies
Initiatives to estimate food waste at the food production and market stages [10,25,26,30,31,32,33,34]International, educational, and research institutions
Agreements to quantify food wastage and decrease the size of portions in restaurants [30,31,32,33,34]Restaurants
Market information and communication systems in rural areas to promote marketing [36,37,39,44]National government
Economic support for sustainable food production [43,45]National government
Promoting fair trade for small and medium-sized producers [36,37,39,44]National government
Promotion of regional food consumption and the marketing of agri-food surpluses within and outside the country [36,37,39,44,45]National government
Cooperation agreements and international treaties for the commercial exchange of Mexican agri-food products with other countries [38,45,46]National government
Developing infrastructure to efficiently produce, market, and transport foodstuffs [19]National government
Regulations for the use of cold chains in the storage and distribution of perishable goods [48]National government
Cold chains used in food handling, storage, transportation, and sale (national and regional) [48]Private companies and national government
Communication strategy to promote responsible food consumption and reduce food waste that has been proposed in Mexico City [46]Private companies and the national government
Re-useLaws to encourage food donation [50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68]National and state governments
Law to promote the creation of food banks [50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68]National and state governments non-profit organizations
Voluntary agreements between private companies and CSOs for food donation [30,31,32,33,34,69,70]Private companies and non-profit organizations
Recovery of surplus food in the food supply chain [69,70]Non-profit organizations
Donation of food to impoverished or food insecure people through food banks or soup kitchens [69,70]State governments, private companies, and non-profit organizations
RecycleLaws for the separation of food waste (organic and inorganic) in households and on public roads [72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97]National and state governments
Environmental laws for separating, storing, collecting, and transporting organic matter [72,75,77,79,85,91,92,95,96,98]State governments
Environmental laws for processing, marketing, and use of compost [72,77,83,85,88,89,91,93,95,98]State governments
Actions for separating, storing, collecting, and transporting organic waste [101,102,104,105,106]State governments
RecoveryLaws for the use of organic waste (including food) to produce bioenergy [76,77,84,86,91,92,94,96,99,100,101,102]State governments
Installation of biogas extraction systems from organic waste and leachate treatment [99,100,101,102,103,104,105]State governments
DisposalCriteria for sending waste to landfill: lack of technology or irrational cost for waste management and treatment [71,84,90,91,96]State governments
Inventory of urban solid waste including food waste and infrastructure for its management in municipalities [106]State governments

4. Discussion

This study is the first approximation of the trajectory of national public policies to influence food waste. The results show that over the last decade, there has been an increased interest by national governments to prevent and manage food waste. In addition, there is evidence of a certain coherence in the implementation of public policies related to food waste in the country, as national and local governments, private companies, and civil society organizations all participate in different ways through a variety of instruments and contexts [19]. This is especially true since the establishment of the Sustainable Development Goals in 2015, and because Mexico, as a member of the United Nations, has accepted to achieve the goals related to poverty reduction, environmental protection, and improving the well-being of people [107,108,109,110].
More than half of the public policy instruments reviewed are laws or regulations that define the functions of Mexican public institutions (federal and/or state) and their responsibilities: to regulate, supervise, coordinate, develop, and/or evaluate public or private actions. This finding reflects the essential role that public institutions play in promoting positive changes in the prevention and management of food waste since these institutions have a wide range of instruments that determine where how, and when actions are developed. Mexico, like many Latin American countries, has made significant progress in legislation on the prevention and reduction in food loss and waste. Unfortunately, only a quarter of the policy instruments analyzed are presented in the form of work plans or concrete actions, reflection of the scarce investment in addressing the problem [111,112].
Meanwhile, 14% of the documents analyzed were initiatives by private companies—mainly multinational hotel chains, restaurants, and large supermarkets—developed in Mexico to prevent food waste [113,114]. Such initiatives could be part of the principles of corporate social responsibility (which is incipient in Mexico and Latin America [115]). There is evidence that companies that have invested in staff awareness and training, food waste reporting, and product innovation have realized returns of USD 14 for every USD 1 invested [116]. Despite this, a 2015 study conducted in Mexico on a sample of 278 companies in the food sector found that only a small percentage of these companies (23% of the large companies, 21% of the medium-sized companies, and 4% of the small and micro companies) had routine activities to prevent food waste. The reasons for not considering actions to prevent food waste generated by their companies were: they did not consider it part of their social responsibility, they considered these activities as philanthropic actions, or they did not recognize the economic losses or environmental damages they caused [10]. These types of responses may be the consequence of the lack of laws that prohibit and penalize food waste, or of consumers and citizens who are not very demanding of companies regarding social and environmental issues and of corporate social responsibility of the companies [115].
Using the hierarchy of options for preventing and managing food waste, it was highlighted that only one-third of public policies and initiatives by private companies or civil society initiatives were classified at the prevention level. This is contrary to expectations, as evidence shows that preventive measures are more effective because they aim at long-term changes [16].
The main preventive measures being developed in Mexico are proposals by academic and research institutions to measure food waste. These initiatives include the calculation of a food waste index based on nationally available information. Using this index, it was estimated that in 2017, 34% of the national production of the 79 main food products that form part of the basic food basket were wasted. This percentage represents about 20.4 million tons of these essential foods. Based on estimations of food wastage, recommendations have been issued for the development of public policies [10]. Initiatives by private companies analyzed also focused on proposals to estimate the waste produced by supermarket chains, hotels, and restaurants, in addition to its economic cost. Until the publication of this work, no documents have been identified on the official pages of these initiatives that report on the amount of food wasted or the impact of their interventions. However, according to the National Census of Reduction and Loss Prevention in the Retail Market, supermarket chains in Latin America generate 17% of the total food waste produced worldwide. In Mexico alone, these supermarkets are estimated to produce about 3.4 million tons of food waste per year [117].
Some Mexican restaurant and hotel chains have created content to train their staff on the importance of reducing food waste in addition to reducing plate sizes. In particular, the reduction in plate size has shown a reduction of up to 57% in food waste [114]. In contrast, a study conducted in a major tourist area in Mexico highlighted barriers to implementing prevention strategies in hotels and restaurants, such as a lack of interest on the part of employees in the establishments to undergo training. The main reason for the lack of interest was that food waste prevention and management is not part of the criteria evaluated in the quality and sustainability certifications of these companies. As regards guests, the study highlights the lack of awareness about the magnitude and negative impact of food waste [118].
The regulation and implementation of cold chains are also relevant to the prevention of food waste, as they make it possible to store, transport, and distribute large quantities of food, preventing it from spoiling or causing illness [119]. In Mexico, between 45% and 50% of perishable products are maintained in cold chains, but these technologies are concentrated in the most populated cities, major ports, and highways, as well as in border cities or those that serve the major supermarket chains [120,121]. As a result, a significant proportion of the vegetables, fruits, and meat produced in the country is lost because the infrastructure to keep them cold is inadequate or non-existent [26,122].
