The Management of Food Waste Recycling for a Sustainable Future: A Case Study on South Korea

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors, 

the manuscript depicts the South-Corea management of food waste recycling.

The description of biogas and compost should be improved and the novelty of the approach has to be underlined.

The part concerning the sustainability should be more quantitative.

 

Author Response

The description of biogas and compost should be improved and the novelty of the approach has to be underlined.

• Biogas and compost descriptions have been enhanced to highlight the novelty of the approach, as suggested. L392-401 and L291-295

 

The part concerning the sustainability should be more quantitative.

• We tried our best to quantitatively explain the sustainability of food waste management system in South Kore in three categories; 1) Recycling (Figure 2, L189), 2) Composition ratio and separate discharge rate of food waste (Figure 3, L207); and 3) Organic waste generation and disposal rates (Figure 6, L424). With every figure, we explained the quantitatively explained where the numbers come from, and how much each category dedicated for sustainable management with several flow charts.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

see the attached PDF file

add more companions with other cases

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

the paper need some improvements 

Author Response

1. Introduction

Add some information also regarding circular economy and sustainability development goals and their connection request indications with for food waste

• Added as suggested. L28-34

 

Add and comment also the following paper published on food waste treatment and biogas production and utilization by: andrettoal et al, schiaveon.

• Added as suggested. L400-405

 

• The RFID system plays a significant role in the food waste management process in South Korea. However, it bears striking resemblance to the RFID systems mentioned earlier (3 examples), and there is little distinction between them. Furthermore, our paper focuses on the upcycling effect of food waste from a sustainability perspective, rather than emphasizing a specific system, like RFID. Therefore, we believe it is inappropriate to mention the RFID system in the introduction section.

 

Add also a chapter regarding the digestate: it’s management

• Added as suggested. L393-396

 

Add if possible the fraction contained in the 3 categories fo waste and their percentage compare with similar form other coutries

• Waste classification into landfill, incineration, and recycling is also available in statistics from other countries like the United States and Europe, as well as in South Korea (Sabour et al., 2020; eurastat-news). However, this review focused on food waste, and data categorized into these three groups was not found in information from other countries. Reference links as follows:

 

Waste treatment by type of recovery and disposal, 2020

(https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/ddn-20220913-1)

Sabour, M.R.; Alam, E. & Hatami, A.M. Global trends and status in landfilling research: a systematic analysis. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag 22, 711–723 (2020).

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-019-00968-5

 

3.2 TYPES OF FOD WASTE RECYCLING PROCESSES

 

4.Conclusion

Add a paragraph with comparisons of the present research results and other similar form the literature

• There is no comparable other similar form in the literature as suggested. This review represents the first case comprehensively addressing the history and current status of South Korea's food waste disposal policies.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Manuscript sustainability-2739585, entitled “Management of food waste recycling for a sustainable future: A case study on South Korea”

 

This review article provides useful information on the management of food waste recycling for a sustainable future in South Korea. It is in general appropriately organized, carried out and written, however there are some points that should be corrected or clarified.

 

L14: “…with over 90% of it being effectively separated…”

L30: “…need to limit them worldwide…”

L34: “adversely”? or “positively correlated”?

L51: Please rephrase

L91: “…interest regarding the environment…”

L92: “initiated” instead of “established”

L124: Please rephrase

L235: 25 or 44 facilities?

L296: Where is Table 3 cited in text?

L335: Please delete “food waste to”

L340: “increased” instead of “heightened”

L349: Table 5 or 4?

L357: Please delete “synthesis”

L362-363: Please delete “manure” (repetition)

L367-368: “Over the previous decade, organic waste has been increased by…”

L372: Figure 5 or 6?

L376-377: Table 7 or 5?

L408-409: “for resource circulation and a recognition system for resource circulation”? Please rephrase

L413: Suggestions, such as?

