*4.2. Product-Specific Causes*

As fresh FV deteriorate for a number of reasons, it is important to adjust work routines for different products and further develop efficient waste reduction strategies and measures. Previous studies on the causes of food waste at stores have often presented findings on an aggregated level [24,25], that is, not adapted to different departments or products. The results show that previous general descriptions of the causes of retail food waste are not detailed enough for planning reduction measures. This study contributes with detailed descriptions of product-specific causes based on both qualitative and quantitative methods. It is important to be acquainted with the different product-specific causes, as described in Table 3, in order to reduce waste.

The results for products with primary packaging are ambiguous, as shown in Table 2. Different types of packaging have different purposes, and therefore it is precarious to draw any general conclusions. The impact of packaging must be examined on a case-by-case basis. In some cases, packaging protects the products and generates a lower waste quota, for instance as regards tomatoes, sweet peppers and carrots. In some other cases, packaged

products have a higher waste quota, for instance as regards pears, oranges, clementine, nectarines and lemons. Nonetheless, this study shows that packaging solutions with the only purpose of convenience for the customers and without protection increase waste. Many organic products, such as apples, tomatoes and oranges, have a higher waste quota compared to conventional products, and this could be explained by a lower turnover, uneven product range, price fluctuations and lack of cooling. However, if both supply and demand of organic products increase, the waste quotas may decrease.

The authors did not find any other studies in literature that have investigated causes of and measures to reduce waste for different FV categories, so in that sense it is difficult to compare our results with other studies. Nonetheless, other studies on in-store waste for FV have reported figures (3–7% in Mena et al., 2011 [15]; 4.3% in Eriksson et al., 2012 [52]; 8–9% in Beretta et al., 2013 [9]) that indicate higher levels of waste compared to the stores included in this study with an average of 1.4%. The general focus on food waste and the development in supermarkets in the past ten years can probably explain part of the lower waste quota in this study. Another possible explanation is the experienced personnel, well-developed store operations, and high turnover in the studied supermarkets.