This analysis also aims to highlight the importance of Mexican policies that strengthen the capacity of small producers living in rural areas or in poverty, as they account for 54% of national food production [123]. These actions have focused on marginalized and poorer areas in Mexico and aim to improve food storage, transportation, and distribution techniques, as well as to promote climate-resilient crops and avoid waste [38]. Their reported impacts are documented based on coverage (such as the number of interventions and beneficiaries) but do not include indicators related to improvements in crop storage, transportation, and marketing systems that could influence a reduction in food waste [38]. The literature suggests that interventions implemented at the primary production level that provide financing, equipment, training, and improvements in water supply to farmers help reduce food waste and increase the resilience of production systems by improving the wages and dietary quality of small-scale producers [124]. These interventions can also be strengthened by providing crop insurance and adequate food storage systems [125].
Another important finding was that 29.4% of the policies and initiatives analyzed were classified at the re-use level. These policies are translated into actions by food banks and a significant number of laws and state government policies that regulate the recovery and donation of food to the food-insecure population. The main food bank network of (BAMX) has 57 banks distributed in 30 states, mainly concentrated in the capitals, which focus on food recovery in agricultural fields, customs, packing plants, markets, supermarkets, restaurants, and hotels [70,126]. Public policies that were classified at this level have had the greatest political support in Mexico and the greatest participation of various actors (government, society, companies) to reduce food waste. However, the amount of food they rescue and donate represents only 1% of the total amount of food wasted annually in Mexico [70]. Regarding the scope of food donations, it has been documented that they can help prevent or reduce waste [127], but it is often focused on small niches of interest, and the infrastructure, material, and human resources devoted to this activity are inadequate or insufficient due to high operating costs [128,129]. As these measures do not currently require significant changes to the existing system, they are easier to implement and have therefore been proposed more frequently than measures to prevent food waste. Scientific evidence has shown that food donation by large food retailers is actually a strategy to reduce the cost of storing, handling, and transporting surplus foods to landfills, as well as to mask their role in waste production [130,131]. Implementing multi-stakeholder initiatives is challenging, as the private and public sectors have different agendas and objectives and tensions can arise. However, it is possible to create alliances if there is communication and agreements are reached.
As is the case in other Latin American countries [112], Mexican public policies have focused mainly on recycling (40.0%). As mentioned above, at this level of hierarchy, the food waste generated is no longer fit for human or animal consumption. This type of alternative has the potential to reduce environmental impact, in addition to social and economic benefits [132], yet in Latin America there is a lack of investment in these technologies due to the technical complexity of their operation, scarce research, high investment costs and lack of political motivation [133]. Two thirds of Mexico’s states emphasize in their legal documents the separation of organic waste (including food waste) from other types of waste on streets and households for processing, marketing, and use as compost, and promote the production of compost from organic waste; however, in practice, only a small proportion of this waste is converted into compost (10.6%) or bioenergy (2.4%) [103].
Finally, at the level of final disposal of organic waste, there are very few measures in place in Mexico. Existing laws, regulations, and policies restrict the disposal of organic waste in landfills and emphasize the importance of processing it into compost or bioenergy. In reality, about 90% of the organic waste generated in Mexico by households, public streets, and businesses is sent to landfills without treatment [103]. Unfortunately, this practice is common worldwide despite its serious consequences for human health and the environment [134].
Based on the above arguments, the findings of this work can be summarized as follows: (1) policies and interventions to address food waste focus on recycling, then on prevention, and then on re-use. (2) There is significant progress in legislation on food waste prevention and management; (3) Actions to address the problem are concentrated in small niches or population groups. This may be the result of a lack of funding and infrastructure to implement them; (4) A methodology has not been formalized to make estimates of food waste at key points in the food supply chain; (5) Impact evaluations of the public policies and interventions that are implemented are not promoted. (6) There is a lack of information on budget expenditure, coverage, characteristics of the beneficiary population, and performance indicators, which would help to understand the scope of each intervention and public policy analyzed.
Furthermore, according to previous analytical frameworks, the type of policies and actions currently implemented in Mexico are weak because they do not generate structural changes in the food system to prevent food waste [17].
It is recognized that this work had the limitation of not having available information describing the impact of the policies implemented in Mexico, in addition to the fact that at the international level, there is no clarity on how to evaluate their effectiveness [135].
Based on the results shown, we propose the following recommendations:
  • Formulate the elements to be included in the national food waste strategy to align public policies and interventions to a common objective.
  • Allocate resources to carry out wide-ranging actions to prevent and manage food waste, prioritizing those corresponding to the first levels of the hierarchy.
  • Minimize waste going to landfills and promote proper final treatment.
  • Focus interventions on the places where the greatest food wastage is detected.
  • Legislate the measurement of food waste in the supply chain.
  • Establish an official methodology for measurement, progress reporting, and data transparency.
  • Establish indicators and mechanisms for evaluating interventions.
  • Strengthen partnerships between governments, international organizations, civil society, and private companies to agree on clear targets for reducing food waste in the short and medium term.
Future lines of research in Latin America should focus on providing evidence of the impact of interventions to reduce food waste as well as strategies to solve the main problems in implementing them.

5. Conclusions

In Mexico, as in the rest of the world, food production, transportation, and consumption require efficient and sustainable practices in the face of the devasting effects of climate change. Policies to counteract food waste are not enough to achieve structural changes in the food system, so it is necessary to strengthen prevention, which has the greatest potential to reduce environmental, economic, and social impacts. Governments, businesses, academic institutions, and society in general, in the Latin American and Caribbean region, have an important role to play in making progress on target 12.3 of the Sustainable Development Goals: “By 2030, halve per capita global food waste”.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/su162410890/s1, Table S1: Mexican public policies analyzed addressing food waste.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, V.M.-R.; methodology, V.M.-R., M.G.-L. and L.D.M.-D.; formal analysis, V.M.-R., M.G.-L. and A.G.-G.; investigation, V.M.-R.; M.G.-L., L.D.M.-D., R.R.P.-D. and R.M.G.-V.; resources, V.M.-R.; supervision, L.D.M.-D., R.R.P.-D., R.M.G.-V. and A.G.-G. Original draft preparation: V.M.-R.; All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data analyzed in the study are openly available in: https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/YCLX4I (accessed on 22 October 2024).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Östergren, K.; Gustavsson, J.; Bos-Brouwers, H.; Timmermans, T.; Hansen, J.; Møller, H.; Anderson, G.; O’Connor, C.; Soethoudt, H.; Quested, T.; et al. FUSIONS Definitional Framework for Food Waste; FUSIONS: Göteborg, Sweden, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  2. Garcia-Garcia, G.; Woolley, E.; Rahimifard, S. A Framework for a More Efficient Approach to Food Waste Management. ETP Int. J. Food Eng. 2015, 1, 65–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Jayadevan, C.M. Impacts of Food Wastage on Economic Growth. World Food Policy 2022, 8, 118–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Tubiello, F.N.; Salvatore, M.; Ferrara, A.F.; House, J.; Federici, S.; Rossi, S.; Biancalani, R.; Condor Golec, R.D.; Jacobs, H.; Flammini, A.; et al. The Contribution of Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use Activities to Global Warming, 1990–2012. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2015, 21, 2655–2660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. United Nations Environment Programme. Think Eat Save—Food Waste Index Report 2024; United Nations Environment Programme: Nairobi, Kenya, 2024. [Google Scholar]
  6. Irani, Z.; Sharif, A.M.; Lee, H.; Aktas, E.; Topaloğlu, Z.; van’t Wout, T.; Huda, S. Managing Food Security through Food Waste and Loss: Small Data to Big Data. Comput. Oper. Res. 2018, 98, 367–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la Agricultura (FAO). El Estado de Los Recursos de Tierras y Aguas Del Mundo Para la Alimentación y la Agricultura. La Gestión de Los Sistemas en Situación de Riesgo; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2011; ISBN 978-84-8476-553-0. [Google Scholar]
  8. FAO. El Estado Mundial de la Agricultura y la Alimentación 2020; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2020; ISBN 978-92-5-133644-1. [Google Scholar]
  9. FAO. The State of Food and Agriculture 2019. In Moving Forward on Food Loss and Waste Reduction; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2019; ISBN 978-92-5-131789-1. [Google Scholar]
  10. Aguilar-Gutierrez, G. Pérdidas y Desperdicios de Alimentos en México. Banco Mund. 2017, 70, 142. [Google Scholar]
  11. CONEVAL. Medición de la Pobreza. 2022. Available online: https://www.coneval.org.mx/Medicion/MP/Paginas/Pobreza_2022.aspx (accessed on 9 September 2024).
