1122604

research-article2022
WMR0010.1177/0734242X221122604Waste Management & ResearchCarletto et al.

Review Article

Waste Management & Research

Sustainability in food service: A systematic

2023, Vol. 41(2) 285­–302
© The Author(s) 2022

review Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0734242X221122604
https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X221122604
journals.sagepub.com/home/wmr

Fernanda Correa Carletto1, Lara Onofre Ferriani2

and Daniela Alves Silva1

Abstract
The irrational functioning of the food sector can negatively impact the environment and resources for future generations. The aim of
this study is to analyse the assessment of sustainability indicators related to meal production processes and waste in the food service
through a systematic literature review. The hypothesis is that these indicators are still little explored. This review was conducted
according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols. The databases consulted were Lilacs,
Science Direct, Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior,
OpenGrey and Greylit. Six different search strategies were applied, combining the terms sustainability and food service, plus manual
searches. The search took place until April 2020 and there was no language restriction of the studies. After removing duplicates, 770
publications were identified through the search process, with 44 having been included in this review. Most publications carried out the
quantification of food waste (38/44), while in 7/44 there were questionnaires, checklists and water footprint assessments. Most studies
identified high indicators of waste, as well as little awareness of sustainability. Factors such as controlled portioning, omnivorous
menus and dissatisfaction with the menu were reported to have caused the greatest losses in the process. This review identified a
restricted assessment of sustainability in food service, countering the need to deepen these indicators and the effect of meal production
processes on sustainable development.

Keywords
Waste, food service, food waste, sustainable development indicators, systematic review, sustainable consumption

Received 18th January 2022, accepted 13th June 2022 by Associate Editor Antonis A. Zorpas.

Introduction waste, especially in the pre-preparation stages, due to poor

quality of the products employed or inadequacy of handling tech-
Food service is economically and socially important, for it niques, in addition to losses of food in production and to leftovers
support related businesses, creates jobs, enables the provision of and food scraps that remain after distribution (Araújo and
meals for different communities, and generates high financial Carvalho, 2015; Strasburg and Jahno, 2017a). The abusive use of
value (Lima and Borges, 2020). According to the Brazilian natural resources and loss and waste of food are considered
Association of Collective Meals (Associação Brasileira Das important sustainability indicators (Food and Agriculture
Empresas De Refeições Coletivas, 2020), in 2019, the sector Organization of The United Nations [FAO], 2011).
provided 21.84 million meals per day, employed 250 thousand According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO,
employees, and had revenues of R$52.02 billion. 2011), one third of the edible parts of food are lost or wasted
Although the meal production process does contribute to the worldwide, amounting to roughly 1.3 billion tons per year. In
economy and society, operations carried out in food service addition to a broad environmental impact, such waste costs the
can have a negative impact on the environment, when there are equivalent of US$ 750 billion.
limiting physical structures, excessive consumption of natural
resources and absence of waste control measures, compromising
the resources for future generations (Brasil, 2006; Dias and 1Departamento de Educação Integrada em Saúde, Universidade
Oliveira, 2016). Federal do Espírito Santo, Vitória, Espírito Santo, Brasil
2Programa de Pós-graduação em Saúde Coletiva, Universidade
Natural resources, such as water, are used in multiple stages of
Federal do Espírito Santo, Vitória, Espírito Santo, Brasil
food production, as in food hygiene and cooking, as well as in the
cleaning of equipment, utensils and physical structure. Electricity Corresponding author:
is necessary for the overall functioning of food service, particu- Daniela Alves Silva, Departamento de Educação Integrada em Saúde,
Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Av. Marechal Campos 1468,
larly for machinery, which can also use gas as the main fuel for Maruípe, 29043-900 Vitória, Espírito Santo, Brazil.
generating heat. In addition, there is a high production of solid Email: [email protected]
286 Waste Management & Research 41(2)

Against this worrying and challenging scenario, the articles selected, and those deemed eligible for this review had
Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) were proposed to their abstracts analysed. Next, articles that met all the inclusion
encourage actions in favour of responsible production and con- criteria were selected for full reading. We must disclose that
sumption (Organização das Nações Unidas [ONU], 2015). In when an article could not be accessed in its entirety, the authors
Brazil, Law No. 12,305 of 2010 established the National Policy were approached with a request for the full-text publication.
on Waste Management, assigning to people or institutions the The studies included in this review had their information
duty to carry out the proper management of waste, so that there is characterized through a standardized instrument, by extracting
no damage to the environment, demonstrating that sustainable data on the country where the study took place, authors and year
development is legally relevant and of national concern (Brasil, of publication, type/location of the establishment, public served,
2010). Other initiatives were observed in different countries to sustainability assessment method, data collection period, study
prevent waste and to promote sustainability (Stone et al., 2019; goal, data analysis method and results found.
Zorpas et al., 2014, 2015). Information on the search process and resulting evaluations
Given the above, this study aims to analyse the assessment of were saved in Microsoft Excel® spreadsheets, and the study pro-
sustainability indicators related to meal production processes tocol and tables were prepared using Microsoft Word®.
and waste in the food service through a systematic literature The methodological quality and subsequent risk of bias of
review. Its objective is to identify the generally sustainability the studies were analysed using the Critical Appraisal Checklist
indicators used in the meal production processes and its impacts for analytical cross-sectional studies of the Meta-analysis of
on sustainable development. The hypothesis is that although the Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument (MAStARI),
assessment of sustainability indicators has been increasing in the developed by Joanna Briggs Institute (Moola et al., 2020). This
food service, it is still very superficial and explored. instrument was adapted according to the aim of this study that
implies cross-sectional studies realized in collective food ser-
vices and based on Falcomer et al. (2018). The bias risk instru-
Materials and methods
ment included seven questions that are listed below.
This systematic review included studies published until April
2020 in any language. The search and selection of suitable stud- 1. Was the analysed food service institution characterized?
ies was conducted according to the recommendations of the The authors should provide clear information about charac-
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta- teristics of food service institution (e.g. type of institution,
Analyses – PRISMA (Moher et al., 2015). A research protocol place and number of meals produced).
and data collection forms were structured accordingly. 2. Was the selected institution representative and randomly
Publications from different parts of the world, presenting determined?
original data, an observational design, and the assessment of The authors should provide detailed information about the
sustainability practices in food service were included in this selection process of the institution (e.g. convenience or ran-
study. The exclusion criteria were review papers, qualitative dom selection).
studies, intervention studies and publications in the form of 3. Was the data collected described in detail?
comments and letters. These, however, were used to search and The authors should provide detailed information about the
select publications manually. process of data collection (e.g. date and duration of collec-
We consulted the databases Lilacs, Science Direct and tion, equipment or instruments used).
Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) and conducted a 4. Have the sustainability measure been specified?
manual search by checking the reference lists of the publications The authors should provide clear description of the type
found. In addition, grey literature was consulted in the databases of sustainability measure (e.g. weighing, check-list or/and
OpenGrey and Greylit, and in those of the Coordenação de interview).
Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior. 5. Was the sustainability measure in a valid and reliable way?
Six search strategies were used, combining the following The study should clearly describe the method of measure-
terms: (1) ‘sustainability’ AND ‘food service’; (2) ‘waste’ ment of sustainability, considering the weighing of foods or
AND ‘food service’; (3) ‘food service’; (4) ‘food service’ validated questionnaires as ‘gold standard’.
AND ‘sustainability’ OR ‘waste’; (5) ‘waste’ and ‘feeding’; 6. Was an appropriate statistical analysis used?
(6) ‘desperdício’ AND ‘alimentação’. The methods section should be detailed enough about statisti-
The search and selection of publications was carried out cal methods used to compare the data.
independently by two reviewers (FCC and LOF), according to 7. Did the results answer the main question?
the eligibility criteria and in accordance with the predefined The study should present results according to the main
protocol. Any disagreements were settled by consensus or in objective.
consultation with a third reviewer (DAS).
Following search and selection, duplicate articles were identi- After the evaluation, the risk of bias was categorized as ‘High’
fied and removed. To begin with, we evaluated the titles of the when the study reached up to 49% score ‘yes’; ‘Moderate’, when
Carletto et al. 287

Studies identified in the databases Additional studies identified

Identification
searches through other sources
(n = 248) (n = 560)

Studies after removing duplicates

(n = 770)

Studies excluded after

Screening

reading titles (n = 650)

Studies selected for abstract evaluation

(n = 120)

Studies excluded after

reading abstracts (n = 45)

Studies fully evaluated for

Eligibility

eligibility Studies excluded after full

(n = 75) reading
(n = 31)

Reasons:
1 theoretical study
1 pilot study
2 intervention studies
1 methodological study
3 could not be accessed in
full
4 qualitative studies
Included

19 did not provide data of

interest
Studies included in the
systematic review
(n = 44)

Figure 1. Flowchart of the study selection process: identification, screening, eligibility and inclusion of studies in the
systematic review, as PRISMA (2015).

the study reached 50%–69% score ‘yes’; and ‘Low’, when the Table 1 shows the characterization of the studies included in
study reached more than 70% score ‘yes’. this review. Studies from four different continents were identi-
fied: Africa (1/44), Asia (4/44), America (33/44) and Europe
(7/44). The majority of publications came from Brazil (32/44)
Results and were published from 2004 on, focusing mainly on the last
The search process resulted in 808 publications: 135 from the 5 years (29/44). It is worthy of note that there was a predomi-
Science Direct database, 28 from Lilacs and 85 from SciELO, in nance of scientific articles (43/44), in addition to Master of
addition to 509 from grey literature and 51 from manual search. Science dissertations (2/44).
Thirty-eight duplicate articles were identified and, after all the Most studies were conducted in institutional food service
evaluation steps, 75 were read in full. Of these, 31 were excluded (38/44), particularly hospitals (9/44), schools/day-care centres
for the following reasons: 1 theoretical study, 1 pilot study, 2 (9/44) and universities (8/44). The samples included mostly
intervention study, 1 methodological study, 4 qualitative studies, workers (17/44) and students (7/44). The most common
19 studies that did not contain data of interest and 3 studies in sustainability assessment methods were the quantification of
which the full-text was not available. Finally, 44 articles were solid waste (38/44) and the application of standardized ques-
included in this review. A flowchart detailing the search and tionnaires adapted by the authors (9/44), with varying evaluation
selection process is shown in Figure 1. periods (Table 1).
Table 1. Characterization of the studies included in the systematic review as to the type/location of institutions, clientele, forms and period of sustainability assessment.
288