L414: “Although we summarized the situation and challenges of the current resource…”

L421: “Finally” instead of “Third”

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing of English language required

Author Response

This review article provides useful information on the management of food waste recycling for a sustainable future in South Korea. It is in general appropriately organized, carried out and written, however there are some points that should be corrected or clarified.

 

L14: “…with over 90% of it being effectively separated…”

• Corrected as suggested. L14

L30: “…need to limit them worldwide…”

• Corrected as suggested. L38

L34: “adversely”? or “positively correlated”?

• Checked as mentioned. It seems likely that 'adversely' fits better in this context. L42

L51: Please rephrase

• Corrected as suggested. L59-62

L91: “…interest regarding the environment…”

• Corrected as suggested. L118

L92: “initiated” instead of “established”

• Corrected as suggested. L119

L124: Please rephrase

• Corrected as suggested. L151-153

L235: 25 or 44 facilities?

• Checked mis-calculation. L267

L296: Where is Table 3 cited in text?

• Added Table 3 as referenced in the text. L309, 316, 328

L335: Please delete “food waste to”

• Corrected as suggested. L370

L340: “increased” instead of “heightened”

• Corrected as suggested. L375

L349: Table 5 or 4?

• Corrected it to Table 4. L385

L357: Please delete “synthesis”

• Corrected as suggested. L393

L362-363: Please delete “manure” (repetition)

• Corrected as suggested. L406

L367-368: “Over the previous decade, organic waste has been increased by…”

• Corrected as suggested. L411-412

L372: Figure 5 or 6?

• Corrected it to Figure 6. L416

L376-377: Table 7 or 5?

• Corrected it to Table 5. L420

L408-409: “for resource circulation and a recognition system for resource circulation”? Please rephrase

• Corrected as suggested. L455-456

L413: Suggestions, such as?  (conclustion)

• Added “such as anaerobic, aerobic, and insect-based composting, as well as dry and wet fermentation processes for animal feed, and biogas production using categorized materials,” as suggested. L463-465

L414: “Although we summarized the situation and challenges of the current resource…”

• Corrected as suggested. L462

L421: “Finally” instead of “Third”

• Corrected as suggested. L471

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article entitled: 'Management of food waste recycling for a sustainable future: A case study on South Korea' is very interesting. It provides an overview of the change in approach to managing wasted food recycling in South Korea. 

Some specific comments

Line 89 please provide the dimension/ example of penalties imposed.

Line 138 do the authors have information on progress towards this goal, if so please add.

The drawings are not neat and need much improvement: 

standardise the size and colour of the font in the drawings, 

improve the legibility of the font, e.g. figure 4

check that the axes and units in the diagrams are described, 

there is no need to give numbers with 0.00 accuracy for integers e.g. figure 2a,

remove the title from figure 7 and add % units to the title.

Author Response

Line 89 please provide the dimension/ example of penalties imposed.

• Added “The act of dumping waste in other public areas such as sewers, parks, port areas, rivers, etc., has been revised to impose penalties of up to 6 months of imprisonment or fines of up to 0.3million won” as suggested. L113-116

Line 138 do the authors have information on progress towards this goal, if so please add.

• The update cycle occurs every five years, with the anticipation that the feasibility study would conclude in 2022. However, the corresponding report has not been uploaded to the Ministry of Environment's data room as of now.

The drawings are not neat and need much improvement: 

standardise the size and colour of the font in the drawings, 

improve the legibility of the font, e.g. figure 4

check that the axes and units in the diagrams are described, 

there is no need to give numbers with 0.00 accuracy for integers e.g. figure 2a,

remove the title from figure 7 and add % units to the title.

• Corrected all drawings as suggested

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 5 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

It is suggested:

Improve the writing of the research objective.

Include a section in the text explaining the work methodology that was applied in this research (Methods, techniques, indicators).

Be more specific in future research and limitations of the work.

Author Response

Include a section in the text explaining the work methodology that was applied in this research (Methods, techniques, indicators).

