Team Wastebusters

Jamie Curran, Daniel Ham, David Hoysan, Annisa Prasetyanto, Melissa Powel, Advait Tinaikar
_______________________________________________________________
Integrated Product Development
Phase 1 Opportunity Report
February 7, 2017
 Overview

Roughly 40% of all food is wasted in the United States annually the total cost of annual food waste
is valued at around $165 billion, and 97% of the wasted food (33 million tons) ends up in landfills, where it
produces methane and other greenhouse gases1. The food waste does not come from one particular source, but
rather accumulates at every step of the value chain.
The Wastebusters Team began by researching the wide domain of food waste and interviewing
stakeholders at different stages of the value chain. The initial round of research was used to identify the social,
economical, and technological (SET) trends concerning food waste. The SET factors were then translated into
product opportunity gaps (POGs). Finally the POGs were evaluated and reduced until a final opportunity area
was identified for further exploration. The body of this report will summarize the work conducted by the
Wastebusters Team and next steps moving forward.

Social, Economic, and Technological Trends

Given the expansive nature of food waste and the intricate relationships that have formed at each level
of the supply chain, the Wastebusters team utilized a mix of primary, secondary, and expert information to
develop a working knowledge of food waste and identified the current food waste trends in society, the
economy, and technology.

Social factors Economic factors Technological factors

Food labeling provides Retailers plan to waste up to Rise of big data and ubiquitous
inaccurate information about 30% of inventory computing
food freshness Thin margins at every step of the Automation and soil monitoring
Consumers buy and not grow value chain for in-home gardening
food 1 in 6 Americans are food New 3D printed food technology
Rising on-demand food delivery insecure Aerial footage raises awareness
services Income is proportionate to waste of waste
No new government studies Increasing investment to food Food sharing and delivery
since 1997 waste startups platforms
Misshapen food is the new Cheaper to discard rather than P.O.S. technology for easier
sexy donate purchasing
No real need to avoid waste
Interviews

In addition to the SET factors, a number of interviews were conducted with stakeholders and industry
participants, including employees from retailers such as Whole Foods and East End Co-op, restaurants such as
Sushi Fuku and Nakama, and industry insiders such as Brian Dawson (Founder, Harvest Port), and David
Haynes (Executive chef, Eurest).

1 http://www.endfoodwastenow.org/index.php/resources/facts
East End Food Co-op
The East End Food Co-op (EEFC) manages waste very
efficiently. In-store waste is either given to employees, donated,
or composted. Very little waste is sent to the landfill. The EEFC,
however, does not use software to predict demand or manage
waste. Their current model has been unprofitable 5 years in a
row.

General Mills
General Mills is very efficient at managing waste when
producing Yoplait yogurt. Their workers even have waste metrics
tied to their annual review. Yoplait, however, does not use just
in time manufacturing. They stock warehouses with inventory
which can go to waste in the event of a recall or product
expiration.

Nakama
The Japanese restaurant Nakama is extremely wasteful. They do
not have a standardized process for preparing food and have poor
inventory management. Food is tossed when the chef decides it is
too old.

David Haynes - Executive Chef for Eurest

Location can play a big role in waste management. Progressive
areas like northern California, Seattle, and Vermont are accepting
of imperfect produce because they understand the environmental
impacts. Food Deserts in the midwest force people to eat fast
food.

Product Opportunity Gaps and Reduction Criteria

The Wastebusters team brainstormed potential opportunities based on the outcomes of the social,
economic, and technological trends and stakeholder interviews from across the value chain. The ideation
exercise yielded over 120 opportunities that factored in the current food waste landscape and had the potential
to positively impact the market.
To reduce the total number of ideas, the team began by affinitizing the ideas into 22 categories such as
consumer waste, grocery retailer waste, imperfect foods, and consumer behavior. The number of concepts was
reduced to eleven by combining overly similar ideas and eliminating concepts based on initial individual
preferences or feasibility. The resultant eleven concepts were reduced to five using a weighted decision matrix
that factored in potential impact on food waste as a whole, saturation of current solutions, feasibility, viability,
market fit, and team enthusiasm. The top five concepts were discussed in detail and voted on by the team until
one final opportunity gap was selected for further development.

Product Opportunity Gap

After much distillation and deliberation, the Wastebusters team ultimately had to decide upon three
crucial elements to determine the opportunity we would pursue. Did we want to reduce waste or help its reuse?
Were we going to approach a solution for wasted food before it was waste to begin with, or after it had become
waste? And finally, did we want to approach food waste from the retail perspective or that of the consumer? At
the end of our discussions, we confirmed our final opportunity to be the following statement: How do we
reduce food waste in the home?
The distilled opportunity that the Wastebusters team decided upon encompassed and directly
addressed the three essential elements discussed above while also addressing the factors such as potential
impact, team enthusiasm, and individual competencies. We wanted to affect consumer behavior to reduce food
waste before the food was even considered waste to begin with.
Furthermore, our research and interviews revealed that our potential impact would best be felt
downstream, as upstream waste solutions seemed to be saturated with competitors or with barriers that would
make many solutions unfeasible given the timeframe and resources available. Given that consumer waste is
responsible for approximately 40%2 of food waste and that households throw away 25% of the food they
purchase3, the wastebusters team determined that approaching food waste from a consumer standpoint would
be both feasible within our current timeline and team competencies, and scalable. In addition, by limiting our
focus to reducing unconsumed food pre-waste, as opposed to post-waste, we hope to affect waste upstream as
well.

Next Steps: Identifying Stakeholders

Once we identified the opportunity to be pursued, we set out to identify and research our primary
stakeholders and market. We created a stakeholder map (Appendix) by listing our initial assumptions regarding
the primary drivers and factors in purchase decisions by consumers. We took into account demographics,
purchasing power, household size, retail preferences, and location for our assumptions before approaching
consumers directly to gain primary knowledge of our market. After breaking down what we believed to be the
relevant factors and demographics, we began to interview primary decision makers in households by heading
to grocery retailers across the spectrum of perceived quality and prices and interacting with consumers.
Our initial and preliminary interviews showed that primary purchase decision makers in households
were cognizant about food waste when asked, though our next steps will aim to determine whether or not such
answers translate into actual behavior and where else opportunities may be available within our scope.

2
http://refed.com/?sort=economic-value-per-ton
3
Gunders, Dana. How America Is Losing Up to 40 Percent of Its Food from Farm to Fork to Landfill. National Resources Defense Council
Issue Paper. August, 2012.
Appendix

Appendix 1: Stakeholder Map

Sources
1. http://www.endfoodwastenow.org/index.php/resources/facts
2. http://refed.com/?sort=economic-value-per-ton
3. Gunders, Dana. How America Is Losing Up to 40 Percent of Its Food from Farm to Fork to Landfill.
National Resources Defense Council Issue Paper. August, 2012.