Country Author (year) Type/location of institutions Clientele Forms of assessment of sustainability Period of assessment

Pakistan Aamir Commercial/buffet and a-la-carte restaurants NA Questionnaire: adapted from Quested and Parry (2011) and FWRA (2016). NA
et al. (2018) completed by the restaurant’s chief manager or chef, followed by a qualitative
interview.
Qatar Abdelaal Commercial/coffee shops, chain stores, Students Weighing: the garbage bags were labelled based on their origin and every day October and November
et al. (2019) pizzeria, bagel shop, Arab bakery/cafe, frozen the bags were weighed and then opened to identify or confirm the nature of 2016 and January and
yogurt shop and a snack bar the waste (avoidable or unavoidable waste). February 2017
Institutional/buffet and a-la-carte restaurants
Brazil Abreu Institutional/hospital Staff, patients, resident Weighing: rest-intake and leftovers. 5 days
et al. (2012) doctors, university students
and companions
Brazil Alves and Ueno (2015) Institutional/company Staff Weighing: solid waste generated in the production of meals divided into 5 days
organic waste (from food), nonrecyclable waste (paper towels and greasy
napkins) and recyclable waste (paper/cardboard, plastic, tin, glass).
Questionnaire: routine regarding the selection, weighing and destination of
solid waste.
Brazil Aranha and Gustavo (2018) Institutional NA Weighing: meals produced, distributed and leftovers. From 22 March to 5 April
Calculation: percentage of leftovers, weight of leftovers per customer, 2016
percentage of rest-intake and per capita of rest-intake.
Brazil Araújo and Carvalho (2015) Institutional/company Workers in administrative Weighing: quantification of residues from the receipt of raw materials, 20 days
and operational positions storage, pre-preparation and preparation, and even after distribution.
Questionnaire: according to the model used by the Meal Production Research
Center at the Federal University of Santa Catarina to identify actions that
contribute to sustainability, answered by the unit’s nutritionist.
Brazil Beal Institutional/hospital receiving transported Healthy and sick collectives Weighing: rest-intake and dirty leftovers related to the healthy community 2 weeks
et al. (2018) meal and rest ingestion of the sick community.
Sweden Betz Institutional/two companies served by the Catering for employees Weighing: remaining intake and leftovers. 5 consecutive
et al. (2015) same large catering company. Company A is Questionnaire: anonymous, with mostly closed questions. It was used to representative days (in
located in the education sector and company B collect data on customer opinions, divided into three sections: the first addition to storage losses,
is in the business sector section on the canteen, the second on food waste in general and the third on collected over a period of
sociodemographic data. 4 weeks)
Brazil Nonino-Borges et al. (2006) Institutional/hospital Patients and servers Weighing: food scraps left on trays or plates. 14 days
Brazil Canonico et al. (2014) Institutional/popular restaurants NA Weighing: food produced, distributed and leftovers. 8–12 July 2013
Calculation: index of rest-intake, the percentage of clean leftovers and food
waste.
Brazil Carvalho et al. (2013) Institutional/company NA Weighing: distributed meal and leftovers. 10 days
Calculation: rest-intake index calculated according to the methodology
proposed by Abreu and Spinelli (2003).
Brazil Copatti et al. (2018) Institutional/hospital Patients and companions Weighing: food produced, distributed and leftovers. 4 days
Calculation: rest-intake.
Portugal Dias-Ferreira et al. (2015) Institutional/hospital NA Weighing: general and preparation waste (soup, main course, fruit and bread). September to October
Calculation: percentage of remains. 2014 (8 weeks)
Brazil Domingues et al. (2016) Institutional/university NA Weighing: total weight of leftovers over the counter and other intake. 31 consecutive days
Sweden Engström and Carlsson- Commercial/restaurants and institutional/ NA Questionnaire: semi-structured interview with employees about their 2 weeks
Kanyama (2004) schools attitudes towards food losses and strategies to prevent and minimize them.
Weighing: losses in storage and preparation, leftover dishes and kitchen scraps.
Sweden Eriksson et al. (2017) Institutional/nursing homes, schools and Schoolchildren and elderly Weighing: wasted food and food served. Waste was categorized as serving 3 months
preschools waste (with subcategories), plate waste and other food waste.
Brazil Fatel et al. (2018) Institutional/hospital Staff Weighing: food produced, served and leftovers. 3 weeks
Calculation: remaining intake and leftovers.
Brazil Ferreira et al. (2012) Institutional/child education centre Preschoolers Weighing: distributed meal and leftovers. September 26th to 30th,
Calculation: rest-intake and clean shade. 2011

(Continued)
Waste Management & Research 41(2)
Table 1. (Continued)

Country Author (year) Type/location of institutions Clientele Forms of assessment of sustainability Period of assessment

Brazil Galian et al. (2016) Institutional/company NA Weighing: The analysis of waste was carried out by checking the amount of 5 days (June to October
Carletto et al.

meal produced and the clean leftovers. 2015)

Calculation: remainder ingested according to Silva et. al. (2010).
Brazil Halmenschlager (2017) Institutional/hospitals NA Calculation: performed by the total adequacy and the total inadequacy. NA
The two totals were added up to obtain the grand total. The classification of
Unidades de Alimentação e Nutrição (UANs) according to good environmental
practices followed the proposal of Veiros (2009), and adapted by the author.
Checklist: elaborated and tested by Colares; Colares et al. (2014).
Questionnaire: answered by the institution manager or person designated
by him, elaborated and structured with open and closed questions based on
adaptations of ABNT-NBR ISO 14001 (BRASIL, 2004), and consult the works of
Tayra and Ribeiro (2006) and Lyra (2008).
Brazil Hatjiathanassiadou et al. Institutional/universities College student and staff Water footprint: verification of the origin of the food purchased to compose March to April 2018
(2019) the 2-month menu. (2 months)
Brazil Issa et al. (2014) Institutional/schools Schoolchildren Weighing: gross and net weight of all ingredients, weight of preparations, From March 2011 to April
clean leftovers, dirty leftovers, rest-intake and weight of portions consumed 2012
by employees.
Calculation: rest-intake according to Vaz (2003).
Brazil Juffo et al. (2016) Commercial/shopping mall restaurants NA Weighing: Solid organic waste. 4 days
Brazil Longo-Silva et al. (2013) Institutional/public day-care centres NA Weighing: portions of each food and/or preparation. From September to
Calculation: average value served to each child and rest-intake index. December 2010
Brazil Mello et al. (2011) Institutional/club Operational and Weighing and Calculation: Data were obtained regarding the number of From September to
administrative staff customers, the quantity of meal distributed, the consumption per capita per November 2008
meal, the rest, the rest per capita and the rest index.
Brazil Moura et al. (2009) Institutional/vocational education centre NA Weighing: meal produced and leftovers. 31 March to 17 April 2009
Calculation: rest-intake according to Vaz (2003). (7 days)
South Painter et al. (2016) Institutional/university NA Weighing: food waste generated daily in cafeterias. 21 days
Africa Online questionnaire: to gain insight into students’ eating habits and their
perceptions of the reasons behind food waste.
Malaysia Papargyropoulou et al. Commercial/buffet and a-la-carte restaurants Local families, tourists, Weighing: avoidable and unavoidable waste, preparation waste, rest-intake 1 week
(2019) Institutional/university students and staff and buffet remains (leftovers).
Brazil Pospischek Commercial/self-service restaurants General Questionnaire: interview with the owner or manager of the establishment NA
et al. (2014) using a questionnaire with open and multiple choice questions adapted to that
proposed by Bilck et al. (2009)
Brazil Ricarte et al. (2008) Institutional/university NA Weighing: vegetables were weighed before handling and after handling, clean October and November
and dirty leftovers. 2005
Calculation: index of clean leftovers and the index of rest-intake.
Brazil Sabino et al. (2016) Institutional/hospital NA Weighing: distributed meals and leftovers. August and September
Calculation: index of remains according to Castro and Queiroz (2007). 2014 (16 days)
United Sakaguchi Commercial/restaurants General Questionnaire: questions about restaurant management knowledge about From February to March
States et al. (2018) food waste (waste management) and actions to reduce waste. 2016
Brazil Santos et al. (2012) Commercial/a-la-carte restaurants General Checklists: requirements of ISO 22000 and 14001 regarding the food security NA
system, management responsibility, resource management, planning and
manufacturing of safe products, validation, verification and improvement
of the food security system. By interviewing supervisors, employees and/or
owners and direct observation.
Classification: conformity according to Collegiate Board Resolution (RDC) nº
275/2004.
Brazil Silva et al. (2019) Institutional/nongovernmental organization Employees, companions Weighing: meals produced, clean leftovers and discarded leftovers. 1st and 29th of July 2018
and patients of the service Calculation: percentage of leftovers and rest-intake. (21 days)

(Continued)
289
 290

Table 1. (Continued)

Country Author (year) Type/location of institutions Clientele Forms of assessment of sustainability Period of assessment