  12. FAO. Iniciativa Mundial Sobre la Reducción de la Pérdida y el Desperdicio de Alimentos; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2015; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  13. Sosa Baldivia, A.; Ruíz Ibarra, G. La Disponibilidad de Alimentos en México: Un Análisis de la Producción Agrícola de 35 Años y Su Proyección Para 2050. Pap. Poblac. 2017, 23, 207–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Kuiper, M.; Cui, H.D. Using Food Loss Reduction to Reach Food Security and Environmental Objectives—A Search for Promising Leverage Points. Food Policy 2021, 98, 101915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Lopez Barrera, E.; Hertel, T. Global Food Waste across the Income Spectrum: Implications for Food Prices, Production and Resource Use. Food Policy 2021, 98, 101874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Diaz-Ruiz, R.; Costa-Font, M.; López-i-Gelats, F.; Gil, J.M. Food Waste Prevention along the Food Supply Chain: A Multi-Actor Approach to Identify Effective Solutions. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 149, 249–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Mourad, M. Recycling, Recovering and Preventing “Food Waste”: Competing Solutions for Food Systems Sustainability in the United States and France. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 126, 461–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Redlingshöfer, B.; Barles, S.; Weisz, H. Are Waste Hierarchies Effective in Reducing Environmental Impacts from Food Waste? A Systematic Review for OECD Countries. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2020, 156, 104723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. SEGOB. Ley General del Consejo Nacional para el Aprovechamiento de Alimentos; SEGOB: Mexico City, Mexico, 2018; Available online: http://sil.gobernacion.gob.mx/Archivos/Documentos/2018/04/asun_3714672_20180430_1526657664.pdf (accessed on 13 October 2023).
  20. Papargyropoulou, E.; Lozano, R.; Steinberger, J.K.; Wright, N.; Ujang, Z. Bin The Food Waste Hierarchy as a Framework for the Management of Food Surplus and Food Waste. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 76, 106–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Bernstad Saraiva Schott, A.; Andersson, T. Food Waste Minimization from a Life-Cycle Perspective. J. Environ. Manag. 2015, 147, 219–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Matsuda, T.; Yano, J.; Hirai, Y.; Sakai, S.I. Life-Cycle Greenhouse Gas Inventory Analysis of Household Waste Management and Food Waste Reduction Activities in Kyoto, Japan. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2012, 17, 743–752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Comisión Para la Cooperación Ambiental. Por Qué y Cómo Cuantificar la Pérdida y el Desperdicio de Alimentos: Guía Práctica; Comisión Para la Cooperación Ambiental: Montreal, QC, Canada, 2019; ISBN 9782897002633. [Google Scholar]
  24. CEC. Quantifying Food Loss and Waste and Its Impacts; CEC: Montreal, QC, Canada, 2019; ISBN 9782897002664. [Google Scholar]
  25. SIPRA. Soluciones Integrales Para la Problemática Ambiental. Diagnóstico Sobre la Pérdida y Desperdicio de Alimentos en Jalisco; Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo Territorial: Guadalajara, Mexico, 2019; pp. 1–62. [Google Scholar]
  26. Terrones Cordero, A.; Vargas Sánchez, R.J.; Hernández Veleros, Z.S. Food Loss and Waste in the State of Hidalgo, Mexico, 2021. Rev. Int. Estad. Geogr. 2024, 15, 47. [Google Scholar]
  27. Arroyo-Currás, T. Rumbo a Estilos de Vida Sostenibles: Curso de Acción Para el Desarrollo de Un Consumo Responsable en México Al 2030; PNUMA: Mexico City, Mexico, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  28. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Estrategia Legislativa Para la Agenda 2030; Coordinación de la Investigación Científica: Mexico City, Mexico, 2020; Available online: https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/573730/Estrategia_Legislativa_para_la_Agenda_2030_VF_comp.pdf (accessed on 10 October 2024).
  29. Presidencia de la República Estrategia Nacional Para la Implementación de la Agenda 2030 en México|Agenda 2030|Gobierno |Gob.Mx. Available online: https://www.gob.mx/agenda2030/documentos/estrategia-nacional-de-la-implementacion-de-la-agenda-2030-para-el-desarrollo-sostenible-en-mexico (accessed on 22 October 2024).
  30. #SinDesperdicio #SinDesperdicio. Available online: https://sindesperdicio.org/ (accessed on 22 October 2024).
  31. Pactoporlacomida Pacto Por la Comida. Available online: https://pactoporlacomida.org/ (accessed on 22 October 2024).
  32. Agroanalytics. Iniciativa 10 × 20 × 30: Plan Masivo de Sostenibilidad Minorista. Available online: https://www.agroanalytics.com.mx/2020/10/09/iniciativa-10x20x30-plan-masivo-de-sostenibilidad-minorista/ (accessed on 24 April 2023).
  33. Unilever Food Solutions. Guía Informativa. Available online: https://www.unileverfoodsolutions.com.mx/tendencias/cero-desperdicios-old/guia-informativa.html (accessed on 22 October 2024).
  34. Lanzan Iniciativa Para Evitar el Desperdicio de Alimentos “Un Plato Pequeño Para Evitar el Desperdicio”|Mi Ambiente. Available online: https://www.miambiente.com.mx/comunitarias/lanzan-iniciativa-para-evitar-el-desperdicio-de-alimentos-un-plato-pequeno-para-evitar-el-desperdicio/ (accessed on 24 April 2023).
  35. CCA. Cuantificar la pérdida y el desperdicio de alimentos. Available online: http://www.cec.org/files/documents/publications/11847-quantifying-food-loss-and-waste-first-step-prevention-es.pdf (accessed on 22 October 2024).
