TY - JOUR
T1 - Unlocking value from food waste
T2 - A cross-regional meta-analysis of economic opportunities
AU - Tariq, Zainab
AU - Smith, Meghann
AU - Lal, Pankaj
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2025/6
Y1 - 2025/6
N2 - Numerous studies have evaluated the economic feasibility of transforming various categories of food waste into valuable products (or valorization) like bioenergy or biofertilizers. However, the cost-effectiveness of these transformations across regions remained uncertain. This systematic literature search on six common cost assessment methods on food waste valorization initially yielded 3964 studies. Using PRISMA guidelines, 50 studies were selected for the meta-analysis. The results suggested a moderate baseline effect (g = −1.49, p-value = 0.04) using the Hedges g algorithm, indicating statistically significant economic benefits of valorization than disposal. The Q statistic 11.8 with df = 5 and moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 55 %) indicated modest publication bias. Leave-One-Out and Leave-Two-Out sensitivity analyses confirmed robustness of results despite including diverse valorization methods. An exception, techno-economic analysis (p-value = 0.8, I2 = 0 %) indicated no heterogeneity between valorization and disposal methods. Hence, the cost viability varies with cross-regional economic and technical factors.
AB - Numerous studies have evaluated the economic feasibility of transforming various categories of food waste into valuable products (or valorization) like bioenergy or biofertilizers. However, the cost-effectiveness of these transformations across regions remained uncertain. This systematic literature search on six common cost assessment methods on food waste valorization initially yielded 3964 studies. Using PRISMA guidelines, 50 studies were selected for the meta-analysis. The results suggested a moderate baseline effect (g = −1.49, p-value = 0.04) using the Hedges g algorithm, indicating statistically significant economic benefits of valorization than disposal. The Q statistic 11.8 with df = 5 and moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 55 %) indicated modest publication bias. Leave-One-Out and Leave-Two-Out sensitivity analyses confirmed robustness of results despite including diverse valorization methods. An exception, techno-economic analysis (p-value = 0.8, I2 = 0 %) indicated no heterogeneity between valorization and disposal methods. Hence, the cost viability varies with cross-regional economic and technical factors.
KW - Leave-one-out and leave-two-out study
KW - Organic waste
KW - Sensitivity analyses
KW - Systematic review
KW - Valorization
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=105000096243&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.biteb.2025.102087
DO - 10.1016/j.biteb.2025.102087
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:105000096243
SN - 2589-014X
VL - 30
JO - Bioresource Technology Reports
JF - Bioresource Technology Reports
M1 - 102087
ER -