Finland Silvennoinen et al. (2015) Commercial/workplace canteen Preschoolers, Weighing: sources of food waste generation (kitchen waste, service waste and 211 days
Institutional/school and childcare schoolchildren, workers, customer leftovers). Originally inedible waste was also analysed.
general public
Finland Silvennoinen et al. (2019) Commercial/a-la-carte and self-service Students and professionals Weighing: waste of food and waste per customer. 482 days
restaurants
Institutional/university
Brazil Soares et al. (2011) Institutional/company Operational staff Weighing: leftover preparations and per capita calculation of clean leftovers 5 months
and cost.
Wales Sonnino and McWilliam Institutional/hospital Surgery and rehabilitation Questionnaire: interviews with the main actors of the meal service (CPU Weekly study
(2011) patients Manager and the six main suppliers of the 25 ingredients).
Weighing: rest-intake and leftovers.
Brazil Souza et al. (2018) Institutional/early childhood education centres Children of both sexes, Weighing: ingredients, meals produced, distributed and leftovers. Between March and July
aged between 17 and Calculation: rest-intake index. 2014 (15 days)
63 months
Brazil Strasburg and Jahno Institutional/universities University students, Calculation: eco efficiency, correction factor for each food, water footprint NA
(2017a) graduate students, defined by Yu et al. (2010) Quantification of the total consumption of each food
teachers, civil servants and purchased in 2012 in each institution, verification of the caloric value (kcal)
service providers of each food, generation of correction factor residues (resulting from the
calculation of the correction factor).
Brazil Viana and Ferreira (2017) Institutional/school Students and servers Weighing: five samples of the food produced and leftovers. 5 consecutive days
Calculation: percentage of leftovers and rest-intake index.
China Wang et al. (2017) Commercial/restaurants NA Weighing: Food and its containers. NA
Calculation: food waste per capita per meal.
Brazil Zandonadi and Maurício Mixed commercial restaurant (centralized Workers Weighing: rest-intake and the clean leftover of the preparations. 12 days
(2012) meal for the self-service restaurant and
decentralized meal for the meal transported)
Brazil Zotesso et al. (2016) Institutional/university University students and Weighing: food waste in the pre-preparation, preparation and post- From March to August
staff consumption stages. 2012
Calculation: correction factor, percentage of leftovers.

NA: not available.

Waste Management & Research 41(2)
Carletto et al. 291

The aims, methods of data analysis and the main results of the Fortaleza-CE, focusing on different forms of waste, both internal
studies included in this review are shown in Tables 2 and 3. and external to production. These authors found that the low
Most publications aimed at quantifying and evaluating solid acceptance of some preparations and the lack of variety were the
waste, by weighing rest-intake and leftovers (Table 2). The articles main responsible for dissatisfaction with the menu. In the 25
also focused on research on sustainability actions, compliance menus offered during the survey, rates of rest-intake classified as
with environmental management, strategies for preventing waste, good ranged from 4.93% to 7.30%, while poor ratings were in the
satisfaction with the menu and cost of leftovers (Table 3). range of 7.69–9.65% and unacceptable ratings from 10.46% to
Regarding data analysis, there was a predominance of descrip- 14.64%. There were no rates of rest-intake classified as optimal.
tive statistics showing frequencies, means and standard devia- On the other hand, for Betz et al. (2015) the portioning of the
tions (41/44). We observed that, in studies that applied statistical foods was one of the causes of waste. Their study assessed two
tests, sustainability indicators were compared between types of different companies in Switzerland, both served by the same
menus (omnivorous and vegetarian), forms of distribution (set catering company, company A in the education sector (produc-
meals, buffet) and customer satisfaction (rest-intake and accept- ing around 450 meals a day) and company B in the business
ance of the menu) (Tables 2 and 3). sector (meals for employees, more than 750 meals a day). The
Results from studies that evaluated solid waste (38/44) authors found that when the portion size was determined by the
revealed high amounts of waste, in both institutional and com- crew rather than the customers, rest-intake were significantly
mercial segments. Although a few studies (3/38) included inor- more frequent (p < 0.00). While answering a questionnaire, the
ganic waste, the measurement and production of organic waste customers cited ‘too large’ portions as the main reason for the
was predominant. The meal processing/production stage was remaining of plate waste. In view of this, the authors empha-
identified as the main source of waste (5/38). Other aspects that sized the importance of adapting portion sizes to the require-
impacted waste indicators were the customers’ dissatisfaction ments of the customers.
with the menu and portion sizes (Table 2). Economic and structural issues that lead to the lack of variety
The studies shown in Table 3 (7/44) revealed an absence of on the menu, an insufficient number of professionals to prepare
measures to assess sustainability in the production of meals (3/7), more elaborate menus, and lack of equipment are also behind
in addition to inadequate handling, disposal and/or separation of high rates of leftovers, according to Moura et al. (2009). These
waste (3/7) and the lack of awareness of managers regarding this authors conducted a study in the food service of a State Center for
issue (1/7) (Table 3). Professional Education, in Guarapuava, state of Paraná, Brazil,
When evaluated the risk of bias of the studies, it was found which serves an average of 280 meals for lunch daily. They found
that just one study (1/44) was classified as moderate risk; all an average of 60.39 g of leftovers per capita, and that the dirty
other (43/44) was considered as low risk of bias. All studies pre- leftovers from this food service could feed 28 people daily.
sented the characterization of the institution and the specification This systematic review revealed that few studies evaluated the
of the sustainability measure, as the results of the studies answer adoption of strategies against the waste of resources and on waste
its main questions. The limitations observed were the lack of management by establishments. However, that is crucial for the
representativeness of the institution and non-randomized selec- dissemination of the concept of sustainability in the meal produc-
tion (38/44); the data collected not described in detail (3/44); the tion sector (Strasburg and Jahno, 2017b).
sustainability measure is not valid and reliable way (6/44); and Halmenschlager (2017) investigated food services in public
the statistical analyses was not appropriate (1/44) (Table 4). and private hospitals in the southern region of the Rio Grande do
Sul state in Brazil, using two instruments: an adapted question-
naire that addressed practices and projects on sustainability, and
Discussion a checklist of good environmental practices in food services.
This systematic review established that the assessment of sus- Based on the percentage of adequacies assessed through the
tainability practices in the food service is carried out mostly Checklist of Good Environmental Practices in Food Services, of
through quantification and classification of solid waste. Most the 14 hospitals studied only four had a higher percentage of
studies found unsatisfactory results through the sustainability adequacies than inadequacies, the highest percentage of ade-
indicators used, especially those involving quantification of quacy having reached 66% and the smallest 24%. These instru-
waste, in addition to the lack or shortage of sustainable develop- ments also generated results in relation to service managers, who
ment measures. were asked about actions taken by the food services in relation to
The main reasons for waste in the meal production environ- meal production sustainability, and about practices confirming
ment usually involve expired products, overproduction of these actions. Only 36% reported having promoted sustainable
food, and excess of rest-intake, according to Aamir et al. measures, while 43% believed to have partly done so and 21%
(2018). In addition, Zandonadi and Maurício (2012) point the did not do it at all.
dissatisfaction of consumers with the menu as a factor impacting Among sustainable production practices that can be developed
the generation of food waste. in food service, those aimed at reducing waste and optimizing the
A similar observation was made by Ricarte et al. (2008), use of natural resources, especially water and energy, are worthy
who evaluated food waste in a Brazilian university cafeteria in of note. It is indispensable to promote the continuous and
Table 2. Objectives, data analysis and main results of the studies included in the systematic literature review that involved the quantification of food waste.
292

Authors (year) Objectives Data analysis Main results

Abdelaal et al. (2019) To quantify and disaggregate, using a bottom-up Descriptive (average and General food waste:
approach, the food waste at a university campus in Qatar. percentage) - Food waste: 4181 kg
- Total food waste generation (three locations): 329.5 kg day−1
- Avoidable waste (fraction discarded because it is no longer desired or is no longer in its best state): 211.1 kg
- Inevitable waste (fraction that arises from food during the preparation process and normally cannot be consumed as
egg shells, fruit shells and coffee grounds): 118.4 kg day−1.
Abreu et al. (2012) To evaluate food waste in the production and distribution Descriptive (average and General food waste:
sectors of a nutrition and dietetics institution of a hospital percentage) - Clean leftovers: From 7.2% to 17.2%, with the average of 11.6%
located in São Paulo (SP), Brazil. - Rest-intake by person: From 34.0 g to 123.0 g, with the average of 72.0 g.
Alves and Ueno To identify and quantify organic and recyclable solid Descriptive (average and General food waste, stage and types of solid waste:
(2015) waste generated in the production and distribution of percentage) - Of 2740 meals, 486.6 kg of solid waste were generated, resulting in an average per capita of 0.177 kg day−1 of waste.
meals in a food and nutrition institution and propose - The waste was distributed as follows: 58.0% in food processing, 31.9% in returns and 10.1% in stock and storage.
actions related to the reduction of solid waste generation -T  ypes of solid waste: 85% was organic compounds of unwanted portions of vegetables and meat, food scraps,
and its destination to sanitary landfills. leftovers from dinners, expired food and food samples, and 15% was composed of waste paper/cardboard, plastics
and cans.
Aranha and Gustavo Check and analyse food waste based on the indexes of Descriptive (percentage) General food waste:
(2018) clean and dirty leftovers and rest-intake of a food and - Average dirty leftover (%): 19.15
nutrition institution in the city of Botucatu (SP), Brazil. - Clean leftover (%): 3.46
- Rest-intake (%): 8.73.
Araújo and Carvalho To evaluate the meals production process in a food and Descriptive (average and Food waste by type and stages:
(2015) nutrition unit in Goiania (GO), Brazil, focusing on waste percentage) - Solid waste: 776 kg, of which:
generation and sustainable aspects. - 568.38 kg of organic compounds
- 207.62 kg of inorganic compounds
- 17.65 kg of oil
- Stage of organic waste generation: 1° is production (55.2%) e 2° is distribution (38.98%)
- Stage of inorganic waste generation: 1° is reception (36.95%) and 2° is distribution (35.9%).
Beal et al. (2018) To quantify and analyse the remaining intake of meals Descriptive (average and Waste according to the public:
served to the sick community and the rest-intake and percentage) - Healthy community:
dirty leftovers from the healthy community of a hospital - Average of total leftovers: 44.71 kg (44.19%)
food and nutrition institution located in a municipality in - Average of the rest-intake index: 8.72%
the Southwest of Paraná, Brazil. - Sick community:
Average of rest-total intake of the pots served: 19.02 kg (28.36%).
Betz et al. (2015) To provide general information about food loss in the Analytical and General food waste and motivation:
food service industry and to assess the level of waste, descriptive (percentage) - % of clients produced rest-intake: Institution A (education sector): 15.79% (n = 356) of clients and Institution B
the reasons for its accumulation, its composition (by (business sector): 18.32% (n = 382) of clients.
food type), and its point of origin in two food service - Rest-intake by portioning: more common when portion served by staff (p < 0.001)
companies in Switzerland. Reasons behind food waste - Main causes of rest-intake according to clients: portion size.
were deduced, and strategies for its reduction were - I nstitution A (university): 202.066 kg, of which more than 60% were food waste: 25% were rest-intake, 10% waste of
developed. preparation process and 0.84% waste from storage.
- I nstitution B (catering by employees): 321.634 kg foods, of which 38.21% were food waste, of which 32.35% from
preparation process.
-A  pproximately 25% of food waste in both institutions were considering avoidable (expired food, improper storage
conditions and inadequate portioning).
-S  mall portion of the food waste (Institution A: 1.41% and Institution B: 1.44%) was unavoidable (parts of food that are
unfit for consumption such as bones, skins and husks, especially in the preparation stage)
Consumer satisfaction
- Institution A: 57.1% (n = 359) and Institution B: 71.73% (n = 382)
- Satisfied customers produced food waste less often than dissatisfied ones (p = 0.01).
Canonico To evaluate the index of rest-intake and leftovers of a Descriptive (average and General food waste:
et al. (2014) popular restaurant in the city of Maringá (PR), Brazil. percentage) - Clean leftovers average: 332.58 kg day−1 and the quantities by person ranging from 3.35 g to 16.3 g.
- Clean leftovers average (% related to distributed meal): 80.67 ranging from 8.86 to 25.6 by day
- Rest-intake average (%): 9.49 ranging from 7.48 to 14.49.

