#ZeroWasteLaw that convinces but doesn't win hearts

The Food Loss and Waste Prevention Bill was voted on in the Plenary Session of Congress this Thursday, May 11, 2023, before moving to the Senate.

From the Ley Sin Desperdicio collective, we highly value the progress made in the text of the future law, on which the different organizations and activists concerned about the serious consequences of food waste have been working for a year .

• However, the bill has gone through several phases and has not developed in the way we would have liked to have a pioneering law in Europe. The initial draft bill was more ambitious and transformative than the final version. Nevertheless, the text now before the Senate does include some of the demands that the group has been proposing in recent months to the various parliamentary groups that make up the Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.

What have we achieved?

• One of the group's main demands was to improve the specification of measurement and quantification, both qualitatively and quantitatively, at every stage of the supply chain, on a regular basis. We believe this is the most significant change in the new text, as it increases the obligations of public administrations to measure each and every stage. Specifically, the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food will be required to implement methodologies that allow for the comparison of recurring trends and to publish the data periodically.
• Regarding definitions, the global vision of the agri-food system has been incorporated, from food losses that remain in the field, to food waste in all subsequent phases of the chain.
• Prevention has been placed in the hierarchy of priorities, within article 5, aligning with European directives and documents: "all possible measures to prevent the generation of food loss and waste, incorporating rational production, purchasing and management criteria based on specific needs that prevent the generation of surpluses."

What shortcomings do we still identify? However, despite the progress made with the text, we want to continue highlighting some shortcomings so that they can be incorporated into the law, either during its passage through the Senate or in subsequent related regulations:

• The law does not include any mention of gleaning or foraging . Although a regulatory framework for this practice is not strictly necessary (it is carried out both formally and informally throughout Spain), its recognition in the text would be a significant step forward in unifying procedures and providing legal certainty for all parties involved: producers, citizens, and social initiative organizations. We request that it be added to the definitions section and that its regulation be included in subsequent texts.
• Regarding the mandatory hierarchy of priorities and the donation requirement, we believe the minimum size of 1300 m2 for establishments is excessive . It would be more appropriate to reduce it considerably, to 400 m2, as it appeared in the initial draft bill.
• There is still no budget allocation that would create all the necessary conditions for this compliance to be feasible throughout the entire food chain and in all territories. However, the possibility of aid for the establishment and implementation of good practices (Chapter III) and the promotion of self-regulation (Article 14) is raised, while there is no mention of such aid for incorporating the mandatory measures.
• Point 4 of Article 15 should be removed, as it suggests that surplus management should serve to reduce poverty and ensure food security.
• Similarly, section 1 i of article 10 should be eliminated, which proposes to promote the creation of new businesses for the channeling of these surpluses, when the priority objective of the Law is not this, but their prevention.
• Furthermore, it would be appropriate to define the grounds for justification contemplated in Article 18 of the sanctioning regime and the way to demonstrate them.
• The lack of consideration of positive measures (not just punitive ones) that motivate the agents involved in complying with the objectives of the Law is a significant omission.
• Furthermore, prompt regulation of all provisions and coordination with the Autonomous Communities and local entities would be necessary to begin implementing the law as soon as possible. It would be appropriate to establish deadlines for developing the regulations for this Law, as well as for preparing the national and regional strategic plans and the sector guidelines.

Once the Law is approved, it will be necessary to review other regulations of equal or lower rank that could hinder its full implementation: marketing standards, the imposition of purely aesthetic criteria, or waste measurement systems that exclude the primary sector (such as the EU Delegated Decision). The #NoWasteLaw Collective believes that this Law, while it could have been more ambitious and transformative, takes an important step in the right direction for preventing food loss and waste , especially at a time like the present with high inflation, scarcity and high cost of resources (water, energy, etc.), a climate emergency, and food poverty. This is just the first of many important steps that will need to be taken in this direction (implementation of the Law, raising public awareness, etc.), by political institutions, government agencies, and civil society organizations, and we must all work together to address the serious consequences of food waste.