  36. Diario Oficial de la Federación. Programa Especial Concurrente Para el Desarrollo Rural Sustentable. Available online: https://dof.gob.mx/nota_detalle.php?codigo=5609192&fecha=30/12/2020 (accessed on 22 October 2024).
  37. Secretaría de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural. Programa Institucional 2020–2024; Del Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuaria—INIFAP: Mexico City, Mexico, 2020; Available online: https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/616122/Programa_Institucional_2020-2024_del_Instituto_Nacional_de_Investigaciones_Forestales__Agricolas_y_Pecuarias__.pdf (accessed on 18 September 2024).
  38. Diario Oficial de la Federación. Plan Nacional de Desarrollo 2019–2024. 2019. Available online: https://www.gob.mx/cenace/acciones-y-programas/plan-nacional-de-desarrollo-2019-2024-195029 (accessed on 22 October 2024).
  39. SADER Y SEGALMEX. Programa Institucional 2020–2024 de Seguridad Alimentaria Mexicana SEGALMEX; Seguridad Alimentaria Mexicana: Zacatecas, Mexico, 2020; Volume 2020, pp. 1–65. Available online: https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/622670/Programa_Institucional_2020-2024_de_Seguridad_Alimentaria_Mexicana_SEGALMEX_2.pdf (accessed on 18 September 2024).
  40. Gobierno del Estado de Guerrero. Plan Estatal de Desarrollo Del Estado de Guerrero: 2022–2027; Gobierno del Estado de Guerrero: Chilpancingo, Mexico, 2016; Available online: https://www.guerrero.gob.mx/articulo/plan-estatal-de-desarrollo-2022-2027/ (accessed on 18 September 2024).
  41. Gobierno del Estado de San Luis Potosí. Plan Estatal de Desarrollo Del Estado de San Luis Potosí 2021–2027; Gobierno del Estado de San Luis Potosí: San Luis Potosí, Mexico, 2016; Available online: https://ped.slp.gob.mx/ (accessed on 18 April 2024).
  42. Gobierno del Estado de Tlaxcala. Plan Estatal de Desarrollo Del Estado de Tlaxcala: 2021–2027; Gobierno del Estado de Tlaxcala: Mexico City, Mexico, 2017; Available online: https://congresodetlaxcala.gob.mx/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/D.%2094.-%20PLAN%20ESTATAL%20DE%20DESARROLLO%202021-2027_.pdf (accessed on 18 April 2024).
  43. Congreso de la Unión. Ley de Desarrollo Rural Sustentable. Mexico City, Mexico. 2021. Available online: https://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LDRS.pdf (accessed on 22 October 2024).
  44. INCA. Programa Institucional 2020–2024 Del Instituto Nacional Para el Desarrollo de Capacidades Del Sector Rural A.C.; INCA: Mexico City, Mexico, 2020; Available online: http://inca.gob.mx/sitio-web/transparencia/docs/Programa%20Institucional%202020_2024%20INCA%20RURAL%20AC%20VF_1409.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  45. Secretaría de Gobernación. Ley General Para la Alimentación Adecuada y Sostenible 2024; Secretaría de Gobernación: Mexico City, Mexico, 2024; Available online: https://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LGAAS.pdf (accessed on 20 May 2024).
  46. Secretaria de Agricultura. Programa Sectorial de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural 2020-2024; SADER: Mexico City, Mexico, 2019; Available online: https://dof.gob.mx/nota_detalle.php?codigo=5595549&fecha=25/06/2020#gsc.tab=0 (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  47. SEMARNAT. Programa de Gestión de Residuos Para la Ciudad de México (PGIR 2021–2025); SEMARNAT: Mexico City, Mexico, 2021; Available online: https://www.pgir.cdmx.gob.mx/#/ (accessed on 13 May 2024).
  48. Secretaria de Salud. NORMA Oficial Mexicana NOM-251-SSA1-2009, Prácticas de Higiene Para el Proceso de Alimentos, Bebidas o Suplementos Alimenticios. 2013, p. 29. Available online: https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/168389/FOLLETO_ALIMENTOS_NOM-251.compressed.pdf (accessed on 22 October 2024).
  49. EY. Panorama de la Cadena de Frío en México: Retos y Oportunidades. Available online: https://www.ey.com/es_mx/insights/consumer-products/cadena-de-frio-en-mexico (accessed on 24 April 2023).
  50. Gaceta Oficial de la Ciudad de México. Ley Para la Donación Altruista de Alimentos de la Ciudad de México. 2017. Available online: https://www.congresocdmx.gob.mx/media/documentos/0596001207d6b3d7225d28d4aacc4c13b5654117.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  51. Gobierno del Estado de Chiapas. Ley Para el Aprovechamiento Integral de Alimentos y Su Donación Altruista Del Estado de Chiapas; Gobierno del Estado de Chiapas: Tuxtla Gutiérrez, Mexico, 2018; Available online: https://www.poderjudicialchiapas.gob.mx/archivos/manager/f7d8ley-para-el-aprovechamiento-integral-de-alimentos-y-su-donacion-altruista-del-estado-de-chiapas-2.pdf (accessed on 10 November 2023).