(Continued)
Waste Management & Research 41(2)
Table 2. (Continued)
Authors (year) Objectives Data analysis Main results

Carvalho et al. To analyse the data regarding the occurrence of waste, in Descriptive (average and General food waste:
(2013) the form of leftovers and rest-intake in a meal producer percentage) - Rest-intake by person (kg): From 0.047 to 0.093, with average of 0.068
institution of a furniture company in the city of Uba (MG), - Rest-intake average (%): 6.87.
Carletto et al.

Brazil, in order to diagnose the level of waste.

Copatti et al. (2018) To evaluate the rest-intake index of patients and Descriptive (average and General food waste:
companions of a hospital food and nutrition institution percentage) - Average rest-intake: 20.80%.
from the analysis of leftovers present in trays returned
for cleaning.
Dias-Ferreira | To quantify the overall amounts of plate waste arising Descriptive General food waste and by preparation:
et al. (2015) from the meal delivery service at hospital; find out what - Total: From 0.462 to 1395 kg patient−1 day−1 in Ward with a similar distribution between lunch and dinner.
is being offered to patients and which items are returned - Food waste by patient: Average of 953 g food by day, representing 35% of served foods.
as waste; and, highlight the environmental cost to society - Food waste by preparation: More than 50% of bread and main course; 12% of soup e 10% of dessert/fruit.
and possible cost savings for the hospital food service
budget.
Domingues To quantify the organic solid waste generated in a Descriptive General food waste:
et al. (2016) university cafeteria in the city of São Paulo (SP), Brazil. (average ± standard - Rest-intake (kg): 914, with average ± sd of 29.5 ± 5 and value by person of 60.8 ± 9.4 g
deviation) - Rest-intake average by person ranged from 44.2 g to 79.1 g, with average of 60.8 g
- Dirty leftovers (kg): 937.5, with average ± sd of 30.2 ± 14.3 value by person of 63.3 ± 32.3 g
- Total solid waste: 1851.5 kg.
Engström and Facing the challenge of old data about food losses, while Descriptive (average and Total food losses and by stage
Carlsson-Kanyama recognizing the need to provide updated information and percentage) - Total: 20% of the food delivered to the food service institutions was lost, in which rest-intake constituted half of the
(2004) analyses of loss fractions and prevention strategies. recorded losses.
- Losses related to the handling of the food: 4% (storage and preparation), 6% leftovers e 10% rest-intake.
Strategies to reduce losses
- All the participating institutions were concerned with reducing losses during the handling of food.
- Strategies: stock control (older foods first) and take care of leftovers so they can be served again or used in other
preparations.
Eriksson et al. (2017) To quantify food waste in schools, preschools and elderly Descriptive (average) General food waste:
care homes for the specific case of one municipality - Food waste: 23% of the food served
in Sweden; to analyse the material for hotspots that - Total waste: 64% corresponded to leftovers, 33% from rest-intake and 3% from others.
could be targeted by waste reduction measures; and, to
evaluate whether food waste was greater when the food
was prepared farther away from the consumers.
Fatel et al. (2018) To evaluate the rest-intake index and total leftovers Descriptive General food waste:
from lunch served in the cafeteria of a hospital food and (average ± standard - Overall average of clean leftover (kg): 3.21 ± 1.72
nutrition institution, located in western Paraná, Brazil. deviation) - Overall average of dirty leftover (kg): 15.61 ± 1.56
- Overall average of total leftovers (kg): 18.82 ± 1.55
- Overall average of total leftovers (%): 7.97 ± 0.84
- Overall average of remains (kg): 12.62 ± 0.40
- Overall average of rest-intake index (%): 5.93 ± 0.18
- Overall average of unused food (%): 12.12 ± 1.52.
Ferreira et al. (2012) To assess the per capita, clean leftovers and rest-intake Descriptive (percentage) General food waste:
of children of both sexes aged between 6 months and - Rest-intake (%): 26/09/2011: 15.62; 28/09/2011: 15.51; 29/09/2011:14.49; 30/09/2011: 14.40.
5 years old at an early childhood education centre. - Rest-intake by children (kg): 26/09/2011: 0.101; 28/09/2011: 0.107; 29/09/2011: 0.108; 30/09/2011: 0.096.
- Clean leftovers (%): 26/09/2011: 7.71; 28/09/2011: 15.07; 29/09/2011: 20.62; 30/09/2011: 9.08.
- Clean leftovers by children (kg): 26/09/2011: 0.050; 28/09/2011: 0.104; 29/09/2011: 0.154; 30/09/2011: 0.061.
Galian et al. (2016) To quantify food waste in a medium-sized industrial Descriptive (average and General food waste:
restaurant in the city of Maringá (PR), Brazil. percentage) - Average rest-intake: 4.41 ± 1.4 kg and 4.19 ± 1.2%
- Clean leftovers: 15.92%.
Issa et al. (2014) To evaluate the planning, production process, distribution Descriptive (average, General food waste:
and adequacy of the nutritional intake of the main meal minimum and - Rest-intake (%): 4.90 (from 0.23 to 22.70)
menu offered in integrated public educational institutions maximum) - Clean leftovers (%): 7.06 (from 0.00 to 38.81)
in Belo Horizonte (MG), Brazil. - Dirty leftover (%): 5.30 (from 0.00 to 35.97).

(Continued)
293
 294

Table 2. (Continued)
Authors (year) Objectives Data analysis Main results

Juffo et al. (2016) To evaluate the volume of organic solid waste generated Analytical (Chi- Food waste by service:
in different food services and the quality of the square and Spermann - Ready-to-eat: From 0.9 kg to 36 kg
segregation process of this waste for reuse in animal correlation) - Buffet: From 2.6 kg to 45.9 kg
feed. and Descriptive - Snacks: From 4.9 kg to 53.3 kg
- All-you-can-eat: From 3.9 kg to 31.7 kg
- Buffet, generated a greater volume of waste (43.43 kg), even with a lower volume of daily meals (775 clients).
- Ready-to-eat service generated less waste (19.91 kg), with 2140 clients daily.
Mello et al. (2011) To evaluate food waste in a food and nutrition institution Descriptive Food waste by meal
located in a club in the city of Rio de Janeiro (RJ), Brazil. (average ± standard - Lunch:
deviation) Rest-intake (kg): 8.2 (1.98)
Rest-intake index (%): 8.42 (2.50)
Rest-intake by person (g): 70.8 (20.03)
- Dinner:
Rest-intake (kg): 4.7 (1.2)
Rest-intake index (%): 13 (4.5)
Rest-intake by person (g): 100 (29.8).
Moura et al. (2009) Know and disseminate institution’s waste indexes, Descriptive General food waste:
as well as to provide for their reduction in the future (average ± standard - Rest-intake (kg): 15.36 (5.3)
through campaigns with customers and training with deviation) - Rest-intake (%): 11.17 (2.64)
handlers. - Rest-intake by person (g): 58.44 (19.86)
- Clean leftovers (kg): 15.85 (5.72)
- Average percentage of clean leftovers (%): 10.41 (3.48)
- Total food waste (kg): 31.21 (8.57)
- Food waste by person (g): 118.68 (32.69).
Nonino-Borges Was to assess food wastage in the Hospital Emergency Descriptive (average and General food waste
et al. (2006) Section of the Clinical Hospital of the School of Medicine percentage) -C onsidering a total of 650 meals, totalling 402 kg of food (Lunch: 220 kg and Dinner: 182 kg). 123 kg (31%) returned to
of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Brazil and to the food service, which 58 kg for lunch (27%) and 65 kg for dinner (35%) were considered rest-intake.
propose a strategy to face this problem. -D isregarding the returned-intact meals, 353 kg of food were offered (Lunch: 202 kg and Dinner: 151 kg). Rest-intake
found was 77 kg, which 40 kg (20%) for lunch and 37 kg (25%) for dinner.
Lunch and Dinner = 571 meals
Total rest-intake (kg): 77.0
Per capita rest-intake (kg): 0.15 ± 0.04
Rest-intake (%): 24.0 ± 70.0.
Painter et al. (2016) To estimate food waste quantities generated in university Descriptive (average and General food waste:
dining hall facilities as a basis for identifying potential percentage) - Total food waste (g) by student daily: 2775
areas for promoting food waste reduction. - Total measured amount of food waste over the sampling period: 10 tons.
- Waste average (g) aluno/dia: 555
- Total food waste (kg): 10,481.
Papargyropoulou To determine the patterns and causes of food waste Descriptive (average and General food waste:
et al. (2019) generation in the hospitality and food service sector, in percentage) - Average waste for each meal/customer served (kg): 0.53 (0.08–1.68)
order to identify the most promising measures for food - Waste of preparation (overproduction, processing, expired foods, spoiled foods) (%): 15–55
waste prevention. - Leftovers (%): 22–50
- Rest-intake (%): 23–35
- Avoidable waste: 32–63% of total waste.

