National Implications of California’s Edible Food Recovery Requirements

Food waste and food insecurity are issues that, as a nation, we need to address. More people are recognizing the connection between these two problems and the need to solve both. Across the nation, states such as New York, Maryland, Rhode Island and many others, have passed bills intended to achieve the redirection of edible food away from landfills. The State of California is implementing arguably the most aggressive regulations in the country. Other states are watching to see the impact of these new regulations as they consider enhancing or enacting their own rules.

According to a 2018 study by CalRecycle, food waste was 13% of what was disposed of in California landfills while one in five Californians are food insecure. This equates to over six million tons of food waste every year. The environmental impacts include the emission of methane gas, a known greenhouse gas pollutant. At the same time food insecurity increased during the COVID 19 pandemic.

Through Senate Bill 1383 (SB 1383) California has initiated a state-mandated effort to reduce organic waste in California landfills by 75% and increase excess edible food recovery by 20% by 2025. This legislation is unique in the United States as it has specific mandates requiring larger food generators to secure contracts with Food Recovery Organizations combined with jurisdictional reporting requirements. Other regions of the country are watching to see how this legislation works and benefit from lessons they can learn from the implementation of SB 1383.

In its early stages, SB 1383 has succeeded in bringing different stakeholders to the table to address the food donation requirement of the bill. Nonprofit organizations, waste haulers, cities, counties, and the food service industry are now working together to achieve compliance. This is a critical component of developing successful and sustainable change in approaches to charitable feeding and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It also is the first step in developing and elevating food donation standards. SB 1383 will increase the amount of edible food in the nonprofit charitable feeding network, providing more food insecure individuals with access to nutritious food.

In other states, efforts to increase tax incentives for businesses donating their excess edible food have been helpful in encouraging food donations. Other efforts have emphasized keeping excess food out of landfill but generally focus on getting it to composting facilities. There has not been an effort presented that mandates the donation of excess edible food in states outside of California. Other states are looking at how California is going to implement the food donation components of the bill to see what works well and what will need to be modified if those states move forward with a similar effort.

Early implementation efforts with SB 1383 are already highlighting some areas that require thoughtful consideration for other legislators looking to create similar bills:

• Identifying which food waste generators should be required to participate. SB 1383 focuses on “Tier 1” and “Tier 2” generators. Categories are defined by attributes such as square footage, seating capacity, and revenue. These criteria, however, leave out a host of generators who have food donations that could assist California in reaching its statewide goals. Future regulations? may need to look at criteria that is relevant in a changing world. For example, as many restaurants adapt to a take-out and delivery model they may reduce their square footage. This may require using other metrics beyond physical size of a restaurant for determining their “tiers”.
• Defining jurisdictions. There may be a natural tendency to use city boundaries when defining “jurisdictions” for building and tracking programs. By naming cities as jurisdictions, we encourage the idea that food does not travel outside of city borders. However, food insecurity does not understand city borders, neither does food waste. Food recipients may cross city boundaries to visit a food recovery organization. Programs may need broader “regional” programs that are not limited by our current definitions of jurisdictional boundaries.
• Requiring food donation, in general, is also more complex that it sounds on the surface. Food safety, willingness, opportunity, and operational challenges effect whether a food waste generator has the ability to donate. In building donation requirements thought needs to be given on how to mitigate the challenges and make it easier for generators to comply with the new rules.

Some may think that food donation is as simple as a grocery store having excess food, a food bank coming to pick it up, and distributing that food to those in need. In reality, it is a much more intricate process. Food donation is a complex yet impactful way to address climate change and food insecurity. As we learn lessons from SB 1383, states will be able to build increasingly more effective regulations.

As the first of its kind, SB1383 has started conversations and collaborations that were not seen in the past. It has brought stakeholders to the table that would not have otherwise interacted to achieve the goal of reducing food waste and food insecurity. It is encouraging to see the potential impact that this legislation can have on a community, region, state and eventually the nation.