4.7 Article

SeqFLoW: A systematic approach to identify and select food waste valorisation opportunities

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106732

关键词

Food waste; Valorization; Decision support; Waste management framework; Downselecting; Multi-criteria decision making

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Food loss and waste is a global challenge with complex environmental, economic, and social implications. The SeqFLoW framework provides a methodology to assess and rank various management options for food loss and waste, allowing industry and academic professionals to select and analyze the most suitable alternatives.
Food loss and waste (FLW) represents a global challenge with complex and multifaceted environmental, eco-nomic and social implications. There are many options to manage FLW, some of which extract value that would otherwise be lost and mitigate environmental impacts. Decision making frameworks aid the selection of FLW management options by comparing the associated environmental, social and economic impacts. However, these frameworks generally utilise in-depth assessments and multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods that are time consuming and require specialist training or software. Consequently, it is generally not feasible to apply in-depth analyses to multiple FLW management options, which limits the scope of the assessment, as there are many potential FLW management options for any given FLW, and new processes and products are being developed regularly. The Sequential decision making for Food Loss and Waste (SeqFLoW) framework provides a screening methodology, to assess and rank a broad range of FLW management options, based on critical success factors. The application of the SeqFLoW framework was demonstrated for a citrus waste case study, which systematically downselected five FLW management options from over 80 alternatives. The SeqFLoW framework offers industry and academic professionals a methodology to justify the downselection of FLW management alternatives for further analysis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据