(Continued)
Waste Management & Research 41(2)
Table 2. (Continued)
Authors (year) Objectives Data analysis Main results

Ricarte et al. (2008) To evaluate food waste in a university restaurant, in Descriptive (average) - Food waste by foods and stage:
Carletto et al.

Fortaleza (CE), Brazil, focusing on the different forms of Food waste was Fruits and horticultural: 203 kg had been lost in the storage (5.84%) e pre-preparation (25.76%), corresponding to
waste, internal and external to production, observing the evaluated by menus and 31.60% food waste.
conditions of storage, conservation and pre-preparation was classified according Leftovers: Salads (5 kg day−1, representing 7% of the produced food), without reuse.
of vegetables and fruits; the procedures for using clean to Aragão (2005) Average Leftovers (%): 9.87
leftovers; and the index of rest ingestion of meals, aiming Excellent: from 0% to Average Rest-intake (%): 8.39
at diagnosing the level of waste of the institution. 3.0%; Good: from 3.1% - Food waste by menu:
to 7.5%; Rest-intake: Of the 25 menus offered during this survey, 12 (48%) resulted in poor rest-intake; 9 (36%), values
Bad: from 7.6% to 10%; classified as good and 4 (16%) showed unacceptable values.
Unacceptable: above 10%
Sabino et al. (2016) To evaluate the rest-intake index of a food and nutrition Descriptive General food waste:
institution that produces meals transported to a hospital (average ± standard - Rest-intake (%): ranged from 22.73 to 47.87, with average of 39.62
in Teófilo Otoni (MG), Brazil. deviation) - Rest-intake by person (g): 173.
Silva et al. (2013) To make a qualitative assessment of the nutritional and Descriptive (percentage) General food waste:
sensory aspects of day-care centre menu preparations - Rest-intake average (%): 34.0 from 25.0 to 43.0.
and quantify the rest-intake of children that attend public
day-care centres in the municipality of São Paulo (SP),
Brazil.
Silva et al. (2019) To assess the index of leftovers and rest-intake from the Descriptive (average) General food waste:
lunch at the Food and Nutrition Unit of the Support Group - Total leftovers (%): 24.4
for Oncology Patients. - Average leftovers per customer (g): 0.164
- Daily average rest-intake for patients (kg): 2.776
- Daily average rest-intake for companions and employees (kg): 3.527
- Average rest-intake among patients (%): 6.75
- Average rest-intake among companions and employees (%): 8.29.
Silvennoinen To estimate the volume of originally edible food waste Descriptive (percentage, General food waste:
et al. (2015) and its distribution among different food service outlets; average, minimum, - Of 23,220 kg of food prepared during the study period, 4396 kg were wasted.
to monitor the sources of food waste generation e.g. maximum) - The amount of food waste of edible origin (spoiled products, improperly prepared food, expired date products,
kitchen, service and customer leftovers; to analyse the overproduction, overproduction), in relation to prepared foods ranged from 19% to 27%, according to the type of
content of the plate leftovers; and to monitor originally establishment
inedible bio waste. - The inedible waste (vegetable peelings and bones) representing from 2% to 11% of all the food handled in the outlets.
- The main drivers of wasted food are buffet services and overproduction (clean leftovers).
Silvennoinen To explore food waste data, its variation and Descriptive (average and General food waste:
et al. (2019) measurement method and discuss what kind of percentage) - Food destination: 17.5% goes to waste
monitoring process would be optimal for Finnish food - Amount of waste: from 449 g of prepared food per serving, 78 g was wasted
service system; to get up-to-date information about food - Origin of waste: 1st leftovers (11.4%), 2nd remains (3.9%) and 3rd preparation waste (2.2%).
waste amounts in the sector and acquire new knowledge
about origins of it, the composition of serving waste; and,
to get a sense of the diversity within the sector.
Soares et al. (2011) Quantify and evaluate the cost of clean leftovers in eightDescriptive (percentage) General food waste and costs:
food and nutrition institutions of a large steel company. - 50% of the food service establishment did not reach values less than or equal to 30 g of clean leftovers.
- Clean leftovers by person: between 24 g and 60 g, equivalent to a monthly food waste of 176–1213 kg of food.
- Monthly cost of food waste: From 2.2% to 3.0% of the amount spent monthly on food.
Sonnino and Address the need for more comprehensive studies Descriptive (average and General food waste by meal service:
McWilliam (2011) of sustainable food systems through a case study of percentage) - Total food waste (%): From 19.0 to 66.0, varying between hospitals and between bulk and plated service
hospital food waste in Wales, UK. - Rest-intake (%): From 14.0 to 42.0.
Souza et al. (2018) To evaluate the nutritional adequacy of meals served and Descriptive (average and Waste according to menu:
consumed, as well as quantifying food waste in child day- percentage) - 85 foods and preparations on the menu: 68% with a percentage of leftover intake >10%
care centres in Maceió (AL), Brazil. - Food actually consumed by children: ranged from 79% to 84% of the food served.

(Continued)
295
 296

Table 2. (Continued)
Authors (year) Objectives Data analysis Main results

Viana and Ferreira To evaluate food waste in a food and nutrition institution Descriptive (average and General food waste:
(2017) in the city of Januária (MG), Brazil, focusing on rest- percentage) - Clean leftover (%): ranged from 0.08 to 27.44
intake. - Rest-intake (%): ranged from 5.48 to 18.5
- Average rest-intake (kg): 37.32
-Average rest-intake per person (g): 79.
Wang et al. (2017) To characterize the total and per capita food waste Descriptive (average) General food waste:
generated in Chinese resultants and their composition Average amount of food waste per capita per meal in the four cities (g): 93
based on field survey and direct weighing in the four case Average per capita waste per meal according to city:
cities; and, to explore the patterns of and reasons behind - Chengdu 103 g
restaurant food waste generation in China and their - Lhasa 98 g
implications on food waste reduction strategies. - Shanghai 97 g
- Beijing 77 g.
Zandonadi and To evaluate the consumer profile regarding the food Analytical General food waste:
Maurício (2012) waste and menu acceptability of the civil construction and Descriptive (average - Institution A: Average of 24.18 kg foods (leftovers and rest-intake) by person.
work force in one institution of Cuiaba (MT), Brazil. and percentage) Leftovers: From 4.02% to 33.61%, with the average of 17.35%
Rest-intake: From 2.2% to 8.2%, with the average of 5.16%.
- Institution B: Average of 16.56 kg foods leftovers and rest-intake) by person
Leftovers: From 1.32% to 11.37%, with the average of 5.37%
Rest-intake: From 1.88% to 7.2% with the average of 3.63%.
Zotesso et al. (2016) To evaluate food waste in the university restaurant of Descriptive (average and Food waste according to month of evaluation:
the State University of Maringá (PR), Brazil, in order to percentage) - Leftovers average (%): 13.3% (March) and 16.4% (August).
identify the factors that most contribute to waste in the - Rest-intake average (%):11.9% (2.4) in march and 10.4% (2.7) in august.
institution and propose actions to reduce it. - Leftovers (kg): 192.5 (84.6) in march and 209.6 (105.6) in august.
- Rest-intake (kg): 166.3 (60.6) in march and 116.6 (48.8) in august.
Waste Management & Research 41(2)
Table 3. Objectives, form of data analysis and main results of the studies included in the systematic literature review that involved the application of questionnaires, checklists
and water footprint assessment.
Author (year) Objective of the study Data analysis form Main results

Aamir Quantify the amount of food waste in Descriptive (average) General waste:
et al. (2018) the restaurant industry and explore the - Average amount of waste per day (kg): 35.6
underlying reasons for this. Ways to avoid waste:
Carletto et al.

