Conversation

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect

Ah, finally someone has realised that it's not 'consumers' who are the problem because we don't really get to tell the supermarkets what to do.

"Roger Gordon, who founded the Food Cowboy startup to rescue and re-route rejected produce, believes that the waste is built into the economics of food production. Fresh produce accounts for 15% of supermarket profits, he argued.

“If you and I reduced fresh produce waste by 50% like [the US agriculture secretary] Vilsack wants us to do, then supermarkets would go from [a] 1.5% profit margin to 0.7%,” he said."

"Some supermarket chains and industry groups in the US are pioneering ugly produce sections and actively campaigning to reduce such losses. But a number of producers and distributors claimed that some retailing giants were still using their power to reject produce on the basis of some ideal of perfection, and sometimes because of market conditions.

The farmers and truckers interviewed said they had seen their produce rejected on flimsy grounds, but decided against challenging the ruling with the US department of agriculture’s dispute mechanism for fear of being boycotted by powerful supermarket giants. They also asked that their names not be used."

That last sentence is terrifying, but I have anecdotal accounts from some market gardeners here that it's not unusual for a supermarket to cut off suppliers who complain too much, especially to the media.

I've also heard anecdotally that the expense of 1st-grade produce and the lack of suppliers providing 2nd-grade ('ugly') produce is why most restaurants and cafes make heavy use of farmer's markets or direct supply agreements with farms. 1st-grade is expensive, and they only need it for dishes where the appearance of the produce is important. For stocks, soups, mashes, etc. nobody cares what the potatoes or carrots look like as long as they're edible.