THIS CONTENT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY Nofima The Norwegian Institute of Food, Fisheries and Aquaculture Research - read more

Study: People who track their food waste throw away less food

A researcher studied food waste among Norwegian families with children and divided them into three groups. She says that simple measures can help families throw away less food.

Hands serving food over a restaurant table with pizza, pasta, salad and drinks.
Dinner leftovers are the largest source of food waste in Norwegian families with children. Using the leftovers actively resulted in a 39 per cent reduction in food waste after 7 weeks.
Published

Researcher Kristine Myhrer Svartebekk followed 230 randomly selected families with children over seven weeks. 

Half of them received specific advice and tasks aimed at reducing waste from dinner leftovers. 

The other half simply recorded what they threw away, without receiving any guidance.

“What surprised us was that the families who only measured their food waste gradually reduced it just as much as those who received concrete advice. We believe that the measurement itself increased awareness of habits and enabled households to develop their own tailored strategies over time,” she says.

Woman sits at a table with a plated meal and a glass of water in an office setting.
Kristine Myhrer Svartebekk, a researcher at Nofima, followed 230 Norwegian households with children over one year to identify what actually reduces food waste.

Leftovers on the menu cut waste by 39 per cent

The intervention group – the families who both tracked waste and received guidance on how to use leftovers in new meals – reduced food waste by 39 per cent in the short term (seven weeks).

The control group, which only measured waste, reduced food waste by 22 per cent during the same period.

The effect of awareness lasts

“The most interesting result came after one year. At that point, the difference between the groups had disappeared. Combined, both had reduced dinner food waste by 29 per cent. This suggests that simply measuring waste makes people aware of how much they were throwing away and therefore reduced waste just as much as the families who also received specific instructions,” says Svartebekk.

Her interpretation is that structured interventions, so-called top-down interventions, work quickly, but the effect fades once guidance stops. 

Awareness of one's own waste builds intrinsic motivation. Each family finds measures that work specifically for them.

“Changing habits takes time, longer than the intervention period. Regular follow-ups might have further strengthened the long-term impact. That's something worth exploring in future studies,” says Svartebekk.

One single solution does not work for everyone

Consumers respond differently to food waste interventions. 

The researchers identified three different consumer profiles based on environmental awareness and personality traits: 

The first group is called Need to Change. These families throw away a lot of food but are relatively unconcerned about it. Precisely for that reason, they have both the greatest potential and the greatest measurable effect if they first become engaged. In the study, they reduced their food waste by 38 per cent.

The second group was named Want to Change. They are already motivated and environmentally aware, and throw away relatively little food to begin with. For them, there is less room for further reduction, even though motivation is high.

The third group, Hard to Change, is the most difficult to reach. They like routines and dislike change, which made them difficult to influence and recruit for the study.

“Personality traits and environmental awareness shape both how much we waste and how we respond to interventions. The greatest societal impact comes from targeted measures – particularly towards the Need to Change group, which combines high waste levels with low intrinsic motivation,” says Svartebekk.

About the scientific method

  • A randomised controlled trial (RCT) is a method in which participants are randomly assigned to either an intervention or a control group to test the effect of an intervention.
  • Participants: 230 Norwegian households with children; 144 in the one-year follow-up. Findings primarily apply to families with children.
  • Duration: 52 weeks. This extended follow-up is uncommon in consumer food waste research and provides rare insight into long-term effects.
  • Intervention group: Converted leftovers into new dinner meals over four weeks, supported by digital learning resources and continuous waste measurement.
  • Control group: Measured food waste only, without receiving any form of instruction.

The knowledge may help achieve food waste targets

Norway aims to halve food waste by 2030. Households currently account for almost half of all food waste. Families with children throw away particularly large amounts of food and meal leftovers.

Svartebekk believes the target is achievable, but it requires more targeted measures. She particularly points to the Need to Change group, where measures may have the greatest effect.  

The study also shows that people need to become more aware of their own food waste. Campaigns and dedicated measurement weeks, where people track their own waste, can strengthen motivation and lead to changes in behaviour.

“I have always tried to keep my own food waste as low as possible, but it's not always easy. I aim to improve continuously and encourage small changes in those around me. A simple tip is to check the fridge before shopping and before cooking, and to use leftovers and ingredients nearing their use-by date. Most meals benefit from a few extra vegetables or a splash of dairy. It rarely makes the dish worse,” she says.

Reference:

Svartebekk, K.M. From waste to awareness: Designing measures against household food waste across consumer profiles, Doctoral thesis at NMBU, 2026.

About the research

The research is part of the Research Council-funded project Sustainable Eaters, led by Nofima in collaboration with 26 partners from research, industry, the public sector, and NGOs.

Experimental work was partly supported by the Fund for Research Levy on Agricultural Products (FFL) through the projects Food for Future and InnoSense.

Powered by Labrador CMS