- Demand forecasts and team training were reported by most respondents

Waste-generating sources:
- Overproduction, rest-intake and expired food in all evaluated restaurants
Barriers:
- Just a separate food waste bin as the main source of separation of food waste in most restaurants
- Responsibility concerns as the main barrier to food donation in all restaurants
-M ost restaurants preferred to donate food to nursing homes and orphanages, followed by nongovernmental organizations and
slums, and finally schools
Practices to reduce the generation of solid waste:
- 64.29% of hospital institutions do not use the Technical Preparation Form
- 78.57% do not control losses in the pre-preparation
- 71.43% do not control leftovers
- 78.57% do not check remains.
Halmenschlager Diagnose the situation of environmental Descriptive (percentage) Measures related to the rational use of water:
(2017) sustainability management in the production -1 00% (n = 14) of hospitals perform identification and correction of leaks and present fat boxes in an appropriate state of
of meals from hospital food services, conservation, functioning and location
located in the southern region of the state of - 92.86% use an adequate amount of detergent
Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. - 85.71% perform controlled rinsing in the hygiene process
Measures related to the rational use of energy:
-A ll participating hospitals adopt some measure to reduce energy, the main ones being the exclusive use of fluorescent lamps,
natural ventilation and air conditioning system in areas where there is no natural ventilation.
-1 00% perform maintenance of their equipment and heating and cooling systems, all of which are corrective, predictive and
preventive maintenance occurs in less than 1/3 of the sample
Sustainability practices adopted:
- 79% of UANs perform selective collection
- 57% separate cans, plastics, paper, metal and organic waste
- 43% separate only recyclable solid waste from organic waste
- 93% promote training for the handling of solid waste
- 71% promote training for rational use of water and prevention of waste during hygiene
- 78% promote training for the rational use of energy
Interview with managers:
-T he managers interviewed (n = 14) were asked about what sustainability is and 71% (n = 10) demonstrated knowledge about the
topic, while 29% (n = 4) did not know and/or did not want to answer
- Regarding the relationship between sustainability and the environment, 64% (n = 9) showed understanding on the subject, 21%
(n = 3) answered partially and 14% (n = 2) did not know or did not want to answer the question
- When asked about the impact the institution has on the environment, 57% (n = 8) answered in order to demonstrate knowledge
about the subject, 7% (n = 1) answered in part and 36% (n = 5) did not knew or did not want to answer
-W  hen asked about the institution’s actions in relation to sustainability in the production of meals and what practices demonstrate
these actions, 36% say they have sustainable actions, 43% believe they have part actions and 21% have no sustainable actions.
Hatjiathanassiadou To evaluate the environmental impacts Analytical (T Test) Water footprint:
et al. (2019) through water footprint estimation of Descriptive (percentage, - Traditional menus: 2752.0 + 396.8 L per capita per week
conventional and vegetarian menus; average per capita, - Vegetarian menu: 1113.9 + 125.8 per capita per week, with p < 0.05
and identification of the place of origin standard deviation) - Water footprint 2.47 times higher in the traditional menu, associated with the use of products of animal origin, mainly beef
of foodstuff used in meals served in a Disposal of raw materials:
university restaurant of a federal public - 75% (n = 12) post production, 19% (n = 3) pre-prepared and 6.2% (n = 1) storage
university in Brazil. Use of food:
- 62.5% (n = 10) make the most of raw materials
- 25.0% (n = 4) reuse some foods in other dishes
- 37.5% (n = 6) discard leftovers entirely
- 18.8% (n = 3) make leftovers available for employees’ meals and preparation of pies
- 12.5% (n = 2) donate to homeless people
- 6.2% (n = 1) leftovers are collected from the oil by an outsourced company.
297

(Continued)
 298

Table 3. (Continued)
Author (year) Objective of the study Data analysis form Main results

Pospischek Evaluate the environmental sustainability Concern for the environment:

Descriptive (percentage)
et al. (2014) actions developed in commercial - 37.5% (n = 6) had no concern or action against the degradation of the environment
restaurants located in the city of São Paulo. - 62.5% (n = 10) claimed to be concerned with the degradation of the environment
- 31.2% (n = 5) the action taken for this purpose consisted of separating recyclable waste
- 18.8% (n = 3) in the correct disposal of frying oil
-1 2.5% (n = 2) reported that their concern with the environment was focused on the product used to prepare the barbecue included
in the self service
Selective collect:
-8 7.5% (n = 14) measured the amount of waste generated per day, of these, 18.7% (n = 3) had containers in their establishments with
different colours for each type of waste
Origin of waste:
1st organic waste; 2nd cardboard; 3rd plastic; 4th metals; 5th glass/porcelain
Disposal of organic waste:
- 100% (n = 16) of food waste goes to waste, not using crushers connected to the sewer
- 6.2% (n = 1) separated organic waste to produce fertilizer
Oil destination:
- 100% (n = 16) stored in containers and later collected by an outsourced company
- 56.2% (n = 9) the outsourced company that collects the oil leaves cleaning products such as soap, bleach and detergent in exchange.
Sakaguchi To investigate how restaurateurs in Descriptive (average) Actions in relation to food waste:
et al. (2018) Berkeley, California, USA perceive food - 34% did not measure the amount of food waste they produced
waste given current financial incentives and - 72% donated edible leftovers to employees as a way to avoid waste
policies. - 38% asked customers to take leftovers home to feed the animals
- 86% of restaurants did not donate edible leftovers
- 14% disposed of the garbage in landfills
- 75% of the establishments evaluated had uncertainties about their responsibility, which was an impediment to donating excess food
- 79% did not collaborate with charities to donate surplus food
- 69% said they were not eligible to present a tax benefit or did not know details about the subject.
Santos et al. (2012) To use two checklists based on the ISO Descriptive (percentage) Compliance with ISO 22000 items:
22000 and 14001 standards to assess Group 1 (G1): compliance - Food security system: G1 (2.7%) restaurants; G2 (10.8%) restaurants; G3 (86.5%) restaurants
conformity of a-la-carte restaurants in with 76 to 100% of the - Responsibility of management: G2 (13.5%) restaurants; G3 (86.5%) restaurants
Brasilia with the Food Safety Management items in the checklists; - Resource management: G2 (18.9%) restaurants; G3 (81.1%) restaurants
System and Environmental Management Compliance of group - Plan and manufacture safe products: G3 (100%) restaurants
System. 2 (G2) with 51 to 75%; - Validation, verification and improvement of the food security system: G3 (100%) restaurants
Compliance with group 3 Compliance with ISO 14001 items:
(G3) with 0 to 50%. - All restaurants were classified as G3 in relation to all sections of the standard
- Direct observation revealed that the restaurants had no environmental concerns or compliance with Brazilian law that determines
the separation of recyclable and disposable waste
- Only 11 restaurants (29.7%) had a system for separating recyclable and nonrecyclable materials and proper disposal of cooking oil.
Strasburg and To propose and apply a procedure for Descriptive - The first equation evaluated the relationship between the energy supply and the total amount of raw materials with respect to the
Jahno (2017a) evaluating environmental performance from environmental impact. The higher this value, the better the relationship. The restaurant ranking showed No. 5 as the most eco-
the perspective of eco-efficiency, for the efficient (1071), followed by restaurants 3 (0.940), 1 (0.721), 2 (0.693) and 4 (0.283)
food service industry. - A reversal of the equation is made to assess the environmental impact on the relationship between energy supply and cost. The
lower the value, the lower the environmental impact. The first two positions were for restaurants 5 (3103) and 3 (3824), followed by
2 (4758), 1 (5135) and 4 (10,959).
Waste Management & Research 41(2)
Carletto et al. 299

Table 4. Risk of bias assessment of the studies included in During the production and distribution of meals, one must
the systematic review according to MAStARI. consider the number of customers, so that the volume of meals
Author (year) Risk percentage Risk of bias produced is proportional to the demand, as well as the presenta-
tion and organoleptic aspects of the preparations, not to mention
Aamir et al. (2018) 57.14 Moderate the adaptation to the climate. Adequate planning prevents high
Abdelaal et al. (2019) 85.71 Low
generation of leftovers and minimizes the environmental impacts
Abreu et al. (2012) 85.71 Low
Alves and Ueno (2015) 85.71 Low caused by food waste, besides influencing the food services
Aranha and Gustavo (2018) 85.71 Low expenditure (Silvério and Oltramari, 2014; Soares et al., 2011).
Araújo and Carvalho (2015) 71.43 Low The technical cards are valuable tools that can assist in con-
Beal et al. (2018) 85.71 Low trolling the waste of food service. These cards aid the nutritionist,
Betz et al. (2015) 85.71 Low standardizing and controlling production and distribution,
Nonino-Borges et al. (2006) 85.71 Low directly influencing the quality of the service offered, in addition
Canonico et al. (2014) 85.71 Low
to facilitating the execution of the processes, the acquisition and
Carvalho et al. (2013) 85.71 Low
control of products, and the planning of the menu. The sheets
Copatti et al. (2018) 85.71 Low
Dias-Ferreira et al. (2015) 85.71 Low also provide data on correction and cooking factors per capita,
Domingues et al. (2016) 85.71 Low portioning and nutritional information, contributing to the train-
Engström and Carlsson- 85.71 Low ing of the crew (Akutsu et al., 2005).
Kanyama (2004) Educational actions directed at the customers are also
Eriksson et al. (2017) 100.00 Low extremely relevant in promoting sustainability, in view of the
Fatel et al. (2018) 85.71 Low
direct impact of customer behaviour on food waste (Issa et al.,
Ferreira et al. (2012) 85.71 Low
2014; Silvério and Oltramari, 2014). In the study by Painter et al.
Galian et al. (2016) 85.71 Low
Halmenschlager (2017) 100.00 Low (2016), conducted in cafeterias at the University of Rhodes,
Hatjiathanassiadou et al. (2019) 85.71 Low South Africa, the average food waste was around 555 ± 107 g per
Issa et al. (2014) 100.00 Low student per day. The total amount of food waste measured over
Juffo et al. (2016) 71.43 Low the sampling period was estimated to be around 10 ton. In addi-
Longo-Silva et al. (2013) 100.00 Low tion, the students answered a questionnaire that provided an
Mello et al. (2011) 85.71 Low insight into their eating habits, and perceptions on the reasons
Moura et al. (2009) 85.71 Low
behind food waste. When asked whether or not they finished
Painter et al. (2016) 85.71 Low
the food on their plates, only 18% of students said they ‘always’
Papargyropoulou et al. (2019) 71.43 Low
Pospischek et al. (2014) 85.71 Low finished everything. Almost half of the students (46%) said they
Ricarte et al. (2008) 71.43 Low ‘sometimes’ finished their meals, 30% rarely did it, and 6% never
Sabino et al. (2016) 85.71 Low finished their food, suggesting that a considerable proportion of
Sakaguchi et al. (2018) 71.43 Low students did not eat all of the food served. When students were
Santos et al. (2012) 85.71 Low asked why they did not finish their meals, the main reason was
Silva et al. (2019) 85.71 Low ‘not liking the food’ (73%). Other reasons were haste (32%), and
Silvennoinen et al. (2015) 85.71 Low
‘just not being hungry’ (30%).
Silvennoinen et al. (2019) 71.43 Low
Soares et al. (2011) 85.71 Low Britto and Oliveiro (2017) described positive impacts on the
Sonnino and McWilliam (2011) 85.71 Low control of rest-intake when promoting nutrition education against
Souza et al. (2018) 85.71 Low waste and changes in portion sizes in the nutrition and dietary
Strasburg and Jahno (2017a) 85.71 Low service of a hospital in São José do Rio Preto, São Paulo. The
Viana and Ferreira (2017) 85.71 Low authors observed that the average food waste decreased from
Wang et al. (2017) 100.00 Low 23 kg to 16 kg per day, a drop of 31% in the volume of waste.
Zandonadi and Maurício (2012) 71.43 Low
There was a monthly reduction from 680 kg to 477 kg of food
Zotesso et al. (2016) 85.71 Low
waste, corresponding to 30% in total volume.
MAStARI: Meta-analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Borges et al. (2019) have also described a positive outcome
Instrument after developing educational actions for employees and raising
customer awareness in a university cafeteria. Clean leftovers
permanent training of employees, along with the planning of dropped from 31.64 ± 10.80 kg to 14.93 ± 10.43 kg (p = 0.001),
menus considering seasonality and regional foods, as well as the validating the effectiveness of the crew’s training. The work with
adoption of appropriate processing techniques that preserve the customers, which was assessed through the analysis of
nutritional and sensory properties of food and its use in full rest-intake, also yielded positive results, with scraps dropping
(Abreu et al., 2012). The preventive maintenance of equipment, from 46.90 g to 37.83 g (p = 0.021). With the maximum value of
waste separation and adequate waste management are also impor- acceptable waste in terms of rest-intake set at 10%, the authors
tant (Dias and Oliveira, 2016). reported a reduction from 8.68% to 6.20% of rest-intake after
300 Waste Management & Research 41(2)