• Added methodology section as suggested. L82-90

Be more specific in future research and limitations of the work.

• Corrected as suggested. L474-480

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 6 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

General comments

 

The submitted manuscript consists in a review paper focused on the history of food-waste management policies in South Korea, in order to provide a valuable waste management framework for the development of effective policies in other countries. The paper is well conceived and organised, but the originality has not been clearly evidenced at the end of the Introduction section. Moreover, some recent literature references have to be added.

Furthermore, an English grammar and language revision is strongly recommended.

Some comments are provided below point by point.

 

I. Introduction

- The Introduction section is well organised. The aim of the review is clear, but the originality with respect to previous review papers about a similar topic has to be highlighted.

 

3. Generation and management of food waste

3.1. Food waste disposal and classification

- All the literature references were completely missed within the text body. Please, add them.

3.3 Methods used to process food waste into compost, animal feed, and biogas

3.3.1 Compostb

-        The following sentences “In addition to conventional aerobic and anaerobic composting methods, vermicom-posting has gained attention. Vermicomposting is the utilization of insects and earth-worms, to cultivate their excrement, known as vermicompost, for use as fertilizer. Organic waste materials like food scraps serve as excellent food for these organisms, and their excrement enriches the soil. This approach is considered to be an environmentally- friendly resource recycling method and offers the advantage of relatively low installation costs.” need appropriate references.

-        3.3.2 Animal Feed

-        The statements “The feed processing methods that involve a combination of drying and fermentation offer the advantage of faster processing compared with composting. However, feed processing facilities have the disadvantage of initial high equipment costs and the expenses associated with maintenance, repair, and overhaul of facilities. Feed processing methods are categorized as wet, dry, or fermentation methods” have to be supported with proper references.

-        The period from “In 2019, the energy recovery from food waste accounted for 12.5% of total organic waste, while feed 366 production and composting accounted for 36.2% and 38.1%, respectively” to “Currently, there are 1,341 environmental facilities in South Korea; these include 110 facilities for biogas production that carry out the treatment of waste resources, such as food waste” has to be corroborated with appropriate references.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English language requires moderate revisions.

Author Response

1. Introduction

- The Introduction section is well organised. The aim of the review is clear, but the originality with respect to previous review papers about a similar topic has to be highlighted.

• Corrected as suggested. L69-77

3. Generation and management of food waste

3.1. Food waste disposal and classification

- All the literature references were completely missed within the text body. Please, add them

• Reference added. L186,205,214

3.3 Methods used to process food waste into compost, animal feed, and biogas

3.3.1 Compost

-        The following sentences “In addition to conventional aerobic and anaerobic composting methods, vermicom-posting has gained attention. Vermicomposting is the utilization of insects and earth-worms, to cultivate their excrement, known as vermicompost, for use as fertilizer. Organic waste materials like food scraps serve as excellent food for these organisms, and their excrement enriches the soil. This approach is considered to be an environmentally- friendly resource recycling method and offers the advantage of relatively low installation costs.” need appropriate references.

• Reference added. L324,326

 

-        3.3.2 Animal Feed

-        The statements “The feed processing methods that involve a combination of drying and fermentation offer the advantage of faster processing compared with composting. However, feed processing facilities have the disadvantage of initial high equipment costs and the expenses associated with maintenance, repair, and overhaul of facilities. Feed processing methods are categorized as wet, dry, or fermentation methods” have to be supported with proper references.

• Reference added. L349

 

-        The period from “In 2019, the energy recovery from food waste accounted for 12.5% of total organic waste, while feed 366 production and composting accounted for 36.2% and 38.1%, respectively” to “Currently, there are 1,341 environmental facilities in South Korea; these include 110 facilities for biogas production that carry out the treatment of waste resources, such as food waste” has to be corroborated with appropriate references.

• Reference added. L416

Author Response File: Author Response.docx