  52. Congreso del Estado de Baja California. Ley Para Fomentar la Donación Altruista en Materia Alimentaria en el Estado de Baja California; Congreso del Estado de Baja California: Mexico City, Mexico, 1998; pp. 1–9. Available online: https://www.congresobc.gob.mx/Documentos/ProcesoParlamentario/Leyes/TOMO_VI/LEYALTRU.PDF (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  53. Congreso del Estado de Coahuila de Zaragoza. Ley Para el Aprovechamiento Integral de Alimentos y Su Donación Altruista Del Estado de Coahuila de Zaragoza; Congreso del Estado de Coahuila de Zaragoza: Saltillo, Mexico, 2018; Available online: https://www.congresocoahuila.gob.mx/transparencia/03/Leyes_Coahuila/coa68.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  54. Congreso del Estado de Oaxaca. Ley Para la Donación y el Aprovechamiento Integral de Alimentos Del Estado de Oaxaca; Congreso del Estado de Oaxaca: Oaxaca, Mexico, 2018; pp. 1–10. Available online: https://docs.congresooaxaca.gob.mx/legislacion_estatals/documentos/000/000/275/original/Ley_para_la_Donaci%C3%B3n_y_el_Aprovechamiento_Integral_de_Alimentos_del_Estado_de_Oaxaca_%28txt_orig_dto_1442_aprob_LXIII_Legis_10_abr_2018_PO_23_2da_Secc_16_jun_2018%29.pdf?1533588376 (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  55. Congreso del Estado de Chihuahua. Ley Para la Donación Altruista de Alimentos en el Estado de Chihuahua; Congreso del Estado de Chihuahua: Chihuahua, Mexico, 2008; Available online: http://www.ordenjuridico.gob.mx/Documentos/Estatal/Chihuahua/wo40451.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  56. Congreso del Estado de Quintana Roo. Ley Para Fomentar a Donación Altruista de Alimentos en el Estado de Quintana Roo; Congreso del Estado de Quintana Roo: Chetumal, Mexico, 2013; pp. 1–4. Available online: https://documentos.congresoqroo.gob.mx/leyes/L1320130430267.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  57. Congreso del Estado Libre y Soberano de Sinaloa. Ley Para el Aprovechamiento Integral de Alimentos y Su Donación Altruista Del Estado de Sinaloa; Congreso del Estado Libre y Soberano de Sinaloa: Culiacán, Mexico, 2018; Available online: https://normas.cndh.org.mx/Documentos/Sinaloa/Ley_AIADAE_Sin.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  58. Congreso del Estado de Michoacán de Ocampox. Ley de Recuperación y Aprovechamiento de Alimentos Del Estado de Michoacán; Congreso del Estado de Michoacán de Ocampox: Morelia, Mexico, 2019; pp. 1–17. Available online: http://congresomich.gob.mx/file/Ley-de-Recuperaci%C3%B3n-y-aprovechamiento-de-alimentos-28-06-2019.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  59. Congreso del Estado de Jalisco. Código de Asistencia Social Del Estado de Jalisco; Congreso del Estado de Jalisco: Guadalajara, Mexico, 1998; pp. 1–17. Available online: https://transparencia.info.jalisco.gob.mx/sites/default/files/Codigo%20de%20Asistencia%20Social%20del%20Estado%20de%20Jalisco_0.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  60. Congreso del Estado de Tamaulipas. Ley Para Fomentar la Donacion Altruista de Articulos de Primera Necesidad Del Estado de Tamaulipas; Congreso del Estado de Tamaulipas: Victoria City, Mexico, 2004; Available online: https://po.tamaulipas.gob.mx/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Ley_Donaci%C3%B3n_Altruista.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  61. Constitución Política del Estado Libre y Soberano de Durango. Ley Para Regular y Promover la Donación Altruista de Alimentos Para el Estado de Durango; México. 2013. Available online: https://congresodurango.gob.mx/Archivos/legislacion/LEY%20PARA%20REGULAR%20Y%20PROMOVER%20LA%20DONACION%20ALTRUISTA.pdf (accessed on 22 October 2024).
  62. Congreso del Estado Libre y Soberano de Aguascalientes. Ley Para Evitar el Desperdicio de Alimentos en el Estado de Aguascalientes; Congreso del Estado Libre y Soberano de Aguascalientes: Aguascalientes, Mexico, 2017; pp. 1–10. Available online: https://eservicios2.aguascalientes.gob.mx/NormatecaAdministrador/archivos/EDO-18-125.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  63. Gobierno del Estado de México. Ley Para la Recuperación y Aprovechamiento de Alimentos Del Estado de México. Available online: https://legislacion.edomex.gob.mx/node/32341 (accessed on 22 October 2024).
  64. Congreso del Estado de Colima. Ley Para Evitar el Desperdicio de Alimentos en el Estado de Colima; Congreso del Estado de Colima: Colima, Mexico, 2019; pp. 1–10. Available online: https://congresocol.gob.mx/web/Sistema/uploads/Iniciativas/LeyEvitarDesperdiciosAlimentos.pdf (accessed on 22 October 2024).
  65. Congreso del Estado de Nuevo León. Ley Del Derecho a la Alimentación Adecuada y Combate Contra el Desperdicio de Alimentos Para el Estado de Nuevo León; México. 2017. Available online: https://www.hcnl.gob.mx/trabajo_legislativo/leyes/leyes/ley_del_derecho_a_la_alimentacion_adecuada_y_combate_contra_el_desperdicio_de_alimentos_para_el_esta/ (accessed on 22 October 2024).
  66. Diario Oficial del Estado de Yucatán. Ley Para Fomentar y Promover el No Desperdiciar Alimentos en el Estado de Yucatán. 2023, pp. 1–14. Available online: https://normas.cndh.org.mx/Documentos/Yucat%C3%A1n/Ley_FPNDAE_Yuc.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  67. Períodico Oficial del Estado de Zacatecas. Ley Para Prevenir el Desperdicio de Alimentos y Fomentar Su Aprovechamiento en el Estado de Zacatecas. 2019, pp. 1–16. Available online: https://www.congresozac.gob.mx/65/ley&cual=325 (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  68. Congreso del Estado de Sonora. Ley Para el Aprovechamiento Integral de Alimentos y Su Donación Altruista Del Estado de Sonora; México. 2018, pp. 1–9. Available online: https://normas.cndh.org.mx/Documentos/Sonora/Ley_AIADAE_Son.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  69. Steta & Malo Al Rescate! Available online: https://stetamalo.com/proyecto/al-rescate/ (accessed on 11 September 2024).
  70. Banco de Alimentos Red de Bancos de Alimentos de México. Available online: https://bamx.org.mx/ (accessed on 24 April 2023).
  71. Cámara de Diputados. Congreso de la Unión. Ley General Para la Prevención y Gestión Integral de Los Residuos [LGPGIR]. D. Of. la Fed. 2023, pp. 1–59. Available online: https://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LGPGIR.pdf (accessed on 11 September 2024).
  72. Congreso del Estado de Guanajuato. Ley Para la Gestión Integral de Residuos Del Estado y Municipios de Guanajuato. 2005. Available online: https://www.congresogto.gob.mx/leyes/ley-para-la-gestion-integral-de-residuos-del-estado-y-los-municipios-de-guanajuato (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  73. Estado de Zacatecas. Ley de Residuos Sólidos Para el Estado de Zacatecas. Periódico Oficial del Gobierno del Estado de Zacatecas. 16 October 2010, pp. 1–63. Available online: https://sefin.zacatecas.gob.mx/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Ley-de-Residuos-Solidos-para-el-Estado-de-Zacatecas.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  74. Congreso del Estado de Baja California. Ley de Prevención y Gestión Integral de Residuos Para el Estado de Baja California; Congreso del Estado de Baja California: Mexicali, Mexico, 2007; Available online: https://www.congresobc.gob.mx/Documentos/ProcesoParlamentario/Leyes/TOMO_VII/22022019_LEYPRERESIDUOS.PDF (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  75. Congreso de Baja California Sur. Ley de Equilibrio Ecológico y Protección Del Ambiente Del Estado de Baja California Sur. Available online: https://www.cbcs.gob.mx/index.php/cmply/1508-ley-proteccion-ambiente-bcs (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  76. Congreso del Estado de Coahuila. Ley Para la Prevención y Gestión Integral de Residuos Para el Estado de Coahuila; Congreso del Estado de Coahuila: Saltillo, Mexico, 2005; Available online: https://www.congresocoahuila.gob.mx/transparencia/03/Leyes_Coahuila/coa136.pdf (accessed on 22 April 2024).
  77. Congreso del Estado de Colima. Ley de Residuos Sólidos Del Estado de Colima; Congreso del Estado de Colima: Colima, Mexico, 2006; Available online: https://congresocol.gob.mx/web/Sistema/uploads/LegislacionEstatal/LeyesEstatales/residuos_solidos_02jun2018.pdf (accessed on 22 April 2024).