implementation of the actions proposed (p = 0.003), placing the Declaration of conflicting interests
cafeteria in a satisfactory range. The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to
Ricarte et al. (2008) observed that the lack of measures to take the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
advantage of clean leftovers resulted in approximately 7% of
waste. Although an alternative to reduce food waste would be the Funding
donation of surpluses, some studies included in this review The authors received no financial support for the research, author-
reported that a reason for this measure not being applied was the ship, and/or publication of this article.
concern with the responsibility for any problems that may arise
from the donated food (Aamir et al., 2018; Sakaguchi et al., 2018). ORCID iD
In addition to environmental, economic and social benefits, Daniela Alves Silva https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7396-2305
sustainability practices in the food service can be good for the
consumers’ health. The use of fresh foods in full and the respect References
for seasonality and local socio-biodiversity contribute to improving Aamir M, Ahmad H, Javaid Q, et al. (2018) Waste not, want not: A case
the quality of the food offered to the population (Veiros and study on food waste in restaurants of Lahore, Pakistan. Journal of Food
Proença, 2010). Products Marketing 24: 591–610.
Abdelaal AH, Mckay G and Mackey HR (2019) Food waste from a university
In this scenario, the important role of the nutritionist is empha-
campus in the Middle East: Drivers, composition, and resource recovery
sized, for this professional is trained to select effective methods potential. Waste Management 98: 14–20.
of acquisition, production and distribution of food, as well as to Abreu ES and Spinelli MGN (2003) Avaliação da Produção. In: Abreu
ES, Spinelli MGN and Zanardi AMP (eds) Gestão de Unidades de
supervise and analyse the indicators, aiming at better results
Alimentação e Nutrição: um modo de fazer. São Paulo: Editora Metha,
along with the crew (Araújo and Carvalho, 2015). pp. 127–141.
It should be noted that most of the articles included in this Abreu ES, Simony RF, Silveira Dias DH, et al. (2012) Avaliação do desper-
study have been published in the last 5 years, and that all dício alimentar na produção e distribuição de refeições de um hospital de
São Paulo. Revista Simbio-Logias 5: 42–50.
countries involved are members of the United Nations (UN). Akutsu RC, Botelho RBA, Camargo E, et al. (2005) A ficha técnica de pre-
That may be related to the update of the 2030 Agenda for paração como instrumento de qualidade na produção de refeições. Revista
Sustainable Development that took place in 2015, built on the de Nutrição 18: 277–279.
Alves MG and Ueno M (2015) Identificação de fontes de geração de resíduos
legacy of the Millennium Development Goals with the aim of
sólidos em uma unidade de alimentação e nutrição. Revista Ambiente &
boosting sustainability, eradicating inequalities and promoting Água 10: 874–888.
the well-being of humanity. The UN established practices to Aragão MFJ (2005) Controle da aceitação de refeições em uma Unidade de
Alimentação Institucional da cidade de Fortaleza-CE. 78 f. Monografia
be adopted by its allied countries, comprising 17 items termed
(Especialização em Gestão de Qualidade em Serviços de Alimentação) -
SDGs that encompass zero hunger and sustainable agriculture, Universidade Estadual do Ceará, Fortaleza.
sustainable cities and communities, and responsible consumption Aranha F and Gustavo AFS (2018) Avaliação do desperdício de alimen-
and production (ONU, 2015). tos em uma unidade de alimentação e nutrição na cidade de Botucatu,
SP [Evaluation of food waste in a food and nutrition unit in the city of
This systematic review presents as its own limitations those of Botucatu, SP]. Revista Higiene Alimentar 32: 28–32.
the selected studies, such as poor methodological detailing, specific Araújo ELM and Carvalho ACMS (2015) Sustentabilidade e geração de
and local investigations, and also a predominantly descriptive resíduos em uma unidade de alimentação e nutrição da cidade de Goiânia
– GO. Demetra: Alimentação, Nutrição & Saúde 10: 775–796.
analysis of the results. Nevertheless, this is a pioneering study that
Associação Brasileira Das Empresas De Refeições Coletivas (2020) Mercado
included articles published in different databases, including grey Real: refeições, mão-de-obra empregada no setor de refeições coleti-
literature, without restrictions on language and date of publication. vas e faturamento. Available at: https://www.aberc.com.br/mercadoreal
(accessed 22 September 2020).
Beal JC, Fritz RE and Cozer M (2018) Índice de Resto Ingestão e Sobras
Conclusions Alimentares de um Serviço de Nutrição e Dietética Localizado no
Sudoeste do Paraná. Simbio-Logias 10: 93–101.
This review identified a restricted assessment of sustainability in Betz A, Buchli J, Göbel C, et al. (2015) Food waste in the Swiss food service
industry – Magnitude and potential for reduction. Waste Management 35:
food service, as opposed to the need of deepening sustainability 218–226.
indicators and the effect of meal production processes on sustain- Borges MP, Rodrigues Souza LH, de Pinho S, et al. (2019) Impacto
able development. High levels of waste, combined with the scar- de uma campanha para redução de desperdício de alimentos em um
restaurante universitário. Engenharia Sanitaria e Ambiental 24:
city of practices aimed at controlling the use of natural resources
843–848.
and waste generation, and the recent debate on the subject, point Brasil (2006) Ministério da Saúde. Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária.
to the importance of sensitizing professionals to the combination Manual de gerenciamento de resíduos de serviços de saúde. Brasília,
of different measures in this investigation, in addition to strate- Brazil: Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária.
Brasil (2010) Presidência da República do Brasil. Lei nº 12.305/2010.
gies to mitigate the environmental impact and the commitment of Institui a Política Nacional de Resíduos Sólidos; altera a Lei no 9.605, de
resources for future generations. 12 de fevereiro de 1998 e dá outras providências. Brasília, Brazil: Diário
Oficial da República Federativa do Brasil.
Author contributions Britto APD and Oliveiro FGR (2017) Desperdício alimentar: Conscientização
dos comensais de um serviço hospitalar de alimentação e nutrição.
FCC and DAS had the idea for the article. FCC and LOF performed Arquivos de Ciências da Saúde 24: 61–64.
the literature search and data analysis. All authors drafted and criti- Bilck AP, et al. (2009) Aproveitamento de subprodutos: restaurantes de
cally revised the work. Londrina. Revista em Agronegócios e Meio Ambiente 2: 87–104.
Carletto et al. 301

