Data and Research to Improve the U.S. Food Availability System and Estimates of Food Loss A Workshop Summary (2015) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
2 The Food Availability System and Food Loss Estimates: Current Methods, Data, and Uses
2 The Food Availability System and Food Loss Estimates: Current Methods, Data, and Uses
Pages 12-41
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 12... ...
moderated the session and introduced the two speakers, also from ERS: Mark Jekanowski and Jean Buzby. The first section of this chapter reports on Jekanowski's description of the FA data structure and uses, followed by Buzby's description of the food loss estimates and the LAFA data structure and uses.
|
From page 13... ...
Total supply is the sum of beginning stocks, production, and imports. Disappearance from supply is the aggregate of ending stocks, Used to Estimate Per Capita Supply and Use Balance Sheets Food Availability, Loss Adjusted Food Availablity, and Nutrient Availability Used in WASDE Domestic and Global Production, Use and Price Forecasts Feeds into Farm Income Forecasts Used in BEA National Accounts Estimates FIGURE 2-1 Commodity supply and disappearance flowchart.
|
From page 14... ...
1 If an estimate of food use is available, as it is for a few commodities, the estimate for farm and industrial use is the residual computed as supply minus the aggregate of exports, ending stocks, use by the food industry, and use by any other industry for which data are available, such as biofuels. For commodities like wheat and for various fats and oils, usage by the food industry was historically measured directly and published in the Census Bureau's Current Industrial Reports (CIR)
|
From page 15... ...
The spreadsheet for oats is similar to those for wheat and several other commodities that relied on the CIR for direct food availability. Most of these have not been updated to 2012 because of the loss of the CIR, but in a few cases, he noted, food use has been updated by extending long-term trends and using data provided by industry.
|
From page 16... ...
1 (millions) Production Imports Stocks Supply 1998 274.626 166.0 107.7 74.0 347.7 1999 277.790 146.2 98.6 81.4 326.2 2000 280.976 149.5 106.0 76.0 331.6 2001 283.920 117.6 96.0 72.7 286.3 2002 286.788 116.0 95.1 63.2 274.3 2003 289.518 144.4 89.7 49.8 283.9 2004 292.192 115.7 90.3 64.9 270.9 2005 294.914 114.9 91.2 57.9 264.0 2006 297.647 93.5 106.2 52.6 252.3 2007 300.574 90.4 123.3 50.6 264.3 2008 303.506 89.1 114.6 66.8 270.5 2009 306.208 93.1 94.9 84.1 272.1 2010 308.833 81.2 85.1 80.3 246.7 2011 310.939 53.6 94.1 67.6 215.3 aTotal food availability = total supply minus the sum of exports, nonfood use, and ending stocks.
|
From page 17... ...
Jekanowski for presentation at the workshop. Data from ERS Food Availability Data System: http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-availability-(percapita)
|
From page 18... ...
Carcassa Retail Boneless 2005 296.186 27,658.8 19,361.1 18,503.7 2006 298.996 28,054.8 19,638.3 18,768.6 2007 302.004 28,042.4 19,629.7 18,760.4 2008 304.798 27,060.9 18,942.6 18,103.7 2009 307.439 26,703.1 18,692.1 17,864.3 2010 309.750 26,262.9 18,384.0 17,569.9 2011 312.009 25,399.0 17,779.3 16,992.0 aCarcass food availability = total supply minus the sum of exports, shipments to U.S. territories, and ending stocks.
|
From page 19... ...
For example, chicken availability would shift down more than beef or pork, since bones account for a larger proportion of chicken available at the retail level. He noted that Figure 2-3 shows steady increases in wheat flour avail
|
From page 20... ...
Jekanowski for presentation at the workshop. Data from ERS Food Availability Data System: http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-availability-(percapita)
|
From page 21... ...
The data give analysts the ability to put food availability into the context of the overall food economy. He said that because the time series of the data is so long and has been estimated consistently, it is very powerful for identifying long-term dietary trends, even accounting for the fact that it is only a proxy for, and likely overestimates, consumption.
|
From page 22... ...
According to Jekanowski, an additional advantage is that FADS data measure the total amount of supply going into the food industry without regard to how it is used within that industry. As a result, FADS is immune to changes in the style or form of consumer food purchases and uses.
|
From page 23... ...
First, FADS takes a commodity focus, starting at the farm level with production and inventories, and staying at that level. It provides no information about specific food items, such as individual retail cuts of meat or different kinds of processed foods.
|
From page 24... ...
Finally, he said, since FADS requires data from many sources, it is vulnerable to decisions by other agencies that impact the availability or content of their data, such as the Census Bureau decision to terminate its CIR series. FADS relied heavily on these data for consumption of many grains, added fats and oils, and items like margarine and salad dressing.
|
From page 25... ...
• Food waste is a component of food loss and occurs when an edible item goes unconsumed, as in food discarded by retailers due to color or appearance and plate waste by consumers. Buzby emphasized that food waste in the LAFA series is just one component of food loss, and that ERS does not have estimates for all different components of food loss.
|
From page 26... ...
These figures are frequently compared against federal dietary recommendations. Buzby stated that an aggregate view of food loss is provided in a new ERS report that she coauthored (Buzby, Wells, and Hyman, 2014)
|
From page 27... ...
Dairy products had the largest loss at the retail level, while vegetables had the largest loss at the consumer level. Figure 2-9 depicts the three food groups with the highest share of food loss in the United States in 2010 (plus a residual "other" category)
|
From page 28... ...
% 1998 9.53 3 9.24 5.1 1999 9.25 3 8.98 5.1 2000 9.20 3 8.93 5.1 2001 9.38 3 9.10 5.1 2002 8.42 3 8.16 5.1 2003 8.78 3 8.52 5.1 2004 8.72 3 8.46 5.1 2005 8.66 3 8.40 5.1 2006 8.11 3 7.86 5.1 2007 8.05 3 7.81 5.1 2008 8.07 3 7.82 5.1 2009 7.39 3 7.16 5.1 2010 7.61 3 7.38 5.1 Per Capita Availability Adjusted for Loss Calories per Lbs/Year Ozs./Day Grams/Day Cup Equivalent 4.82 0.21 5.99 52.0 4.68 0.21 5.82 52.0 4.66 0.20 5.79 52.0 4.75 0.21 5.90 52.0 4.26 0.19 5.29 52.0 4.44 0.19 5.52 52.0 4.41 0.19 5.48 52.0 4.39 0.19 5.45 52.0 4.10 0.18 5.10 52.0 4.07 0.18 5.06 52.0 4.08 0.18 5.07 52.0 3.74 0.16 4.65 52.0 3.85 0.17 4.79 52.0 aPrimary weight for carrots pertains to per capita farm availability. SOURCE: Prepared by J
|
From page 29... ...
% % % 8.77 11.00 34.0 49 8.51 11.00 34.0 49 8.47 11.00 34.0 49 8.63 11.00 34.0 49 7.75 11.00 34.0 49 8.08 11.00 34.0 49 8.02 11.00 34.0 49 7.97 11.00 34.0 49 7.46 11.00 34.0 49 7.41 11.00 34.0 49 7.42 11.00 34.0 49 6.80 11.00 34.0 49 7.00 11.00 34.0 49 Food Pattern Grams per Calories Equivalents Cup Equivalent Available Daily Available Daily (cups)
|
From page 30... ...
30 U.S. FOOD AVAILABILITY SYSTEM AND ESTIMATES OF FOOD LOSS 1970 2011 12 10 Pounds per Person 8 6 4 2 0 FIGURE 2-5 Most common fruits available for U.S.
|
From page 31... ...
Buzby turned her presentation to ERS initiatives for improving the LAFA data series, noting that the ERS long-run goal is to update the data series by reviewing, updating, and documenting each loss estimate for each individual commodity to the most recent year of data available. In the past two decades, ERS had two cooperative agreements to update the farm-to-retail weight loss factors, one with the University of Minnesota's Food Industry Center (TFIC)
|
From page 32... ...
. Tree nuts and peanuts Retail Consumera Eggs Added fats and oils Meat, poultry, and fish Added sugar and sweeteners Fruit Grain products Vegetables Dairy products 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 FIGURE 2-8 Quantity losses at the consumer and retail levels for nine food categories (measured in billion pounds)
|
From page 33... ...
Buzby noted that the new data include qualitative information from produce, meat, and seafood managers about where and why food loss occurs at the retail level. She said many retail-level loss estimates need updating and documenting, particularly added fats and oils, added sugars and sweeteners, fluid milk and dairy products, grain products, processed fruits and vegetables, eggs, and peanuts and tree nuts.
|
From page 34... ...
She stated that the LAFA data expressed in terms of calories and food pattern equivalents are particularly important. ERS also uses the embedded loss assumptions to estimate the amount, value, and calories of food loss at the retail and consumer levels.
|
From page 35... ...
This packaging probably shifts loss formerly taken at the consumer level to the retail (supermarket) level and has not yet been accounted for in ERS estimates, she said.
|
From page 36... ...
Jekanowski replied that for the most part, FADS starts with availability at the farm level. There are some minor adjustments, for example, going from carcass weight to retail weight to boneless weight, that will account for loss at the retail level.
|
From page 37... ...
In answer to a question from Harry de Gorter (Cornell University) , Buzby said the food loss estimates consider only the retail (grocery stores, restaurants, small corner shops, hotels, restaurants, hospitals, schools, and so on)
|
From page 38... ...
Kretser also asked whether the 34 percent loss at the consumer level for carrots varies by commodity and whether it changes over time. Buzby replied that when she inherited the original FADS from Linda Kantor over a decade ago, the LAFA data series was static across time and commodities.15 For example, for all fresh vegetables, consumer-level loss was 30 15See Kantor (1998)
|
From page 39... ...
Susan Krebs-Smith asked if the new estimates for consumer-level loss were applied for all years or for recent years. Buzby replied that ERS adopted the new consumer-level loss estimates for the entire span of the LAFA data series, namely from 1970 to the most recent year available, although some loss estimates have not been updated.
|
From page 40... ...
He stated that it would be useful to sort out some of the terminology. Schmidhuber noted that according to FAO data, there are very few losses at the farm level in developed countries.
|
From page 41... ...
For example, many retail industries in developed countries have contracts with developing countries for fresh fruits and vegetables. However, standards differ by country, and not all loss data are collected.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.