  78. Gobierno del Estado de Yucatán. Ley Para la Gestión Integral de Los Residuos en el Estado de Yucatán. 2011. Available online: https://poderjudicialyucatan.gob.mx/digestum/marcoLegal/02/2012/DIGESTUM02102.pdf (accessed on 22 April 2024).
  79. Gobierno del Estado de Tabasco. Reglamento de la Ley Para la Prevención y Gestión Integral de Los Residuos Del Estado de Tabasco. 2014. Available online: https://tabasco.gob.mx/leyes/descargar/1/1010 (accessed on 22 April 2024).
  80. Gobierno del Estado de Zcatecas. Reglamento de la Ley de residuos sólidos para el estado de Zacatecas; Zacatecas, Mexico. 2014. Available online: http://cgj.zacatecas.gob.mx/MJE/REGLAMENTOS/Reglamento%20de%20la%20Ley%20de%20Residuos%20S%C3%B3lidos%20para%20el%20Estado%20de%20Zacatecas.pdf (accessed on 22 April 2024).
  81. Congreso del Estado de Sinaloa. Ley de Residuos Del Estado de Sinaloa; Congreso del Estado de Sinaloa: Culiacán, Mexico, 2018; Available online: https://legislacion.scjn.gob.mx/Buscador/Paginas/wfArticuladoFast.aspx?q=b/EcoMjefuFeB6DOaNOimOZAwIUyEB9JiuiO/vRdtrvswYL80PEbJHtgLEM+XsBXhYyg+VVvDJsxBVz9JvzHKA== (accessed on 22 April 2024).
  82. Congreso del Estado de Veracruz. Ley de Prevención y Gestión Integral de Residuos Sólidos Urbanos y de Manejo Especial Para el Estado de Veracruz; Congreso del Estado de Veracruz: Xalapa, Mexico, 2004; Available online: http://www.ordenjuridico.gob.mx/Documentos/Estatal/Veracruz/wo77544.pdf (accessed on 22 April 2024).
  83. Congreso del Estado de Michoacán. Ley Para la Prevención y Gestión Integral de Residuos en el Estado de Michoacán; Congreso del Estado de Michoacán: Morelia, Mexico, 2010; Available online: http://congresomich.gob.mx/file/LEY-PARA-LA-PREVENCI%25C3%2593N-Y-GESTI%25C3%2593N-INTEGRAL-DE-RESIDUOS-EN-EL-ESTADO-REF-29-DIC-2016.pdf (accessed on 22 April 2024).
  84. Gobierno del Estado de Hidalgo. Ley de Prevención y Gestión Integral de Residuos Del Estado de Hidalgo; Gobierno del Estado de Hidalgo: Pachuca, Mexico, 2011; Available online: https://www.congreso-hidalgo.gob.mx/biblioteca_legislativa/leyes_cintillo/Ley%20de%20Prevencion%20y%20Gestion%20Integral%20de%20Residuos%20del%20Estado.pdf (accessed on 22 April 2024).
  85. Congreso del Estado de Oaxaca. Ley Para la Prevención y Gestión Integral de Los Residuos Sólidos Del Estado de Oaxaca; Congreso del Estado de Oaxaca: Oaxaca, Mexico, 2020; Available online: https://www.congresooaxaca.gob.mx/docs65.congresooaxaca.gob.mx/legislacion_estatal/Ley_para_la_Prevencion_y_Gestion_Integral_de_los_Residuos_Solidos_(Ref_dto_1228_LXV_Legis_4_abr_2023_PO_16_28a_secc_22_abr_2023).pdf (accessed on 22 April 2024).
  86. Gobierno del Estado de Jalisco. Ley de Gestión Integral de Los Residuos Del Estado de Jalisco; Gobierno del Estado de Jalisco: Guadalajara, Mexico, 2007; Available online: https://info.jalisco.gob.mx/sites/default/files/leyes/ley_de_gestion_integral_de_los_residuos_del_estado_de_jalisco.pdf (accessed on 22 April 2024).
  87. Legislatura Constitucional del Estado de Quintana Roo. Ley Para la Prevención y Gestión Integral de Residuos Del Estado de Quinta Roo; Legislatura Constitucional del Estado de Quintana Roo: Chetumal, Mexico, 2012; Available online: https://documentos.congresoqroo.gob.mx/leyes/administrativo/ley082/L1420140330258.pdf (accessed on 22 April 2024).
  88. Gobierno del Estado de México. Reglamento Del Libro Cuarto Del Código Para la Biodiversidad Del Estado de México; Gobierno del Estado de México: Toluca, Mexico, 2007; Available online: https://legislacion.edomex.gob.mx/sites/legislacion.edomex.gob.mx/files/files/pdf/rgl/vig/rglvig103.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  89. Congreso del Estado de Aguascalientes. Ley de Protección Ambiental Para el Estado de Aguascalientes; Congreso del Estado de Aguascalientes: Aguascalientes, Mexico, 2000; Available online: https://eservicios2.aguascalientes.gob.mx/NormatecaAdministrador/archivos/EDO-18-50.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  90. Gobierno del Estado de Guerrero. Ley de Aprovechamiento y Gestión Integral de Los Residuos Del Estado de Guerrero; Gobierno del Estado de Guerrero: Chilpancingo, Mexico, 2008; Available online: https://congresogro.gob.mx/legislacion/ordinarias/ARCHI/LEY-DE-APROVECHAMIENTO-Y-GESTION-INTEGRAL-DE-LOS-RESIDUOS-DEL-ESTADO-DE-GUERRERO-593-2021-03-10.pdf (accessed on 14 April 2024).
  91. Congreso del Estado de Durango. Ley Para la Prevención y Gestión Integral de Residuos Del Estado de Durango; Congreso del Estado de Durango: Victoria de Durango, Mexico, 2021; Available online: https://congresodurango.gob.mx/Archivos/legislacion/LEY%20PARA%20LA%20PREVENCION%20Y%20GESTION%20DE%20RESIDUOS.pdf (accessed on 14 April 2024).
  92. Gaceta Oficial del Distrito Federal. Ley de Residuos Sólidos Del Distrito Federal; Distrito Federal. 2019, pp. 1–50. Available online: https://paot.org.mx/centro/leyes/df/pdf/2019/LEY%20_RESIDUOS%20_SOLIDOS_25_06_2019.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  93. Orden Jurídico Poblano. Ley Para la Prevención y Gestión Integral de Los Residuos Sólidos Urbanos y de Manejo Especial Para el Estado de Puebla; Orden Jurídico Poblano: Puebla, Mexico, 2006; Available online: https://ojp.puebla.gob.mx/legislacion-del-estado/item/229-ley-para-la-prevencion-y-gestion-integral-de-los-residuos-solidos-urbanos-y-de-manejo-especial-para-el-estado-de-puebla (accessed on 14 April 2024).