Canonico FS, Pagamunici LM and Ruiz SP (2014) Avaliação de sobras e Lyra L (2008) Avaliação da adequação de unidades produtoras de refeições
resto ingesta de um restaurante popular do município de Maringá-PR. do Distrito Federal quanto as normas ABNT NBR ISO 14001:2004 e
Revista Uningá 19: 5–8. 22000:2006. 64 f. Dissertação (Especialização em Gastronomia e Saúde)
Carvalho EM, Fonseca CS and Castro LCV (2013) Avaliação do índice de – Centro de Excelência em Turismo. Universidade de Brasília, Distrito
resto-ingestão e sobras em uma Unidade Produtora de Refeição (UPR). Federal.
Revista Higiene Alimentar 27: 19–22. Mello AG, Back FDS, Baratta R, et al. (2011) Avaliação do desperdício
Castro FAF and Queiroz VMV (2007) Cardápios: planejamento e etiqueta de alimentos em unidade de alimentação e nutrição localizada em
(22nd ed.). Viçosa: UFV, p. 97. um clube da cidade do Rio de Janeiro. Revista Higiene Alimentar 25:
Colares LGT, Figueiredo VO and Mello A (2014) Lista de verificação de boas 33–39.
práticas ambientais em serviços de alimentação. 12o Ofício de Niterói Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, et al. (2015) Preferred reporting items for
– RJ: Registro de Títulos e Documentos no 74767, livro B-350, 2014. systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 state-
Available at: http://www.crn4.org.br (accessed 22 September 2020). ment. Systematic Reviews 4: 1.
Copatti LC, Bruger VB, Baratto I, et al. (2018) Avaliação de resto de ingesta Moola S, Munn Z, Tufanaru C, et al. (2020) Chapter 7: Systematic reviews
em uma unidade de alimentação e nutrição hospitalar na cidade de Pato of etiology and risk. In: Aromataris E and Munn Z (eds) JBI Manual for
Branco-PR. Revista Brasileira de Obesidade, Nutrição e Emagrecimento Evidence Synthesis. Adelaide, Australia: JBI. Available at: https://synthe-
12: 976–983. sismanual.jbi.global
Dias NA and Oliveira AL (2016) Sustentabilidade nas áreas de Alimentação Moura PN, Honaiser A and Bolognini MCM (2009) Avaliação do índice de
e Nutrição: Desafios para o nutricionista no século XXI. Revista Higiene resto ingestão e sobras em Unidades de Alimentação e Nutrição (UAN)
Alimentar 30: 26–31. do colégio agrícola de Guarapuava (PR). Revista Salus 3: 15–22.
Dias-Ferreira C, Santos T and Oliveira V (2015) Hospital food waste and Nonino-Borges CB, Rabito EI, da Silva K, et al. (2006) Desperdício de
environmental and economic indicators – A Portuguese case study. Waste Alimentos Intra – Hospitalar. Revista de Nutrição 19: 349–356.
Management 46: 146–154. Organização das Nações Unidas (ONU) (2015) Transformando Nosso
Domingues CFS, Thomaz DPC, Simões DM, et al (2016) Geração de Mundo: A Agenda 2030 para o Desenvolvimento Sustentável. Available
resíduos sólidos orgânicos em um restaurante universitário de São Paulo/ at: https://brasil.un.org/sites/default/files/2020-09/agenda2030-pt-br.pdf
SP. Revista Meio Ambiente e Sustentabilidade 10: 58–73. (accessed 6 September 2022).
Engström R and Carlsson-Kanyama A (2004) Food losses in food service Painter K, Thondhlana G and Kua H (2016) Food waste generation and poten-
institutions examples from Sweden. Food Policy 29: 203–213. tial interventions at Rhodes University, South Africa. Waste Management
Eriksson M, Persson Osowski C, Malefors C, et al. (2017) Quantification 56: 491–497.
of food waste in public catering services – A case study from a Swedish Papargyropoulou E, Steinberger JK, Wright N, et al. (2019) Patterns
municipality. Waste Management 61: 415–422. and causes of food waste in the hospitality and food service sector:
Falcomer AL, Santos Araújo L, Farage P, et al. (2018) Gluten contamination Food waste prevention insights from Malaysia. Sustainability 11:
in food services and industry: A systematic review. Critical Reviews in 1–24.
Food Science and Nutrition 60: 479–493. Pospischek VS, Spinelli MGN and Matias ACG (2014) Avaliação de ações
Fatel ECS, Fritz RE and Cozer M (2018) Avaliação do Índice de Resto de sustentabilidade ambiental em restaurantes comerciais localizados no
Ingestão e Sobras do Almoço Servido no Refeitório de Uma Unidade município de São Paulo. Demetra 9: 595–611.
de Alimentação e Nutrição Hospitalar Localizada no Oeste do Paraná. Quested T and Parry A (2011) New estimates for household food and drink
Nutrição em Pauta 148: 31–36. waste in the UK. In Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP).
Ferreira JA, dos Santos CHP, Pereira AJS, et al. (2012) Avaliação da sobra Available at: https://wrap.org.uk/resources/report/estimates-household-
limpa e resto ingesta de um CEINF em Campo Grande-MS. Ensaios e food-and-drink-waste-uk-2011 (accessed 22 September 2020).
Ciência Ciências Biológicas, Agrárias e da Saúde 16: 83–94. Ricarte MPR, Fé MABM, Santos IHVS, et al. (2008) Avaliação do desperdí-
Food and Agriculture Organization of The United Nations (2011) Global cio de alimentos em uma unidade de alimentação e nutrição institucional
food losses and food waste: Extent causes and prevention. Roma. em Fortaleza/CE. Saber Científico 1: 158–175.
Available at: http://www.fao.org/3/mb060e/mb060e00.htm (accessed Sabino JB, Brasileiro NPM and Souza LT (2016) Pesquisa de resto-ingesta
16 October 2020). em uma Unidade de Alimentação e Nutrição hospital de Teófilo Otoni
Food Waste Reduction Alliance (FWRA) (2016) Analysis of U.S. food waste – MG. Revista Higiene Alimentar 30: 24–27.
among food manufacturers, retailers, and restaurants. Available at: http:// Sakaguchi L, Pak N and Potts MD (2018) Tackling the issue of food waste in
www.foodwastealliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/FWRA-Food- restaurants: Options for measurement method, reduction and behavioral
Waste-Survey-2016-Report_Final.pdf (accessed 20 March 2018). change. Journal of Cleaner Production 180: 430–436.
Galian LCF, Santos SS and Madrona GS (2016) Análise do desperdício de Santos LL, Akutsu R, Botelho RBA, et al. (2012) Food service compliance
alimentos em uma unidade de alimentação e nutrição. Revista Geintec 2: with ISO 14001 and ISO 22000. Revista de Nutrição 25: 373–380.
3121–3127. Silva AM, Silva CP and Pessina EL (2010) Avaliação do índice de resto
Halmenschlager W (2017) Sustentabilidade Ambiental em Unidades de ingesta após campanha de conscientização dos clientes contra o desperdí-
Alimentação e Nutrição Hospitalares da Região Sul do Rio Grande do cio de alimentos em um serviço de alimentação hospitalar. Rev. Simbio-
Sul. 2017. 64 f. Dissertação (Mestrado), Programa de Pós-Graduação em Logias 3: 43–56.
Nutrição e Alimentos, Faculdade de Nutrição, Universidade Federal de Silva JS, Salomão JO, Peres DS, et al. (2019) Avaliação de resto-ingesta em
Pelotas, Pelotas. unidade de alimentação e nutrição/Evaluation o frest-of-ingestion in food
Hatjiathanassiadou M, Souza SRGd, Nogueira JP, et al. (2019) Environ­ and nutrition unit. Revista de Enfermeria 13: e238574.
mental impacts of university restaurant menus: A case study in Brazil. Silvennoinen K, Heikkilä L, Katajajuuri JM, et al. (2015) Food waste vol-
Sustainability 11: 1–15. ume and origin: Case studies in the Finnish food service sector. Waste
Issa RC, Moraes LF, Francisco RRJ, et al. (2014) Alimentação escolar: plane- Management 46: 140–145.
jamento, produção, distribuição e adequação. Revista Panamericana de Silvennoinen K, Nisonen S and Pietiläinen O (2019) Food waste case study
Salud Pública 35: 96–103. and monitoring developing in Finnish food services. Waste Management
Juffo EELD, Moraes IMA, Allegretti G, et al. (2016) Avaliação quantita- 97: 97–104.
tiva e do grau de segregação dos resíduos sólidos orgânicos gerados em Silvério GA and Oltramari K (2014) Desperdício de alimentos em Unidades
serviços de alimentação de um shopping center em Porto Alegre – RS. de Alimentação e Nutrição brasileiras. Rev do Setor de Ciências Agrárias
Revista Higiene Alimentar 30: 53–58. e Ambientais 10: 125–133.
Lima BTAN and Borges AF (2020) Alimentação fora do lar: fatores que Soares ICC, da Silva ER, Priore SE, et al. (2011) Quantificação e análise
influenciam consumidores a optarem por um restaurante fast-food. do custo da sobra limpa em unidades de alimentação e nutrição de uma
Caderno Profissional De Marketing UNIMEP 8: 1–8. empresa de grande porte. Revista de Nutrição 24: 593–604.
Longo-Silva G, Toloni MHA, Rodrigues S, et al. (2013) Qualitative evalua- Sonnino R and McWilliam S (2011) Food waste, catering practices and pub-
tion of the menu and plate waste in public daycare centers in São Paulo lic procurement: A case study of hospital food systems in Wales. Food
city, Brazil. Revista de Nutrição 26: 135–144. Policy 36: 823–829.
302 Waste Management & Research 41(2)

Souza CAN, Longo-Silva G, Menezes RCG, et al. (2018) Adequação nutri- Viana RM and Ferreira LC (2017) Avaliação do desperdício de alimentos
cional e desperdício de alimentos em Centros de Educação Infantil. em unidade de alimentação e nutrição cidade de Januária, MG. Revista
Revista Ciência & Saúde Coletiva 23: 4177–4188. Higiene Alimentar 31: 22–26.
Stone J, Garcia-Garcia G and Rahimifard S (2019) Development of a prag- Wang LE, Liu G, Liu X, et al. (2017) The weight of unfinished plate: A
matic framework to help food and drink manufacturers select the most survey based characterization of restaurant food waste in Chinese cities.
sustainable food waste valorisation strategy. Journal of Environmental Waste Management 66: 3–12.
Management 247: 425–438. Yu Y, et al. (2010) Assessing regional and global water footprints for
Strasburg VJ and Jahno VD (2017a) Application of eco-efficiency in the the UK. Ecol. Ecol. Econ. 69:1140e1147. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.
assessment of raw materials consumed by university restaurants in Brazil: ecolecon.2009.12.008
A case study. Journal of Cleaner Production 161: 178–187. Zandonadi HS and Maurício AA (2012) Avaliação do índice de resto-ingesta,
Strasburg VJ and Jahno VD (2017b) Paradigmas das práticas de gestão de refeições consumidas por trabalhadores da construção civil no municí-
ambiental no segmento de produção de refeições no Brasil. Engenharia pio de Cuiabá, MT. Revista Higiene Alimentar 26: 64–70.
Sanitaria e Ambiental 22: 3–12. Zorpas AA, Lasaridi K, Abeliotis C, et al. (2014) Waste prevention cam-
Tayra F and Ribeiro H (2006) Modelos de indicadores de sustentabilidade: paign regarding the waste framework directive. Fresenius Environmental
síntese e avaliação crítica das principais experiências. Saúde e Sociedade Bulletin 23: 2876–2883.
15: 84–95. Zorpas AA, Lasaridi K, Voukkali I, et al. (2015) Promoting sustainable
Vaz CS (2003) Alimentação de coletividade: uma abordagem gerencial. Manual waste prevention strategy activities and planning in relation to the waste
Prático do gestor de serviços de refeições coletivas. Brasília: Metha; 2003. framework directive in insular communities. Environmental Processes 2:
Veiros MB et al (2009) Food safety practices in a Portuguese canteen. Food 159–173.
Control 20: 936-941. Zotesso J, Cossich E, Colares L, et al. (2016) Analysis of solid waste gen-
Veiros MB and Proença RPC (2010) Princípios de sustentabilidade na eration in a university cafeteria in Brazil: A case study. Environmental
produção de refeições. Nutrição em Pauta 102: 45–49. Engineering and Management Journal 18: 294–308.