  94. Poder Legislativo del Estado de Campeche. Ley Para la Gestión Integral de Los Residuos Sólidos Urbanos, de Manejo Especial y Peligrosos Del Estado de Campeche; Poder legislativo del Estado de Campeche: Campeche, Mexico, 2019; Available online: https://legislacion.congresocam.gob.mx/index.php/etiquetas-x-materia/117-ley-para-la-gestion-integral-de-los-residuos-solidos-urbanos-de-manejo-especial (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  95. Congreso del Estado de Chihuahua. Ley Para la Prevención y Gestión Integral de Los Residuos Del Estado de Chihuahua; Congreso del Estado de Chihuahua: Chihuahua, Mexico, 2014; Available online: https://www.congresochihuahua2.gob.mx/biblioteca/leyes/archivosLeyes/1084.pdf (accessed on 14 April 2024).
  96. Poder Legislativo del Estado de Querétaro. Ley de Prevención y Gestión Integral de Residuos Del Estado de Querétaro; Poder Legislativo del Estado de Querétaro: Querétaro, Mexico, 2004; Available online: http://legislaturaqueretaro.gob.mx/app/uploads/2016/01/LEY067.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  97. Poder Ejecutivo del Estado de Morelos. Ley de Residuos Sólidos Para el Estado de Morelos; Poder Ejecutivo del Estado de Morelos: Cuernavaca, Mexico, 2007; Available online: https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/mex142138.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  98. Gobierno del Estado de Morelos. Programa Estatal de la Gestión y Manejo Integral de los Residuos Sólidos Urbanos y de Manejo Especial en MORELOS; Gobierno de del Estado de Morelos, Mexico. 2013. Available online: http://marcojuridico.morelos.gob.mx/archivos/reglamentos_estatales/pdf/PRORESIDUOSMOR.pdf (accessed on 14 April 2024).
  99. Gobierno del Estado de Colima. Plan Estatal de Desarrollo de Colima 2021–2027; Gobierno del Estado de Colima, Mexico. 2021. Available online: https://admiweb.col.gob.mx/archivos_prensa/banco_img/file_6442b7e46141f_Plan_Estatal_de_Desarrollo_2021_2027.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  100. Gobierno del Estado de Chiapas. Ley de Residuos Sólidos Para el Estado de Chiapas y Sus Municipios; Poder Legislativo del Estado de Chiapas: Tuxtla Gutiérrez, Mexico, 2020; Available online: https://normas.cndh.org.mx/Documentos/Chiapas/Ley_RSE_Chis.pdf (accessed on 20 April 2024).
  101. Gobierno de la Ciudad de México. Plan General de Desarrollo de la Ciudad de México; Gobierno de la Ciudad de México: Mexico City, Mexico, 2020; Available online: https://www.ssc.cdmx.gob.mx/storage/app/media/Difusion%20Consulta%20Indigena/Proyecto_Prog_Gral_de_Desarrollo_2020-2040.pdf (accessed on 14 April 2024).
  102. Gobierno del Estado de Tabasco. Plan Estatal de Desarrollo Del Estado de Tabasco: 2019–2024; Gobierno del Estado de Tabasco: Villa Hermosa, Mexico, 2019; Available online: https://tabasco.gob.mx/sites/default/files/users/planeacion_spf/PLED%202019-2024.pdf (accessed on 22 April 2024).
  103. Secretaría del Medio Ambiente y Ordenamiento Territorial del Estado de Guanajuato. Programa Estatal Para la Prevención y Gestión Integral de Los Residuos Sólidos Urbanos de Guanajuato; Secretaría del Medio Ambiente y Ordenamiento Territorial del Estado de Guanajuato: Guanajuato, Mexico, 2020; Available online: https://smaot.guanajuato.gob.mx/sitio/manejo-integral-de-residuos/197/Programa-Estatal-para-la-Prevenci%C3%B3n-y-Gesti%C3%B3n-Integral-de-los-Residuos (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  104. Gobierno del Estado de Morelos. Plan Estatal de Desarrollo Del Estado de Morelos: 2019–2024; Gobierno del Estado de Morelos: Cuernavaca, Mexico, 2021; Available online: https://www.hacienda.morelos.gob.mx/images/docu_planeacion/planea_estrategica/ped/Plan_Estatal_de_Desarrollo_2019-2024-2.pdf (accessed on 14 April 2024).
  105. Poder Ejecutivo del Estado de Morelos. Estrategia Para la Gestión Integral de Los Residuos Del Estado de Morelos; Poder Ejecutivo del Estado de Morelos: Cuernavaca, Mexico, 2017; Available online: http://marcojuridico.morelos.gob.mx/archivos/varios/pdf/VERESIDUOSMO.pdf (accessed on 22 April 2024).
  106. INEGI. Censo Nacional de Gobiernos Municipales y Demarcaciones Territoriales de la Ciudad de México; INEGI: Aguascalientes, Mexico, 2019; Available online: https://www.inegi.org.mx/programas/cngmd/2019/ (accessed on 17 April 2024).
  107. United Nations. Environmental Program Environment Assembly. Available online: https://www.unep.org/environmentassembly/?%2F= (accessed on 11 September 2024).
  108. Team of The United Nations Environment Programme. About the United Nations Environment Programme. Available online: https://www.unep.org/who-we-are/about-us (accessed on 11 September 2024).
  109. UNESA. The 17 Goals. Sustainable Development. 2015. Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/goals (accessed on 22 October 2024).
  110. UNFCCC. The Paris Agreement. Available online: https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement (accessed on 11 September 2024).
  111. Muñoz Ureña, H.A. Avances Legislativos Sobre Prevención y Reducción de Pérdidas y Desperdicios de Alimentos en América Latina y el Caribe; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2021; ISBN 978-92-5-133851-3. [Google Scholar]
  112. Acevedo Correa, D.; Montero Castillo, P.M.; Marrugo Ligardo, Y.A. Gestión de Desperdicios Alimentarios: Una Visión Desde la Política Pública Colombiana. Rev. Venez. Gerenc. 2023, 28, 769–784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. De Laurentiis, V.; Caldeira, C.; Sala, S. No Time to Waste: Assessing the Performance of Food Waste Prevention Actions. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2020, 161, 104946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Reynolds, C.; Goucher, L.; Quested, T.; Bromley, S.; Gillick, S.; Wells, V.K.; Evans, D.; Koh, L.; Carlsson Kanyama, A.; Katzeff, C.; et al. Review: Consumption-Stage Food Waste Reduction Interventions—What Works and How to Design Better Interventions. Food Policy 2019, 83, 7–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Lázaro, L.L.B.; Gremaud, A.P. A Responsabilidade Social Empresarial e Sustentabilidade Na América Latina: Brasil e México. Rev. Adm. da UFSM 2015, 9, 138–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Ruiz, E.; Moreno, J.; Suarez, R. Buenas Prácticas Corporativas en Materia de Reducción de Pérdidas y Desperdicios de Alimentos en América Latina y el Caribe; Inter-American Development Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  117. ANTAD. Censo Nacional de Mermas Mercado Detallista. Available online: https://antad.net/retail-talks-censo-nacional-de-mermas-mercado-detallista-antad-retailers-mx/ (accessed on 11 September 2024).
  118. Fernández-Xicotencatl, R.I.; Loría-Mayén, J.J.; Medina-Mata, I.; Makita-Balcorta, T.G. Desperdicio de Alimentos Desde la Perspectiva de Los Colaboradores Del Sector Hotelero en Cancún, Quintana Roo. Estud. Soc. Rev. Aliment. Contemp. Desarro. Reg. 2023, 33, 1–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Kitinoja, L. Use of Cold Chains for Reducing Food Losses in Developing Countries. PEF White Pap. 2013, 6, 1–16. [Google Scholar]
  120. Salvador, M.R. Las Cadenas de Frío y el Transporte Refrigerado en México. Comer. Exter. 2009, 59, 1010–1017. [Google Scholar]
  121. Alvarez, A. Análisis de la Cadena del Frío de Frutas y Hortalizas en México. Available online: https://www.mundohvacr.com/2008/06/analisis-de-la-cadena-del-frio-de-frutas-y-hortalizas-en-mexico/ (accessed on 11 September 2024).
  122. Márquez-Molina, O.; Reyes Álvarez, R.; Rojas Contreras, I.I.; Reyes Reza, I. Evaluación Del Impacto Nutricional, Ambiental y Económico de Los Desperdicios Orgánicos Del Tianguis de Ozumba, Estado de México. UVserva 2024, 16, 246–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Secretaría de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural Productores de Pequeña Escala Son Los Que Nos Dan de Comer. Available online: https://www.gob.mx/agricultura/articulos/productores-de-pequena-escala-son-los-que-nos-dan-de-comer?idiom=es (accessed on 11 September 2024).
  124. International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). Transforming Food Systems for Rural Prosperity; IFAD: Rome, Italy, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  125. Bajželj, B.; Quested, T.E.; Röös, E.; Swannell, R.P.J. The Role of Reducing Food Waste for Resilient Food Systems. Ecosyst. Serv. 2020, 45, 101140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente. Índice de Desperdicio de Alimentos 2021. Available online: https://www.unep.org/es/resources/informe/indice-de-desperdicio-de-alimentos-2021 (accessed on 11 September 2024).
  127. de Visser-Amundson, A.; Kleijnen, M. Nudging in Food Waste Management: Where Sustainability Meets Cost-Effectiveness. In Food Waste Management: Solving the Wicked Problem; Springer International Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 57–87. ISBN 9783030205614. [Google Scholar]
  128. Principato, L. Food Policies to Tackle Food Waste: A Classification; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 35–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Garske, B.; Heyl, K.; Ekardt, F.; Weber, L.M.; Gradzka, W. Challenges of Food Waste Governance: An Assessment of European Legislation on Food Waste and Recommendations for Improvement by Economic Instruments. Land 2020, 9, 231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Vlaholias, E.; Thompson, K.; Every, D.; Dawson, D. Charity Starts... at Work? Conceptual Foundations for Research with Businesses That Donate to Food Redistribution Organisations. Sustainability 2015, 7, 7997–8021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. McIntyre, L.; Tougas, D.; Rondeau, K.; Mah, C.L. “In”-Sights about Food Banks from a Critical Interpretive Synthesis of the Academic Literature. Agric. Hum. Values 2016, 33, 843–859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. UN Environment Programme. CCET Guideline Series on Intermediate Municipal Solid Waste Treatment Technologies; UN Environment Programme: Nairobi, Kenya, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  133. Silva-Martínez, R.D.; Sanches-Pereira, A.; Ortiz, W.; Gómez Galindo, M.F.; Coelho, S.T. The State-of-the-Art of Organic Waste to Energy in Latin America and the Caribbean: Challenges and Opportunities. Renew. Energy 2020, 156, 509–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. FAO. Reducing the Food Wastage Footprint; FAO: Roma, Italy, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  135. Stöckli, S.; Niklaus, E.; Dorn, M. Call for Testing Interventions to Prevent Consumer Food Waste. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2018, 136, 445–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 16 10890 g001
Figure 1. Hierarchy of options for food waste prevention and management. Reference: Adapted from Papargyropoulou et al. 2014 [20].
Figure 1. Hierarchy of options for food waste prevention and management. Reference: Adapted from Papargyropoulou et al. 2014 [20].
Sustainability 16 10890 g001
Sustainability 16 10890 g002
Figure 2. Proportion of public policies and initiatives to manage food waste in Mexico, by presidential term.
Figure 2. Proportion of public policies and initiatives to manage food waste in Mexico, by presidential term.
Sustainability 16 10890 g002
Sustainability 16 10890 g003
Figure 3. Distribution of Mexican public policies and initiatives. (a) Distribution of Mexican public policies and initiatives, according to the food waste hierarchy. (b) Types of public policies instruments and initiatives used in Mexico at each level of the food waste hierarchy. Note: Policies and initiatives could be classified into more than one category because the documents analyzed could cite more than one action.
Figure 3. Distribution of Mexican public policies and initiatives. (a) Distribution of Mexican public policies and initiatives, according to the food waste hierarchy. (b) Types of public policies instruments and initiatives used in Mexico at each level of the food waste hierarchy. Note: Policies and initiatives could be classified into more than one category because the documents analyzed could cite more than one action.
Sustainability 16 10890 g003
Table 1. Type of public policy and initiative to manage food waste in Mexico.
Table 1. Type of public policy and initiative to manage food waste in Mexico.
Type of Public Policy or Initiativen%
Regulatory public policies5160.0
Programmatic public policies2225.9
Initiatives and actions of civil society organizations and private companies1214.1
Total85100.0
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Mundo-Rosas, V.; Morales-Díaz, L.D.; Posadas-Domínguez, R.R.; González-Victoria, R.M.; Galarde-López, M.; García-Guerra, A. Characterization and Analysis of Public Policies to Prevent and Manage Food Waste in Mexico. Sustainability 2024, 16, 10890. https://doi.org/10.3390/su162410890

AMA Style

Mundo-Rosas V, Morales-Díaz LD, Posadas-Domínguez RR, González-Victoria RM, Galarde-López M, García-Guerra A. Characterization and Analysis of Public Policies to Prevent and Manage Food Waste in Mexico. Sustainability. 2024; 16(24):10890. https://doi.org/10.3390/su162410890

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mundo-Rosas, Verónica, Leydi Diana Morales-Díaz, Rodolfo Rogelio Posadas-Domínguez, Rosa María González-Victoria, Miguel Galarde-López, and Armando García-Guerra. 2024. "Characterization and Analysis of Public Policies to Prevent and Manage Food Waste in Mexico" Sustainability 16, no. 24: 10890. https://doi.org/10.3390/su162410890

APA Style

Mundo-Rosas, V., Morales-Díaz, L. D., Posadas-Domínguez, R. R., González-Victoria, R. M., Galarde-López, M., & García-Guerra, A. (2024). Characterization and Analysis of Public Policies to Prevent and Manage Food Waste in Mexico. Sustainability, 16(24), 10890. https://doi.org/10.3390/su162410890

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop