Helping consumers reduce fruit and vegetable waste: Final report

Retail Programme – Food Waste

Helping Consumers Reduce Fruit and Vegetable Waste: Final Report

A research project examining consumer attitudes and behaviour around storage of fresh fruit and vegetables in the home. Recommendations made as to how consumers and retailers can help to reduce the amounts of fresh fruit and vegetables thrown away in the home are based on a survey of current storage advice given, and an experimental research programme.

Project code: RTL044-001 Research date: 1.6.07 – 30.6.08 Date: September 2008

WRAP helps individuals, businesses and local authorities to reduce waste and recycle more, making better use of resources and helping to tackle climate change.

Written by: David Johnson, Neil Hipps (East Malling Research) and Simon Hails (Reading Scientific Services Ltd)

Front cover photography: A selection of fresh fruit and vegetables WRAP and East Malling Research believe the content of this report to be correct as at the date of writing. However, factors such as prices, levels of recycled content and regulatory requirements are subject to change and users of the report should check with their suppliers to confirm the current situation. In addition, care should be taken in using any of the cost information provided as it is based upon numerous project-specific assumptions (such as scale, location, tender context, etc.). The report does not claim to be exhaustive, nor does it claim to cover all relevant products and specifications available on the market. While steps have been taken to ensure accuracy, WRAP cannot accept responsibility or be held liable to any person for any loss or damage arising out of or in connection with this information being inaccurate, incomplete or misleading. It is the responsibility of the potential user of a material or product to consult with the supplier or manufacturer and ascertain whether a particular product will satisfy their specific requirements. The listing or featuring of a particular product or company does not constitute an endorsement by WRAP and WRAP cannot guarantee the performance of individual products or materials. This material is copyrighted. It may be reproduced free of charge subject to the material being accurate and not used in a misleading context. The source of the material must be identified and the copyright status acknowledged. This material must not be used to endorse or used to suggest WRAP’s endorsement of a commercial product or service. For more detail, please refer to WRAP’s Terms and Conditions on its web site: www.wrap.org.uk

Helping Consumers Reduce Fruit and Vegetable Waste: Final Report 1

Executive summary 1.0 Introduction Previous research by WRAP has revealed that 6.7 million tonnes of food is thrown away by UK consumers each year. Most of this could have been eaten, and 40% (by weight) of this avoidable food waste is made up of fruit and vegetables, worth almost £3 billion. Almost 90% of this fruit and vegetable waste consists of fresh produce, about 1.4 million tonnes, and most is thrown away as a result of not being used in time (going off or going past the food date - ‘best before’, ‘display until’ etc.). For example, the top five fruit and vegetables which get thrown away whole, without being touched are: Apples – 4.4 million per day. Potatoes – 5.1 million per day. Bananas – 1.6 million per day. Tomatoes – 2.8 million per day. Oranges – 1.2 million per day.

The environmental, financial and health implications of so much fresh produce being thrown away makes this category one of the priorities for WRAP and the Love Food Hate Waste campaign. WRAP issued an open call for applications to its Innovation Fund in March 2007, for projects that would help reduce the amount of food thrown away by households in the UK. This project, led by East Malling Research, was one of the successful submissions. The objectives of the project were to: 1. Gain information from consumers on how they currently manage the storage of fresh fruit and vegetables in

the home, on the types of products that are commonly wasted and the reason for rejection. 2. a) Review the advice given by the major retailers to consumers about storage of fresh fruit and vegetables

and suggest improvements. b) Assemble an easy to understand scale of relative perishability for different types of fruit and vegetables, to aid the consumer with best storage practice.

3. Develop and test simple methods to prolong the freshness of fruit and vegetables in the home.

The project team consisted of members from: East Malling Research (EMR) - an independent provider of research and consultancy serving the food chain

and other sectors of the land-based industry. EMR builds on 90 years experience of successfully delivering cutting edge research and development. www.eastmallingresearch.com

Sainsbury’s - a leading UK food retailer. www.j-sainsbury.co.uk Reading Scientific Services Ltd (RSSL) - an independent laboratory carrying out scientific analytical analysis,

product testing, product development, training and consultancy. www.rssl.com The Food Refrigeration and Process Engineering Research Centre (FRPERC) at the University of Bristol - a

multi-disciplinary R&D team of researchers, scientists, engineers and technologists providing expert solutions to the food (and associated) industries. www.frperc.bris.ac.uk

Mack Multiples Division - sources fresh fruit, salads and vegetables from over 60 countries and supplies the UK's major multiple retailers. www.mwmack.co.uk

2.0 Key findings of the research 2.1 Consumer research elements This research was designed and executed with the objective of gaining information as to how consumers manage the storage of fresh fruit and vegetables in the home, to comment on the types of products that are commonly wasted and to determine why. The study had three parts: an attitudinal questionnaire; a daily diary containing information relating to fruit and vegetable purchasing, transport, storage and wastage over one week; and a spot check audit of fridge contents. 297 householders completed the survey, and 273 the diary. The fieldwork was carried out in August and September 2007. The materials used in the consumer research phase are given in Appendix 2.

http://www.eastmallingresearch.com/�

http://www.j-sainsbury.co.uk/�

http://www.rssl.com/�

http://www.frperc.bris.ac.uk/�

http://www.mwmack.co.uk/�


The diary revealed that 40% of fruit by weight is stored in the fridge; 60% elsewhere (56% in fruit bowl). In comparison 75% of vegetables were stored in the fridge.

The most commonly stated reasons for throwing away fruit and vegetables were that they were perceived to be mouldy \ slimy or ‘off’ in terms of appearance or texture.

In a separate piece of research, WRAP commissioned Exodus Research to conduct 1001 telephone-based interviews to explore consumer behaviour around food storage (“Food Storage and Packaging, 2007”). This research found that: only 23% - 28% of people would store fruit in the fridge; 65 to 70% would store fruit in the fruit bowl; and 53% – 57% would store vegetables in the fridge.

Based on the consumer research undertaken by RSSL as part of this project we know where consumers are currently storing different types of fruit and vegetables. Comparing this to the recommendations based on the experimental research (and expert advice – see below), and knowing how much fruit and vegetables are purchased in the UK (from Defra’s Family Food and Expenditure Survey 2005/6 (http://statistics.defra.gov.uk/esg/publications/efs/default.asp)) we can estimate that: At least 1.2 million tonnes of fruit and vegetables are being stored outside of the fridge that would benefit

from being kept cool. Even if 5% of this could be eaten rather than thrown away that would mean 60,000t less waste.

Conversely there are fruit and vegetables, such as bananas and pineapples, that are best stored outside of the fridge, but the research revealed that some consumers were unaware of this. For example 6% of bananas purchased were stored in the fridge – equivalent to over 40,000t. 2.2 Survey of best practice storage and retailer advice A literature survey was carried out to collate data that is available on commercial storage of fresh produce. This included sourcing data on optimum temperature, humidity to maintain freshness and other factors that are likely to impact on shelf life e.g. ethylene production and the impact of breaking the cool chain. The potential application and interpretation of this for the consumer was assessed to provide practical guidelines to the consumer on best practice for storage of fresh produce in the home. This was compared with known current practice by reviewing advice about maintaining freshness provided to the consumer by retailers. Stores representing the major multiple retailers were visited in order to gauge the consistency of advice being provided to the consumer for different product lines. In addition, current recommended practice for fresh produce handling for major categories was determined from suppliers. Summarising the position with regard to all products: With the exception of one retailer a high percentage of packaged products provided information to the

consumer on how to store the products in the home (Figure 1).

Figure 1 Percentage of packaged products providing storage information

Retailer Ref. A B C D E

Packaged products (number of products) 63 60 52 62 62

Information supplied (number of products) 57 59 47 53 23

% products with information 90 98 90 85 37

Free-flow (FF; loose) products were virtually devoid of storage information (% products with information

ranged from 6-19% with an average of 7%) (Figure 2).


Figure 2 Percentage of free-flow products providing storage information

Retailer Ref. A B C D E FF products (number of products) 40 42 36 42 34

Information supplied (number of products) 2 8 2 3 2


In some cases information was provided via tags (e.g. bunched beetroot), stickers (e.g. on squash) and on

paper bags (for mushrooms). Generally consumers are purchasing FF product without any advice on how to keep the product fresh at

home. Examining packaged product lines supplied as conventional or organic showed a general lack of storage

information for the organic products available in 3 (references B, D and E) of the 5 retail stores visited (Figure 3).

Figure 3 Number of conventional and organic products providing storage information

Retailer Ref.

A B C D E

Number of product lines with or without storage advice

With Without With Without With Without With Without With Without

Conventional products

20 0 26 0 21 2 27 6 4 10

Organic products

17 3 14 12 23 0 18 15 0 14

Although advice on storage was often provided on packaging, the information provided for particular products

often varied between retailers. Small print was often used for storage information. Instructions to consumers to ‘see reverse of label’ for storage advice is not ideal, since they would have to

disrupt the package to read the information. It is unlikely that consumers have the time to do this when packing away their shopping. Moreover, many products store best in their original packaging.

Consumers may be getting mixed messages regarding the storage of fresh produce e.g. ambient retail display with advice to ‘refrigerate at home’.

For some products, storage advice varied between different retailers.

2.3 Experimental research – impact of storage conditions on freshness and shelf-life A series of experiments were carried out as part of this research, the principal ones being: To compare the quality changes in products stored under refrigeration with those occurring in the fruit bowl /

vegetable rack at ambient temperature. To compare the quality changes in products stored with and without the polyethylene bags provided by the

retailer. To compare the quality changes in vegetables stored under ambient conditions either in permanent darkness

or exposed to normal day and night conditions.

Experiments were carried out to compare the quality changes in products (purchased as ‘free-flow’) stored under refrigerated conditions with those occurring at ambient temperatures (cool and warm) to simulate storage by consumers in fruit bowls or vegetable racks. Quality changes in products stored with and without the polyethylene bags provided by the retailer were also compared and for some types of vegetables quality changes were monitored under ambient conditions either in permanent darkness or illuminated by fluorescent lights. Seventeen of the most wasted fresh fruit and vegetables (according to WRAP’s The Food We Waste research1) were selected for this study. Over a period of time (up to 3 weeks) the condition of the products were monitored. Products were assessed both scientifically (e.g. water content, firmness – both indicators of freshness) and using quality control specifications from Sainsbury’s (to indicate consumer acceptability; e.g. appearance, smell etc.).

1 http://www.wrap.org.uk/retail/case_studies_research/report_the_food_we.html


This combination of information was used by the project team to develop recommendations for the best storage conditions for each product. Key findings were: For 13 of the 17 types of fruit and vegetables tested, refrigeration was vitally important in maintaining

freshness and extending ‘storage life’. Oranges and pears will last for up to two weeks longer if kept in the fridge. Peppers, carrots and tomatoes will last for at least a week longer if kept in the fridge.

The storage advice provided to consumers on packaged products was generally endorsed by the experimental results.

For some bulky vegetables such as potatoes and onions, storage in a cool (15oC) temperature was preferable to a warm (22oC) temperature but refrigeration was unnecessary. However it was vitally important to exclude light from these products to prevent greening \ sprouting.

Some types of fruit such as bananas are injured at refrigerator temperatures and should be stored at cool temperatures.

The dryness of the air within refrigerators will encourage the loss of water (transpiration) from fruit and vegetables and can be a major factor in loss of quality and presumably also in product rejection (waste) by consumers. Whilst packaged products are afforded some protection against excessive loss of water those purchased as ‘free-flow’ have no protection.

Storing ‘free-flow’ products in perforated polyethylene bags supplied by the multiple retailers was highly beneficial in conserving water and maintaining freshness in most of the products tested. Peppers, carrots and lemons will last for at least a week longer if kept in the fridge, but two weeks

longer if kept in a bag in the fridge. On the basis of the results of this experiment a summary of the benefits of refrigeration and the use of

polyethylene bags for the storage of the most wasted types of fruit and vegetables was prepared (Appendix 3). A summary of this is given in Table 1 below.

Table 1 Summary of advice to consumers

Commodity Advice to consumers

Lemons At home, refrigerate for freshness*

Melons At home, keep cool or refrigerate for freshness

Peppers At home, refrigerate for freshness*

Tomatoes At home, keep cool or refrigerate for freshness*

Potatoes At home, keep in a cool dark place for freshness*

Oranges At home, keep cool or refrigerate for freshness*

Apples At home, refrigerate for freshness*

Strawberry At home, refrigerate for freshness*

Grapes At home, refrigerate for freshness*

Kiwifruit At home, refrigerate for freshness*

Pears At home, refrigerate for freshness*. Ripen at room temperature

Broccoli At home, refrigerate for freshness*

Carrots At home, refrigerate for freshness*

Mushrooms At home, refrigerate in paper bags provided

Onion At home, keep in a cool, dark, dry place

Bananas At home, keep cool but don’t refrigerate*

Pineapples At home, keep cool but don’t refrigerate


* - Additional advice can also be given on-pack, in-store or on-line regarding the benefits of packaging; “If bought pre-packed, or taken home in a free grocery \ produce bag, there are benefits for these fruit and vegetables in keeping them in their packaging or the loosely tied bag. They’ll maintain their freshness and last for longer. If you prefer to buy loose, which allows you to buy exactly what you need, and don’t need or want to take a free bag then there are a range of reusable bags or containers available specifically designed for storing fruit and vegetables. Remember that fresh fruit and vegetables do need to “breathe” and so don’t store them in completely sealed containers”. 3.0 Conclusions and recommendations It is well known in the fresh produce industry that most fruit and vegetables keep longer at low temperatures (and high humidity), and where advice is currently being given to consumers it is largely consistent with this. For example, many pre-packed apples do carry storage advice along the lines of “refrigerate for freshness” or “keep refrigerated”. However this research has revealed that in some cases this advice is not given on pre-packed produce, in very few cases is any advice given on how to store produce bought loose and little advice is currently available on retail websites. The survey (of five of the main UK retailers) revealed that advice was given on most pre-packed produce by most of the retailers (four of the five had storage information on more than 85% of pre-packed fresh fruit and vegetables; but one had storage information on only 37% of these products), but the situation was very different for fruit and vegetables sold loose (free flow). The five retailers gave storage advice on only 6 – 19% (average 7%) of loose produce. Many consumers are unaware of storage advice, or of the benefits of following this advice, and there is a clear need to ensure that the correct storage advice is available to all consumers, regardless of how or where they shop.

These new research findings have highlighted an opportunity for retailers to enable their customers to get more out of their fresh fruit and vegetables, by: Reviewing the advice currently given to customers, on-pack, in-store and on-line. Introducing advice where it is lacking, and making all advice clear and prominent. Complementing this basic storage advice with relevant tips and information (for example, recipes).

In support of the Love Food Hate Waste campaign, and as part of this research project, Sainsbury’s is trialling new storage guidance to customers both in store and on its website. In addition, Love Food Hate Waste is providing detailed tips on storing different types of fruit and vegetables, to keep them at their freshest for longer, at www.lovefoodhatewaste.com. Retailers, manufacturers and others can link to this site to help raise awareness amongst their customers, and details of how to do this can be found on the web-site. The full findings from the research will be published on completion of the project, and WRAP ([email protected]) can be contacted to discuss the project and its implications further.

http://www.lovefoodhatewaste.com/�

mailto:[email protected]�


Contents Executive summary .............................................................................................................................. 1 Contents ............................................................................................................................................... 6 1.0 Consumer research .................................................................................................................. 7

1.1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................7 1.2 Methodology .........................................................................................................................7

1.2.1 Recruitment criteria ..................................................................................................7 1.2.2 Data collection and questionnaire ..............................................................................7 1.2.3 Analyses...................................................................................................................7 1.2.4 Sample demographics ...............................................................................................8

1.3 Results..................................................................................................................................9 1.3.1 Attitude questionnaire ...............................................................................................9 1.3.2 Daily diary of fruit and vegetable purchase, usage and wastage ................................13 1.3.3 Comparison between Exodus and RSSL results .........................................................25 1.3.4 Fridge audit ............................................................................................................25

2.0 Developing a scale of relative perishability ........................................................................... 29 2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................29 2.2 Methodology .......................................................................................................................29

2.2.1 Perishability ............................................................................................................29 2.2.2 Storage information to consumers ...........................................................................29

2.3 Results................................................................................................................................29 2.3.1 Perishability ............................................................................................................29 2.3.2 Storage information to consumers ...........................................................................30 2.3.3 Summarising the position with regard to selected product lines: ................................31

3.0 Devising practical methods for reducing waste in the domestic situation ............................ 46 3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................46 3.2 Methodology .......................................................................................................................46

3.2.1 Refrigerators ..........................................................................................................46 3.2.2 Experimental set-up ................................................................................................47 3.2.3 Product assessments...............................................................................................48

3.3 Results................................................................................................................................48 3.3.1 Lemons ..................................................................................................................49 3.3.2 Melons (Canteloupe) ...............................................................................................51 3.3.3 Apples....................................................................................................................53 3.3.4 Bananas .................................................................................................................54 3.3.5 Grapes ...................................................................................................................56 3.3.6 Kiwifruit .................................................................................................................58 3.3.7 Oranges .................................................................................................................59 3.3.8 Pears .....................................................................................................................60 3.3.9 Pineapples..............................................................................................................62 3.3.10 Strawberries ...........................................................................................................64 3.3.11 Broccoli ..................................................................................................................66 3.3.12 Carrots ...................................................................................................................68 3.3.13 Mushrooms.............................................................................................................70 3.3.14 Onions ...................................................................................................................72 3.3.15 Sweet Peppers........................................................................................................73 3.3.16 Potatoes (baking) ...................................................................................................74 3.3.17 Tomatoes ...............................................................................................................77

4.0 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................ 79 5.0 Suggestions for further work ................................................................................................. 81 Appendix 1 References....................................................................................................................... 82 Appendix 2 Materials used in consumer research.............................................................................. 83 Appendix 3 Summary of EMR storage advice and benefits................................................................ 94


1.0 Consumer research 1.1 Introduction The objective of this research was to gain information from consumers as to how they currently manage the storage of fresh fruit and vegetables in the home and to comment on the types of products that are commonly wasted and the reasons for rejection. This consumer study was carried out by Reading Scientific Services Ltd (RSSL). Specific aims were to determine: The purchases of fresh fruit and vegetables (quantities, origins). Their transport methods (carrier types). Their storage patterns and methods (in the fridge, at ambient temperature, loose, in original packaging, etc.). Which fruit and vegetables are most frequently thrown away and why? Typical use and format of domestic fridges. 1.2 Methodology The consumer study took place in August and September 2007. 1.2.1 Recruitment criteria Respondents were pre-recruited by telephone from the RSSL Thames Valley database of volunteers. This database is a list of volunteers from the local area who are interested in taking part in research projects. Respondents recruited to take part in the test fell within the following criteria as specified by WRAP: 20% 18-34, 60% 35-65, 20% over 65. 100% consuming fresh fruit and vegetables at least once per week. 50% with children at home. 50% ABC1, 50% C2DE. Responsible for the main grocery shopping or co-sharing. The target was 300 respondents or households. 1.2.2 Data collection and questionnaire Each respondent completed three self-completion questionnaires on paper. The first one was an attitude (behaviour) questionnaire about their food habits. It was completed at the beginning of the study, before the second questionnaire which was a daily usage diary. The daily diary started on the day of their main grocery shopping and it was completed for 7 consecutive days. Respondents were allowed 2 weeks to complete the questionnaires recording their daily fruit/vegetable purchase, consumption and waste, at home. The last questionnaire was a fridge audit, a snapshot completed after the daily diary. A list of the most common fruit and vegetables was used for the different questionnaires: Fruit: apples, bananas, “easypeels” / clementines, grapes, melons, oranges, pears, strawberries, other

‘seasonal’ fruit (berries, plums, peaches …) and other exotic fruit (mango, pineapple, passion fruit …). Vegetables: broccoli, cabbage, carrots, cauliflower, cucumber, lettuce, mushrooms, onions, peppers, potatoes

and other vegetables. 1.2.3 Analyses Attitude questionnaire The analyses consist of percentages, frequency distributions, cross-tabulations and ranking.


Daily diary For the daily diary, the first step was to harmonise the weight of the different fruit and vegetables as the respondents had the choice to answer in grams or in number of pieces. The second step was a summation of instances and weights of particular fruit and vegetables across respondents and days. The averages per household were calculated to summarise the results. Correlations, cross-tabulations and analyses of variance (ANOVA) were conducted to explain behaviours. Fridge audit The first and the second steps to analyse the fridge audit data were similar to the ones of the daily diary, a harmonization of the weights and a summation of weights and amounts. Finally the most common patterns were identified. 1.2.4 Sample demographics Attitude questionnaire 297 respondents participated in the study and correctly completed the attitude questionnaire. The households consisted of: 11% one person households. 32% two people households with no children. 32% families (two adults plus children). 4% single parents (one adult plus children). 21% other combinations. The most common number of people eating at home for meals was two.

Table 1 Age distribution of attitude questionnaire respondents.

Under 25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 Over 65

3% 18% 19% 22% 14% 24%

The distribution of Social-Economic Groups (SEG) was: 54% ABC1. 44% C2DE. 2% no answer. Sixty-eight percent of respondents had one fridge, 30% had two and only 2% had three. The most common fridges were larder style fridges with a small self contained freezer (37%) and fridge-freezers with a separate freezer section (35%). On average, the main fridge included: 3.5 main body shelves. 3.5 door shelves. 1.5 fruit and vegetable compartments (50% had 2 – 45% had 1).

Daily diary From the 297 respondents who correctly completed the attitude questionnaire, 273 correctly completed the daily diary. The difference comes from respondents who did not complete the questionnaire on consecutive days, stopped before the seven days or completed it only on their shopping day. The demographic profile was very similar to the attitude questionnaire.


Fridge audit From the 297 respondents who correctly completed the attitude questionnaire, 228 correctly completed the fridge audit. Some respondents sent the questionnaire back too late or ticked the boxes instead of writing the amount in number of pieces or the weight in grams. The households consisted of: 12% one person households. 37% two people households with no children. 29% families (two adults plus children). 5% single parents (one adult plus children). 19% other combinations.

The most common number of people eating at home for meals was two.

Table 2 Age distribution of fridge audit respondents.

Under 25 25 - 34 35 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64 Over 65

1% 14% 16% 24% 15% 30%

The distribution of Social-Economic Groups (SEG) was: 51% ABC1. 46% C2DE. 3% no answer.

The demographic profile was very similar to the attitude questionnaire. 1.3 Results 1.3.1 Attitude questionnaire Storage inside the fridge The first question was about the importance of keeping 10 different types of food inside the fridge. The 10 items were ranked from 1 (the most important to keep inside the fridge) to 10 (the least important). On average respondents thought that fruit and vegetables are less important to keep inside the fridge than meat/fish, milk/yogurts, cheese, butter, or leftovers. Only jams/jellies and bread were considered less important than fruit and vegetables to store in the fridge.

Table 3 Ranking of the importance of keeping food in the fridge (1 most important, 10 least important).

Mean 1-2-3 8-9-10 Min Max

Meat/Fish 1.9 87% 2% 1 10

Milk/Yogurts 2.1 91% 1% 1 10

Cheese 4.0 40% 2% 1 10

Butter 4.1 40% 6% 1 10

Leftovers 4.8 32% 11% 1 10

Vegetables 6.6 3% 30% 1 10

Sauces 7.1 3% 43% 1 10

Fruit 7.4 2% 51% 1 10

Jams/Jellies 7.6 2% 58% 2 10

Bread 9.5 1% 95% 2 10


Most respondents felt it was slightly more important to store vegetables in the fridge than fruit.

Table 4 Ranking of the importance of keeping fruit and vegetables in fridge (1 most important, 10 least important).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Vegetables 0% 0% 2% 6% 14% 26% 20% 18% 10% 3%

Fruit 1% 0% 1% 1% 8% 13% 25% 24% 23% 4%

The second question was how frequently the respondents were not able to store fruit and vegetables in their fridge when they wanted to, because of constraints in the fridge. Cucumber, lettuce, strawberries, mushrooms and broccoli are the fruit and vegetables that a majority of respondents prefer to store in the fridge and are always/often able to. Not many respondents find there are fruit and vegetables they prefer to store in the fridge but cannot. However, the fruit and vegetables which received the highest scores for the two previous answers are the same. A majority of respondents never store apples, bananas, oranges, potatoes, easy peels, pears or onions in the fridge.

Table 5 Preferences for fridge storage of fruit and vegetables.

Never/Rarely Often/Always Never stored in the fridge

Apples 29% 4% 54%

Bananas 10% 1% 84%

Easypeels 18% 3% 67%

Grapes 50% 11% 25%

Melons 40% 17% 22%

Oranges 17% 2% 69%

Pears 25% 5% 57%

Strawberries 67% 21% 4%

Other seasonal fruit 50% 11% 21%

Other exotic 42% 10% 28%

Broccoli 63% 18% 10%

Cabbage 50% 15% 22%

Carrots 62% 18% 12%

Cauliflower 55% 15% 18%

Cucumber 72% 22% 2%

Lettuce 71% 23% 2%

Mushrooms 65% 20% 7%

Onions 29% 7% 55%

Peppers 61% 19% 9%

Potatoes 18% 5% 68%

Other vegetables 49% 10% 10%

Shelf life of fruit and vegetables The fruit and vegetables were assessed regarding their shelf life, to measure real shelf life against expectations. The most common fruit and vegetables disappointing respondents because they did not last long enough were strawberries, bananas and lettuces. The fruit and vegetables that did not disappoint respondents were onions oranges, cabbages and apples.


Table 6 Disappointment with different categories of fresh produce.

Percentage of disappointment

Apples 3%

Bananas 60%

Easypeels 5%

Grapes 35%

Melons 6%

Oranges 2%

Pears 12%

Strawberries 64%

Other seasonal fruit 40%

Other exotic 11%

Broccoli 38%

Cabbage 2%

Carrots 13%

Cauliflower 9%

Cucumber 34%

Lettuce 48%

Mushrooms 34%

Onions 0%

Peppers 6%

Potatoes 8%

Other vegetables 10%

Reading information on packaging The frequency of reading different information on the label when consumers are buying fresh fruit and vegetables was evaluated. A majority of respondents always read the food dates, type of item and price of item, and would never read allergy information. Consumers ‘sometimes’ read storage information, cooking information, country of origin, weight/number, and other information.

Table 7 Frequency of reading label/package information.

Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always

Food dates 4% 7% 10% 17% 63%

Storage information 18% 21% 28% 18% 14%

Nutritional content 29% 25% 22% 17% 6%

Ingredients 36% 18% 20% 16% 9%

Allergy information 52% 23% 13% 6% 6%

Cooking information 14% 20% 39% 14% 12%

Country of origin 21% 18% 28% 19% 14%


Weight/Number 10% 14% 28% 29% 18%

Type of item 3% 4% 10% 28% 55%

Price 1% 1% 13% 27% 57%

Other information 24% 17% 42% 8% 4%

Amongst the respondents who read the food dates, only one third always read and follow them. A further third always read them and will often follow them.

Table 8 Abiding by the food date.

Food dates

Followed Read

Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always Total

Rarely 0% 3% 1% 1% 1% 7%

Sometimes 0% 1% 4% 3% 1% 10%

Often 0% 0% 2% 9% 5% 17%

Always 1% 2% 10% 19% 34% 66%

Total 2% 7% 19% 33% 40% 100%

Storage information

Followed Read

Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always Total

Rarely 0% 10% 9% 4% 2% 26%

Sometimes 0% 2% 17% 14% 2% 35%

Often 0% 0% 1% 13% 7% 22%

Always 0% 0% 1% 4% 13% 18%

Total 1% 12% 27% 35% 25% 100%

(NOTE: Respondents who never read the information and those who did not answer the questions 6 and or 7 were removed from the cross tables. Base sizes - Dates: 285 respondents/Storage: 239 respondents) Consumers who always follow food dates are more likely to be over 45, to always follow the storage information and not to want more information about the storage of fruit and vegetables. There were no differences between consumers who always follow the food dates and the others regarding the number of children, the SEG or the number of fridges. The storage information and the cooking information are less read and especially less followed than the food dates. “Sometimes” read and followed was the most common answer (respectively 17% and 25%). More information In answer to the question “would you like more information about how to store fruit and vegetables?”, slightly more respondents gave a positive answer (56% against 44%). The most common place for wanting more information would be on the packaging. This was consistent between fruit and vegetables.


Table 9 Preferred location for storage advice.

On packaging Leaflet Point of sale On Line Other way No need

Fruit 46% 11% 11% 5% 1% 44%

Vegetables 45% 10% 12% 5% 1% 44%

(N.B. Some respondents may have given more than one answer.) Consumers who would like to have more information are less likely to always follow the food dates and to always follow the storage information. There were no differences between consumers who would like to have more information and the others regarding the age, the number of children, the SEG or the number of fridges. Storage tips Respondents were asked about tips for storing or improving shelf life of fruit and/or vegetables. One hundred and forty three people gave at least one tip. The most common tips were to remove the original packaging from the fruit and vegetables before storage and to use a special container. Bananas received the highest number of tips. Consumers agreed that bananas had to be separated from other fruit, but they were divided about storing them in the fridge. Fifteen per cent recommended keeping fruit and vegetables in a cool/dark place, 15% in the fridge. Some other tips were to buy only what is needed, to buy local products only and to store half of the fruit in the fridge and use the other half from the fruit bowl first.

Table 10 Consumer storage tips for fruit and vegetables.

Remove packaging before storage 23%

Use a special container (airtight, paper bags…) 16%

Keep bananas away from other fruit 15%

Keep fruit and vegetables in a cool/dark place 15%

Keep fruit and vegetables in the fridge 13%

Buy only what you need 6%

Do not refrigerate bananas 4%

Store half of the fruit in the fridge and use the other half from fruit bowl first 4%

Buy only local products 3%

1.3.2 Daily diary of fruit and vegetable purchase, usage and wastage The diary started on the main shopping day and lasted for seven days. Some respondents shopped several times during the week, topping up the main weekly shop. Stock take and storage The quantity of fruit and vegetables in the stock take decreased regularly during the 7 days as they were eaten or thrown away. A total of 2,255 kg of fruit and vegetables were stored by all of the respondents on the first day of the study, the day of main shopping trip, whereas only 852 kg were stored on the last day (Figure 1). There was a greater weight of vegetables than fruit in the stock take. On the first day, for example 1,328 kg of vegetables against 927 kg of fruit.


Figure 1 Total quantity of fruit and vegetables stored by all respondents during the week (kg).

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Days

Qu

anti

ty (

kg)

Fruits in the fridge Fruits outside the fridge

Vegetables in the fridge Vegetables outside the fridge

Table 11 Quantities of vegetables stored (average weight per household, g).

Vegetables Inside the fridge Outside the fridge Grand total

Broccoli 91 9 100

Cabbage 115 37 151

Carrots 187 25 211

Cauliflower 114 39 153

Cucumber 147 3 149

Lettuce 254 2 256

Mushrooms 73 4 77

Onions 51 148 198

Peppers 78 7 84

Potatoes 207 1095 1301

Prepared vegetable salads 35 1 36

Other vegetables 321 23 344

Unsurprisingly, potatoes were contributing the most in terms of the overall weight of vegetables present within the household. Most vegetables were kept in the fridge in the fruit and vegetable compartment, except potatoes and onions, which were stored in the cupboard. Forty per cent of the vegetables were kept loose and 33% in plastic bags. Store boxes and paper bags were not often used. Mushrooms were kept in different packaging.


Table 12 Quantities of fruit stored (average weight per household, g).

Fruit Inside the fridge Outside the fridge Grand total

Apples 150 338 488

Bananas 30 442 471

Easypeels 22 68 90

Grapes 104 25 129

Melons 87 54 141

Oranges 24 122 145

Pears 40 93 133

Strawberries 94 5 99

Other seasonal fruit 112 13 125

Other exotic fruit 63 13 77

Prepared fruit Salads 6 0 6

Apples and bananas were the most common fruit in households. They were mainly stored outside the fridge. Fridge storage The upper shelves were used to store strawberries and other seasonal fruit. The lower shelves also contained seasonal fruit, plus “other” vegetables and grapes. The fruit and vegetable compartment was mainly used for vegetables. The most commonly found of these were lettuces, carrots, cucumbers and “other” vegetables. The door shelves were rarely used to store fruit and vegetables.

Table 13 Storage of fruit and vegetables in the fridge.

Categories Quantity (g)

Other seasonal fruit 29.1 Upper shelves

Strawberries 27.8

Other vegetables 72.4

Grapes 43.5

Strawberries 43.2 Lower shelves

Other seasonal fruit 43.1

Other vegetables 226.9

Lettuce 209.4

Carrots 166.1 Fruit and veg compartments

Cucumber 120.6

In door / /

Purchases Fourteen hundred kg of fruit and 1800 kg of vegetables were bought or received during the week by all of the respondents. On average, 744 g of fruit and 965 g of vegetables were bought or received per day, per household (Figure 2).


Figure 2 Total quantities of fruit and vegetables bought during the week (kg).

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Days

Qu

anti

ty (

kg)

Fruits Vegetables

Approximately 90% of the fruit and vegetables came from supermarkets. The garden provided one quarter of other seasonal fruit and other vegetables. At the time of writing, the Internet was not developed as a supply line.

Table 14 Outlets for purchasing fruit and vegetables.

Corner shops

Farmer's market Gift Green

grocers Internet Super market

Your garden

Average (g)

Fruit 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 88% 5% 744

Vegetables 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 87% 6% 965

Table 15 Outlets for purchasing particular categories of fruit and vegetables.

Category Percentage

Prepared Fruit Salads 5% Corner shops

Oranges 4%

Farmer's market Cauliflower 5%

Others seasonal fruit 6% Gift

Other vegetables 6%

Green grocers Prepared fruit Salads 6%

Other seasonal fruit 23%

Other vegetables 23%

Apples 7%

Cabbage 6%

Carrots 6%

Potatoes 6%

Your garden

Onions 5%


Apples and bananas were the fruit bought in the largest volumes. Apples occasionally came from the garden.

Table 16 Average daily weight per household (g) of fruit purchased.

Fruit Supermarket Other ways Grand total

Apples 133 25 157

Bananas 189 9 197

Easypeels 29 1 30

Grapes 48 2 51

Melons 46 2 49

Oranges 39 2 41

Pears 33 6 39

Strawberries 48 4 52

Other seasonal fruit 52 31 84

Other exotic fruit 36 4 41

Prepared Fruit Salads 5 0 5

Potatoes were the vegetables bought in the largest volumes. They were obtained also from the garden.

Table 17 Average daily weight per household (g) of vegetables purchased.

Vegetables Supermarket Other ways Grand total

Broccoli 46 3 49

Cabbage 58 8 66

Carrots 67 8 75

Cauliflower 59 7 67

Cucumber 44 5 49

Lettuce 71 7 78

Mushrooms 25 1 26

Onions 34 4 38

Peppers 19 2 21

Potatoes 280 66 346

Prepared Vegetable Salads 17 1 18

Other vegetables 87 48 135

Around two-thirds of respondents used carrier bags to bring their fruit and vegetables home. One third of respondents used re-usable carrier bags or “bags for life”. There were no differences amongst the different categories of fruit and vegetables regarding the bags used to carry them home.

Table 18 Method for carriage home.

Carrier bag Shopping crate Cardboard box Bag for life Cool bag

Fruit 63% 3% 2% 32% 1%

Vegetables 63% 3% 2% 31% 1%


Storage of Purchases There were some distinct differences between where fruit and vegetables are stored after shopping. Once in the home, fruit were mainly kept outside of the fridge, whereas three-quarters of vegetables were kept in the fridge.

Table 19 Home storage location.

Fridge Kitchen/fruit bowl Cupboard/Under

the sink Garage/Outdoor

storage

Fruit 40% 56% 2% 2%

Vegetables 75% 4% 14% 7%

The fruit storage was divided between ‘in the cold’, ‘in the fridge’ and ‘at ambient’ temperature. Grapes, melons, other seasonal fruit and prepared salads were kept mostly in the fridge, whereas other fruit were kept at ambient temperature in the kitchen. Potatoes and onions were stored in the cupboard, in the dark, at ambient.

Table 20 Home storage for particular categories of fruit.

Fruit Fridge Fruit bowl Cupboard Outdoor storage

Apples 26% 70% 2% 2%

Bananas 4% 89% 5% 1%

Easypeels 22% 76% 1% 2%

Grapes 71% 28% 1% 1%

Melons 58% 35% 3% 4%

Oranges 17% 83% 0% 0%

Pears 26% 72% 1% 2%

Strawberries 93% 6% 0% 1%

Other seasonal fruit 58% 39% 2% 1%

Other exotic fruit 42% 52% 2% 5%

Prepared fruit salads 100% 0% 0% 0%

Table 21 Home storage for particular categories of vegetables.

Vegetables Fridge Fruit bowl Cupboard Outdoor storage

Broccoli 92% 2% 4% 3%

Cabbage 60% 6% 20% 14%

Carrots 80% 1% 11% 9%

Cauliflower 71% 6% 16% 8%

Cucumber 100% 0% 0% 0%

Lettuce 99% 0% 0% 0%

Mushrooms 92% 2% 4% 2%

Onions 41% 10% 40% 9%

Peppers 89% 2% 6% 2%

Potatoes 21% 9% 48% 22%

Prepared vegetable salads 98% 1% 1% 1%

Other vegetables 81% 8% 6% 5%


Fruit were mostly stored loose. Vegetables were kept loose or in plastic bag. Storage boxes and paper bags were rarely used. There were differences amongst some categories of fruit and vegetables.

Table 22 Packaging used for home storage.

In store box Loose In plastic bag In paper bag Other packaging

Fruit 12% 65% 11% 1% 12%

Vegetables 8% 40% 33% 4% 15%

Most of the fruit were kept loose except strawberries (in original packaging tray), grapes (in plastic bag) and prepared fruit salads. Vegetables’ storage was divided between loose and in a plastic bag. Mushrooms were mainly kept in the paper bag provided or other packaging.

Table 23 Packaging used for home storage for particular categories of fruit.

Fruit In store box Loose In plastic bag In paper bag Other packaging

Apples 2% 80% 16% 1% 2%

Bananas 0% 92% 5% 1% 1%

Easypeels 1% 81% 6% 0% 13%

Grapes 14% 28% 46% 0% 13%

Melons 3% 93% 3% 0% 1%

Oranges 2% 87% 7% 0% 5%

Pears 4% 76% 12% 0% 8%

Strawberries 53% 4% 2% 1% 39%

Other seasonal fruit 24% 46% 5% 1% 24%

Other exotic fruit 11% 75% 3% 0% 11%

Prepared Fruit Salads 20% 0% 10% 0% 70%

Table 24 Packaging used for home storage for particular categories of vegetables.

Vegetables In store box Loose In plastic bag In paper bag Other packaging

Broccoli 5% 45% 40% 0% 10%

Cabbage 3% 57% 27% 1% 13%

Carrots 4% 50% 43% 1% 2%

Cauliflower 7% 50% 33% 1% 9%

Cucumber 5% 49% 16% 0% 30%

Lettuce 8% 27% 48% 0% 17%

Mushrooms 26% 6% 6% 34% 29%

Onions 1% 63% 25% 3% 8%

Peppers 4% 58% 29% 0% 8%

Potatoes 4% 37% 46% 3% 10%

Prepared vegetable salads 21% 3% 53% 2% 22%

Other vegetables 13% 37% 30% 3% 18%


Waste Only the edible fruit and vegetables thrown away were taken into consideration in the study (i.e. this survey excluded peelings and other preparation waste). Quantities The quantities of potentially edible fruit and vegetables thrown away varied considerably during the week. The highest quantities were on the first day of the main shopping trip. One reason could be that consumers empty and clean their fridge and cupboards of existing content to have enough space for the newly purchased produce. Compared with the quantities bought, the quantities thrown away were low. During the week, 1400 kg of fruit and 1800 kg of vegetables were bought compared with 74 kg of fruit and 102 kg of vegetables thrown away (Figure 3).

Figure 3 Total quantity of fruit and vegetables thrown away by all respondents.

0

5

10

15

20

25

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Days

Qu

anti

ty (

kg)

Fruits - general bin Fruits - other Vegetables - general bin Vegetables - other

A greater weight of vegetables was thrown away than fruit. One third of fruit and one quarter of vegetables were thrown away, but not in the general refuse bin, i.e. in a kitchen waste collection caddy, a home compost bin or fed to household pets. On average, 39 g of fruit and 54 g of vegetables were thrown away per day per household. This was equivalent to 5.3% of total fruit and 5.7% of total vegetables bought during the week. Apples and bananas were the most commonly thrown away fruit. Lettuces, cabbages and potatoes were the most commonly thrown away vegetables.


Table 25 Average daily weight per household (g) of particular categories of fruit thrown away.

General bin Other ways Grand total Fruit

24.2 14.8 39.0

Apples 4.1 6.1 10.2

Bananas 8.0 3.5 11.5

Easypeels 1.3 0.3 1.6

Grapes 1.5 0.4 1.9

Melons 2.7 0.8 3.5

Oranges 1.9 0.3 2.2

Pears 1.2 1.3 2.5

Strawberries 1.8 0.7 2.5

Other seasonal fruit 1.2 1.0 2.2

Other exotic fruit 0.3 0.3 0.6

Prepared Fruit Salads 0.0 0.3 0.3

Table 26 Average daily weight per household (g) of particular categories of vegetables thrown away.

General bin Other ways Grand total Vegetables

40.5 13.1 53.6

Broccoli 1.9 0.5 2.4

Cabbage 6.2 2.1 8.3

Carrots 2.8 1.2 4.0

Cauliflower 5.7 0.2 5.9

Cucumber 3.9 1.1 5.0

Lettuce 7.3 4.0 11.3

Mushrooms 1.1 0.3 1.4

Onions 0.2 0.1 0.3

Peppers 1.2 0.2 1.4

Potatoes 5.9 1.5 7.4

Prepared vegetable salads 1.1 0.5 1.6

Other vegetables 3.4 1.2 4.6

Reasons for throwing fruit and vegetables away The three main reasons for throwing away were the same for both fruit and vegetables. They were that the produce was mouldy / slimy, the appearance was off or the texture was off. The fact that the food dates were past was also a reason given, mainly for vegetables. Only 2% of respondents admitted that they bought more than needed.


Table 27 Reasons for throwing away fruit and vegetables.

Past food dates

Bought more than needed

Mouldy/ slimy

Appearance off

Texture off

Smell off

Didn't like it

Needed space

Another reason

Fruit 10% 2% 26% 31% 21% 3% 2% 1% 3%

Vegetables 18% 2% 26% 27% 19% 8% 1% 2% 4%

When considering individual categories. Consumers threw away bananas mostly because they thought that their appearance was off and apples because the food dates were past. Poor texture was a determinant for throwing away apples, grapes, other seasonal fruit and exotic fruit.

Table 28 Reasons for throwing away particular categories of fruit.

Past food dates

Bought more than

needed

Mouldy/ slimy

Appear-ance off

Texture off

Smell off

Didn't like it

Needed space

Another reason

Apples 20% 1% 19% 19% 28% 0% 3% 1% 9%

Bananas 6% 0% 13% 55% 16% 5% 1% 1% 3%

Easypeels 8% 5% 32% 30% 19% 3% 3% 0% 0%

Grapes 10% 3% 24% 39% 21% 2% 0% 0% 2%

Melons 15% 11% 26% 11% 11% 15% 4% 0% 7%

Oranges 10% 0% 33% 19% 19% 0% 10% 5% 5%

Pears 4% 0% 44% 28% 20% 0% 4% 0% 0%

Strawberries 12% 3% 40% 20% 19% 4% 0% 1% 1% Other seasonal fruit 3% 3% 33% 25% 30% 3% 0% 3% 3%

Other exotic fruit 8% 0% 38% 23% 31% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Prepared fruit salads 0% 0% 50% 25% 25% 0% 0% 0% 0%

The main reasons vegetables were thrown away was because the appearance was off and/or the produce was mouldy/slimy. However, for peppers poor texture was clearly a common problem. Prepared salads, carrots and cauliflowers were frequently thrown away because they were past their food dates.

Table 29 Reasons for throwing away particular categories of vegetables.

Past food dates

Bought more than

needed

Mouldy/ slimy

Appear-ance off

Texture off

Smell off

Didn't like it

Needed space

Another reason

Broccoli 11% 0% 7% 48% 19% 4% 0% 7% 4%

Cabbage 17% 3% 10% 28% 14% 17% 0% 3% 7%

Carrots 24% 2% 24% 17% 16% 6% 0% 2% 10%

Cauliflower 25% 17% 8% 33% 0% 17% 0% 0% 0%

Cucumber 17% 2% 34% 15% 18% 3% 3% 0% 6%

Lettuce 16% 2% 32% 25% 14% 6% 1% 2% 2%

Mushrooms 13% 3% 32% 24% 18% 11% 0% 0% 0%

Onions 0% 8% 33% 42% 8% 8% 0% 0% 0%

Peppers 4% 4% 12% 15% 58% 4% 0% 4% 0%

Potatoes 12% 0% 21% 35% 17% 12% 0% 0% 4%

Prepared vegetable salads 30% 0% 21% 23% 9% 12% 0% 2% 2%

Other vegetables 15% 2% 20% 28% 23% 7% 2% 0% 3%

Although respondents did not say they threw away fruit and vegetables because they bought too much, the fruit and vegetables most thrown away were often those bought in the highest quantities.


Consumers who threw away because the food dates were past Some of the consumers who threw away fruit and vegetables because the food dates were past gave additional reasons: The appearance and the colour were off. The texture was also off. The produce was mouldy/slimy.

Table 30 Specific problems with fruit and vegetables past food dates.

It was on offer in store and I bought more than I needed

Mouldy slimy

Appearance Colour off

Texture off

Smell off

Prepared too

much food

Didn't like it

Needed more space

Another reason

Fruit 10% 15% 12% 17% 2% 0% 0% 2% 31%

Vegetables 2% 19% 24% 11% 10% 2% 0% 0% 22%

Some correlations Households with children threw away more fruit and vegetables than those without children, both in quantity and in terms of percentage of food thrown away. They were more likely to use the compost bin for fruit and less likely for vegetables than households without children. They also gave fruit and vegetables more often to pets or other animals. Apples, bananas, cabbage and potatoes were the categories where the largest effect of household composition on waste was observed.

Table 31 Influence of children on average daily wastage per household (g).

General bin

Compost bin

Home compost

Food macerator

Pets food

Other ways

Grand total

No children 12.2 4.2 8.3 0.1 0.4 1.1 26.3 Fruit

Children 38.3 8.7 3.4 0 3.6 0 54.0

No children 27.6 7.8 5.2 0 1.7 1.4 43.7 Vegetables

Children 55.9 1.1 5.2 0 3.1 0 65.2

Table 32 Influence of children on average daily wastage per household (g) of particular categories of fruit and vegetables.

General bin Grand total

No children 1.8 6.6 Apples

Children 6.8 14.5

No children 2.2 6.3 Bananas

Children 14.9 17.6

No children 2.7 5.2 Cabbage

Children 10.3 12.1

No children 2.8 5.0 Potatoes

Children 9.6 10.2


Socio-economic grouping influences the wastage patterns of households C2, D and E categories seem to throw away a greater quantity of vegetables. Cabbage, cauliflower, cucumber and lettuce were the vegetables where these differences were the most pronounced.

Table 33 Influence of socio-economic group on average daily wastage per household (g) of fruit and vegetables.

General bin

Compost bin

Home compost

Food macerator Pets food Other

ways Grand total

ABC1 21.0 8.7 6.6 0.1 1.5 1.0 39.1 Fruit

C2DE 28.5 3.2 5.4 0 2.3 0 39.5

ABC1 29.9 5.4 4.2 0 2.4 1.4 43.3 Vegetables

C2DE 55.0 3.9 6.7 0 2.3 0 68.0

Table 34 Influence of socio-economic group on average daily wastage per household (g) of particular categories of fruit and vegetables.

General bin Total

ABC1 3.2 4.8 Cabbage

C2DE 10.3 13.4

ABC1 4.0 4.2 Cauliflower

C2DE 8.2 8.3

ABC1 2.6 3.3 Cucumber

C2DE 5.3 7.0

ABC1 4.3 8.1 Lettuce

C2DE 10.9 15.3

Further observations showed that on average, respondents under 45 years of age, who stated that they always followed food dates and who stated they would like more storage information seemed to throw away more fruit and vegetables than the rest of the sample.

Table 35 Comparison of age class and label readers’ impact on average daily wastage per household (g).

General bin Total

Under 45 35.1 52.0 Fruit

Above 45 16.5 30.0

Under 45 52.9 62.9 Vegetables

Above 45 31.9 47.1

1 fridge 26.0 37.8 Fruit

More than 1 20.1 41.5

1 fridge 48.8 60.9 Vegetables

More than 1 22.2 37.3

Fruit Not always follow dates 20.4 34.4


Always follow dates 30.5 46.9

Not always follow dates 33.6 44.9 Vegetables

Always follow dates 52.4 68.3

Need of info 25.5 42.7 Fruit

No need 22.4 34.2

Need of info 39.2 57.3 Vegetables

No need 42.2 48.8

1.3.3 Comparison between Exodus and RSSL results An earlier consumer study for WRAP by Exodus study took place in February 2007. Two hundred and eighty-four households completed a diary of purchases, storage and wastage of fruit and vegetables for 7 days, i.e. a similar number of households to the current study and for the same period of time. The average weights of edible fruit and vegetables thrown away per household were similar for the two studies. Any small differences are likely to be as a result of using two different methodologies and undertaking the research in winter (Exodus) and summer (this research).

Table 36 Comparison of average daily wastage per household (g) in Exodus and RSSL consumer studies.

Exodus RSSL

Fruit and vegetables 98 93

Fruit 35 39

Vegetables 63 54

Table 37 Comparison of average daily wastage per household (g) in Exodus and RSSL consumer studies for particular categories of fruit and vegetables.

Exodus RSSL Fruit

35.2 39.0

Apples 6.2 10.2

Bananas 4.7 11.5

Easypeels 2.8 1.6

Grapes 1.4 1.9

Melons 1.8 3.5

Oranges 4.8 2.2

Pears 0.4 2.5

Strawberries 0.4 2.5

Other seasonal fruit 4.4 2.2

Other exotic fruit 5.5 0.6

Prepared fruit salads 0.04 0.3

1.3.4 Fridge audit The fridge audit was conducted at the end of the study and was completed by 228 respondents. Fridge fullness Respondents were asked to describe what was currently in their main fridge and also how full it was.


Most fridges were either half full or three quarters full. These results were consistent across the four types of fridges cited in the study (larder fridge, larder fridge with a freezer compartment, American fridge and fridge freezer).

Table 38 Fridge audit, fullness of fridge.

Compared to normal How full

Less As full Fuller TOTAL

<1/4 full 5% 2% 0% 7%

1/4 full 15% 1% 0% 16%

1/2 full 21% 13% 2% 37%

3/4 full 4% 21% 5% 30%

Completely full 0% 3% 7% 10%

TOTAL 46% 40% 14% 100%

Description of types of food in the fridge Dairy products (butter, cheese etc.) were found in the fridge in almost every household. Jams, sauces, meats, fish and eggs were also frequently found together with large quantities of milk and drinks.

Table 39 Fridge audit, quantities and frequency of dairy products, drinks, meat, fish and drinks in fridges.

Categories Frequency Average Units

Butter and cheese 97% 1 188 g

Milk 95% 2 319 ml

Jams, sauces … 84% 1 472 g

Fresh meat, fish and eggs 83% 837 g

Yogurts and dairy desserts 81% 785 g

Soft drinks 71% 1 900 ml

Other 45% 720 g

Other drinks 39% 1 316 ml

Packaged chilled food/ready meals 36% 526 g

Beer 35% 1 235 ml

Wine 35% 966 ml

Leftovers 30% 440 g

Bread, rolls … 20% 671 g

Other 15% 660 ml

Leftovers 7% 199 ml

Few respondents had fruit stored in their fridge. One quarter had strawberries, grapes and apples. Less than 10% had pears, easypeels or oranges in their main fridge.


Table 40 Fridge audit, quantities and frequency of fruit in fridges.

Fruit Frequency Average (g)

Others seasonal fruit 30% 375

Strawberries 26% 353

Grapes 26% 319

Apples 25% 740

Melons 18% 410

Other exotic fruit 15% 306

Pears 8% 485

Easypeels 7% 455

Bananas 6% 461

Prepared fruit salads 5% 312

Oranges 4% 420

Vegetables were more often in the fridge. Around 60% of the respondents had cucumber, lettuce and carrots in the fridge. Cauliflower, cabbage and potatoes were vegetables that were less commonly found in the fridge; in less than 20% of the households.

Table 41 Fridge audit, quantities and frequency of vegetables in fridges.

Vegetables Frequency Average (g)

Cucumber 64% 254

Other vegetables 64% 603

Lettuce 63% 629

Carrots 58% 419

Peppers 41% 187

Mushrooms 35% 191

Broccoli 33% 297

Onions 30% 169

Potatoes 19% 1034

Cabbage 16% 635

Cauliflower 15% 736

Prepared Vegetable Salads 15% 334

Different storage locations The upper shelves were used to store dairy products, butter, cheese, jams and sauces. The lower shelves also held dairy products, alongside meat. The fruit and vegetable compartment was mainly used for fruit and vegetables. The drinks (milk and other drinks) were stored in the door.


Table 42 Fridge audit, location of food stored in the fridge.

Categories Quantity Frequency

Yogurts and dairy desserts 685 g 42%

Butter and cheese 933 g 42% Upper shelves

Jams, sauces … 1201 g 35%

Yogurts and dairy desserts 698 g 31%

Butter and cheese 689 g 28% Lower shelves

Fresh meat, fish and eggs 853 g 28%

Other vegetables 594 g 64%

Onions 168 g 50% Fruit and veg compartments

Lettuce 676 g 34%

Milk 2085 ml 77%

Soft drinks 1406 ml 38% In door

Jams, sauces … 1073 g 35%


2.0 Developing a scale of relative perishability 2.1 Introduction Up to the point of sale, most types of fresh fruit and vegetables have been stored and / or transported under carefully controlled temperatures and / or atmospheres to ensure that they satisfy consumer demands for quality and they achieve an acceptable ‘shelf-life’ period in the home. Whilst for packaged commodities, particularly ready-prepared or ‘fresh-cut’ product lines, there may be customer information regarding food dates, this is not so for most ‘free-flow’ product lines. In general, buying patterns dictate that a large quantity of an ever increasing range of fruit and vegetables are purchased on a single occasion and these products need to be kept in a satisfactory condition until consumption. Some of the fruit and vegetables purchased need to survive until the next shopping trip is due. Product knowledge is required about the best conditions for storing fresh produce in the home. Without this, products lose sensory quality or deteriorate to a point where they are unfit for consumption due to decay or adverse chemical reactions. There needs to be an appreciation of the relative perishabilities of different products in order that the most perishable are consumed before they deteriorate. Awareness is needed of whether products require further conditioning in the home prior to consumption. For example unripe pears or avocados will require ambient storage until they ripen. A literature survey was carried out to collate data that is available on commercial storage of fresh produce. This included sourcing data on optimum temperature, humidity to maintain freshness and other factors that are likely to impact on shelf life e.g. ethylene production and the impact of breaking the chill chain, etc. The potential application and interpretation of this for the domestic consumer was assessed to provide practical guidelines on best practice for the storage of fresh produce in the home. This was compared with known current practice, by reviewing advice about maintaining freshness provided to the consumer by retailers. Stores representing the major multiple retailers were visited in order to gauge the consistency of advice being provided to the consumer for different product lines. In addition, current recommended practice for fresh produce handling for major categories was determined from suppliers. 2.2 Methodology 2.2.1 Perishability Recommended temperature, relative humidity (RH) and approximate ‘storage life’ of fresh fruit in commercial storage were obtained mainly from USDA and Australian publications available through the internet (Optimal Fruit, Vegetables and Nuts Storage Database (Sydney Postharvest Laboratory) http://www.postharvest.com.au; USDA Agriculture Handbook Number 66 – Contents (http://www.ba.ars.usda.gov/hb66)). Information was obtained for 104 types of fresh fruit and vegetables. 2.2.2 Storage information to consumers Five supermarkets, representing the top five multiple grocery retailers, were visited in the period 27 June to 4 July 2007. The main purpose was to note information provided to consumers on how to store products in the home. Additional information recorded included: type of packaging, type of display, i.e. cool or ambient and ‘display until’ (DU) and ‘best before’ (BB) dates for each product. Details of all variations of each product were recorded such as ‘organically produced’ and ‘ready-ripe’. 2.3 Results 2.3.1 Perishability The minimum expected storage life for each product was extracted from the data obtained and is presented in Tables 46-50. Each table represents a different category of perishability. The most perishable products were those with an expected minimum storage life of 7 days or less (Table 46). Products with expected minimum perishabilities of 8-14, 15-28, 29-120 days and more than 120 days are presented in Tables 47, 48, 49 and 50 respectively. Information relating to products that are most wasted by UK consumers are indicated by the use of bold type (Exodus Diary Research 2007: Kitchen Diary Top Line Results based on 284 Diaries and analysis by WRAP based on Defra’s Expenditure and Food Survey 2004/5).


Generally, it would be expected that products with a short commercial storage life would have a correspondingly short storage life in the home and vice versa. However, for some product types the storage life in the home is likely to be affected by how long the product has been in commercial storage. This could be significant for long-stored vegetables such as onions, potatoes and carrots that are likely to show a reduced ‘home-life’ when they begin to break dormancy at the end of commercial storage. For the sake of this study, these effects will be largely ignored, as will other factors that affect storage life such as cultivars and growing conditions, etc. It is apparent that products most wasted by UK consumers are not necessarily those in the most perishable categories. Indeed, approximately equal numbers of products are represented in each of the five perishability categories. To obtain maximum life in commercial storage the lowest possible temperature will normally be used, as this will have the greatest effect in slowing the respiration and rate of metabolism of the products. The lowest temperature for each product is determined by its susceptibility to chilling injury. Sixty-seven percent of the products listed in Tables 46-50 can be stored at 5oC or below and these are amenable to home storage in the refrigerator. Some of those products that are stored commercially at temperatures above 5oC can also be stored in a domestic refrigerator for a limited period. Chilling injury is related to temperature and time of exposure. Consequently, in commercial storage requiring maximum duration, minimum temperatures are strictly adhered to in order to avoid quality loss. The consequences of chilling product after purchase are likely to be less important since the likely duration of storage may be shorter than that realised commercially. Moreover the temperature in domestic fridges is optimistically between 4-5oC but more likely higher, which is unlikely to present a significant chilling threat to products other than the most sensitive products e.g. bananas, squash and sweet potatoes. Consequently, for the vast majority of products, the advice to consumers is to refrigerate to maintain freshness. Storage advice was provided by the retailers for 63 of the products listed in Tables 46-50, and for 56 of these the advice was ‘to refrigerate’. Notable exceptions were banana, aubergine, okra and mango. Some products regarded as chilling sensitive and not stored under low temperatures commercially have a consumer recommendation to be stored under refrigeration. Such products include tomato and cucumber. Climacteric fruit, i.e. those that ripen after harvesting, are of special concern since they may have significant storage life at low temperatures but may ripen rapidly at ambient temperatures. Climacteric fruit include apples, pears, bananas, plums, peaches, nectarines, avocados and mangos. Whilst on the basis of their projected life in commercial storage, fruit such as avocados, nectarines, plums and pears have been placed in the third and fourth most perishable categories they would be placed in the most perishable category if left in ambient temperatures after purchase. Without such complications the advice to consumers would be simply to allocate refrigerator space on the basis of the lists provided in Tables 46-50. 2.3.2 Storage information to consumers Summarising the position with regard to all products:

With the exception of one retailer (E), a high percentage of packaged products provided information to the

consumer on how to store the products in the home.

Table 43 Storage information provided by the top five retailers on packaged fresh fruit and vegetables.


Packaged products (number) 63 60 52 62 62

Information supplied (number) 57 59 47 53 23


Free-flow (FF) products were virtually devoid of storage information (% products with information ranged

from 6-19% with an average of 7%).

Information is provided via tags, e.g. bunched beetroot, stickers e.g. on squash and bags for mushrooms.


Generally consumers are purchasing FF product without any advice on how to keep the product fresh at

home.

Table 44 Storage information provided by the top five retailers on free flow fresh fruit and vegetables. Retailer Ref. A B C D E

FF products (number) 40 42 36 42 34

Information supplied (number) 2 8 2 3 2


Examining packaged product lines supplied as conventional and organic showed a general lack of storage

information for organic products available in 3 (references B, D and E) of the 5 retail stores visited.

Table 45 Storage information provided by the top five retailers on packaged conventional vs organic fresh fruit and vegetables.


Advice Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No

Conventional 20 0 26 0 21 2 27 6 4 10

Organic 17 3 14 12 23 0 18 15 0 14

Although advice on storage was often provided on packages the information provided for particular products

often varied between retailers.

Generally, the difference between the DU and BB dates were the same for all products regardless of

perishability (1-3 days). One supermarket visited (reference E) had no BB dates (only DU dates).

Small print was often used for storage information.

Instructions to consumers to ‘see reverse of label’ for storage advice is not ideal since they would have to

disrupt the package to read the information. It is unlikely that consumers have the time to do this when

packing away their shopping. Moreover, this research has shown that many products store best in their

original packaging.

Instructions to refrigerate and ‘serve at room temperature’ are intended to ensure that consumers have the

best possible eating experience but in the busy modern home it is perhaps unlikely that meals are sufficiently

well planned to comply with this advice and may therefore store produce at ambient.

Consumers may be getting mixed messages regarding the storage of fresh produce e.g. ambient retail display

with advice to ‘refrigerate at home’ and vice versa.

For some products, storage advice varied in different supermarkets.

2.3.3 Summarising the position with regard to selected product lines:

Collated information extracted from the packaging of the nine ‘most-wasted’ types of fruit and eleven ‘most-

wasted’ types of vegetables (Exodus Diary Research 2007: Kitchen Diary Top Line Results based on 284

Diaries and analysis by WRAP based on Defra’s Expenditure and Food Survey 2004/5) are provided in tables

51-59 and 60-70 respectively.

The points raised for the complete range of products examined were generally applicable to the 20 ‘most-

wasted’ product lines. It was reassuring that where advice was given for eleven of the ‘most-wasted’ product

lines this was consistent across retailers. Clearly, it is of concern that information supplied for the remaining


products was inconsistent. It is reasonable to expect that consumers should receive the same storage advice

for most products regardless of the choice of retailer. However, there are products where storage advice is

complicated and where the need to reduce waste may conflict with the desire to provide optimum eating

quality. Tomatoes are a good example of a ‘chilling-sensitive’ fruit where refrigeration may compromise taste

and flavour (Maul et al., 2000). However, to delay ripening (softening) and spoilage, refrigeration is

recommended.

Stage of ripeness and the necessity to ripen in the home are requirements restricted to certain types of fruit

and necessarily complicate any advice provided to consumers. These considerations do not arise with

vegetables and consequently the storage advice is generally simpler and more consistent between retailers.

Storage advice for 8 out the 10 ‘most-wasted’ vegetables was consistent and clear.

Table 46 Storage advice for the most perishable category of fresh fruit and vegetables (minimum expected storage life of 7 days or less). Figures in bold indicate products that are in the top nine of most wasted fruit and top eleven of most wasted vegetables. The ticks illustrate the advice that was given where products were found, so key is to identify where advice is not consistent (ticks are found across the table) rather than count the number of ticks in each row.

Commercial storage Storage advice to consumers on packaged/tagged products Product

Temp. oC RH (%) Fridge Cool Cool/dry Cool/dark Room temp.

Blackberry -0.5 - 0 >90

Blueberry -0.5 - 0 >90

Elderberry -0.5 - 0 95

Peach -1 - 0 90 - 95

Raspberry -0.5 - 0 >90

Banana 13.3 - 14.4

90 - 95

Pea 4 -5 95 - 98

Apricot -0.5 - 0 90 - 95

Currant -0.5 - 0 95

Fig -1 - 0 90 - 95

Gooseberry -0.5 -0 95

Honeydew melon 10 90 - 95 Mange tout 0 95 - 98

Mushrooms 0 -1 95 Okra 7 -10 >90

Physalis 5 -10 80 - 90

Spring onions 0 98

Strawberry 0 90 - 95

Swiss chard 0 95 - 98

Tomato 7 - 21 90 - 95 For peach, advice from three sources was to refrigerate ripe fruit. For banana, advice from two sources was to avoid refrigeration.


Table 47 Storage advice for the second most perishable category of fresh fruit and vegetables (minimum expected storage life of 8-14 days).



Broad bean 5 - 7.5 95 – 100

Dwarf bean 0 95 – 98

Fine bean 0 95 – 98

Runner bean 5 - 7.5 95 – 100

Beetroot 0 >98

Artichoke 0 >95

Asparagus 0 - 2 95 - 99

Broccoli 0 98 - 100 Cherry -1 - 0 >95

Chicory 0 95 - 100

Courgettes 5 - 10 95

Dragon fruit 10 90

Aubergine 10 - 12 90 - 95

Fennel 0 90 - 95

Grape -1 - 0 90 - 95 Greens - spring 0 95 - 98

Guava 8 -10 90 - 95

Loganberry 4-7 90 - 95

Mango 10 - 13 85 - 90

Marrow 5 - 10 95

Papaya 7 - 13 90 - 95

Passion fruit 7 - 10 90 - 95

Pepper 7 90 - 95 Pineapple 7 - 12 85 - 95 Prickly pear 5 - 8 90 - 95

Rhubarb 0 95 - 100

Spinach 0 95 - 100

Sweet corn 0 90

Water cress 0 >95

Water melon 10 - 15 90

For mango, advice from one source was to avoid refrigeration.

For organic papaya, advice from one source was to avoid refrigeration.

For pineapple, advice from one source was to avoid refrigeration.


Table 48 Storage advice for the third most perishable category of fresh fruit and vegetables (minimum expected storage life of 15-28 days).

Commercial storage Storage advice to consumers on packaged or tagged products Product


Cucumber 10-12.5 95 Truffles 0 90-95

Avocado 5-12 85-95

Cauliflower 0 95-98 Kale 0 95-100

Lychees 2-5 95

Radish 0 90-95

Brussels sprouts 0 95-100

Lettuce 0 98-100 Mandarin 5-8 95

Nectarine 0-8 85-95

Olive 5-7.5 90-95

Satsuma 0-8 85-95

For avocado, advice from one source was to refrigerate ripe fruit.

For nectarine, advice from two sources was to refrigerate ripe fruit.

Table 49 Storage advice for the fourth most perishable category of fresh fruit and vegetables (minimum expected storage life of 29 -120 days.



Date 20 70-75

Garlic -1-0 <75

Parsley 0 95-100

Water chestnut 0-2 98-100

Celery 0 >95

Plum -1-0 90-95

Prune -1-0 90-95

Grapefruit 12-15 95

Lime 10 95

Cranberry 2-5 90-95

Ginger 12-14 85-90

Ginseng 0 95

Leek 0 95-100

Pear -1 90-94 Potato 4-13 80-100 Pumpkin 10-13 50-70

Quince -0.5-0 90

Squash – summer 10-13 50-70

Winter squash 10-13 50-70

Clementine 0-8 85-95

Orange 0-8 85-95 Apple -1 to 4 90-95 Asian pear 0 >90

Chinese cabbage 0 98-100

Coconut 0-1.5 75-85

Pak choi 0 >95

Sharon fruit 5-10 80-90


Kiwifruit 0 90-95 Parsnip 0-1 98

Swede 0 98 –100

Turnip 0 90-95

For plums, advice from two sources was to refrigerate ripe fruit. For pears, advice from one source was to refrigerate ripe fruit. Garlic can be stored at room temperature for 1-2 months.

Table 50 Storage advice for the least perishable category of fresh fruit and vegetables (minimum expected storage life of more than 120 days).

Commercial storage Storage advice to consumers on packaged products Product


Cabbage 0 95-100 Celeriac 0-2 97-98

Jerusalem artichoke

0-2 90-95

Lemon 7-12 85-95 Onion (dry) 0 65-70 Pomegranate 6 90

Shallots (green) 0 98

Carrot 0-1 98-100 Horseradish 0 98-100

Sweet potato 14 90

Table 51 Types of package and display and storage information for apples supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Apples

A B C D E Conventional

Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB 2 3 2

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice

Serve/ripen Room temperature

Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice



Table 52 Types of package and display and storage information for bananas supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Bananas


Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB 1 2

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice

Serve / ripen Room temperature

Organic Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Table 53 Types of package and display and storage information for grapes supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Grapes

A B C D E

Conventional

Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB 2

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice



Table 54 Types of package and display and storage information for kiwifruit supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Kiwifruit


Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB 1 3

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Table 55 Types of package and display and storage information for lemons supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Lemons


Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB 2 2 1 2

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice



Table 56 Types of package and display and storage information for melons supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E.

Multiple retailer reference Melons (free-flow)


Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice

Serve /ripen Room temperature

Table 57 Types of package and display and storage information for oranges supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Oranges


Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB 2 3 2 2

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice



Table 58 Types of package and display and storage information for pears supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Pears


Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Table 59 Types of package and display and storage information for pineapples supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Pineapples (free-flow)


Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB 1 3

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice



Table 60 Types of package and display and storage information for broccoli supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Broccoli


Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB 2 1 1 2

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Table 61 Types of package and display and storage information for cabbages supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Cabbages


Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB 2 1 2

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice



Table 62 Types of package and display and storage information for carrots supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Carrots


Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB 2 1 2

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice

Serve/ripen Room temp

Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark


Table 63 Types of package and display and storage information for cauliflowers supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Cauliflowers


Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB 2 2

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/ dry

Cool dark

No advice



Table 64 Types of package and display and storage information for cucumbers supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Cucumbers


Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB 2 1 2

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Table 65 Types of package and display and storage information for lettuces supplied by 5 major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Lettuces


Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB 1 2

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice



Table 66 Types of package and display and storage information for mushrooms supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Mushrooms


Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB 1 1 2

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Table 67 Types of package and display and storage information for onions supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Onions


Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB 4 7 4 4

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice



Table 68 Types of package and display and storage information for peppers supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Peppers


Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB 2 2 1 2

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Table 69 Types of package and display and storage information for baking potatoes supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Potatoes (baking)


Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB 3 2 3 2

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice



Table 70 Types of package and display and storage information for tomatoes supplied by five major multiple retailers (A, B, C, D and E).

Multiple retailer reference Tomatoes


Pack type Net

Plastic

Display Ambient

Cool

DU date

BB date

DU to BB 2 2 1 2

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice


Organic

Storage Fridge

Cool or cool/dry

Cool dark

No advice



3.0 Devising practical methods for reducing waste in the domestic situation 3.1 Introduction A series of experiments were carried out at EMR to:

Compare the quality changes in products stored under refrigeration with those occurring in the fruit bowl / vegetable rack at ambient temperature.

Compare the quality changes in products stored with and without the polyethylene bags provided by the retailer.

Compare the quality changes in vegetables stored under ambient conditions either in permanent darkness or exposed to normal day and night conditions.

3.2 Methodology 3.2.1 Refrigerators Four ‘Beko’ fridge/freezers (model CDA 554) were purchased and installed in a ‘jacketed’ controlled temperature (CT) room in the post-harvest facility (Jim Mount Building) at EMR. These units comprised a fridge compartment with a 176 L (6.2 cu. ft) capacity and a freezer compartment with a 71 L (2.5 cu. ft) capacity. Based on information provided by Judith Evans (FRPERC) Beko was the market leader for fridges and freezers in April 2007 with model CDA 554 in the top quartile for sales. The capacity of the fridge compartment was at the upper end of the range when surveys were carried out in 1990/91 (FRPERC) but with the modern trend for larger fridges the capacity of the CDA 554 appears to be typical. Installation guidelines provided by the manufacturer were followed and a series of tests were carried out to monitor the temperature within each unit. Battery powered remote temperature and humidity loggers (USB-502, Adept Scientific) were placed on the top and bottom shelves and in one of the crispers of each fridge. Four tests were carried out from early to mid June 2007. The results of the first test are given in Table 71. Minor adjustments were made to fridge thermostats prior to subsequent tests being carried out. In the final test the range in mean fridge temperatures was 0.6oC. In view of the fact that variation in temperature recorded by the 13 loggers held at a nominal 20oC was 0.4oC the 0.6oC variation in fridge temperature was considered acceptable for the planned work programme.

Table 71 Fridge test - Average temperature and % relative humidity (%RH) recorded over a 24-hour period (6.7.07) with fridge thermostats on 2.5 setting.

Fridge Probe position Temp. (oC) %RH 1 Top shelf 4.1 48

Bottom shelf 3.9 46

Crisper 4.1 43

2 Top shelf 4.1 50

Bottom shelf 5.0 47

Crisper 4.0 46

3 Top shelf 5.3 49

Bottom shelf 5.2 49

Crisper 5.4 46

4 Top shelf 4.1 48

Bottom shelf 4.9 46

Crisper 4.6 45

Ambient air 20.8 54


3.2.2 Experimental set-up Non-fruit and vegetable items were purchased from Sainsbury’s on 25 July 2007. The number and types of items were based on information provided by Judith Evans, which in turn was based on data from MAFF and FRPERC surveys. These surveys showed that the most common number of food items was in the range 21-25 and the most popular items other than fruit and vegetables were fats, dairy and meat products (found in 100%, 97.2% and 85.5% of fridges respectively) followed by drinks (81.5%) and jars (74.2%). Clearly, it was inappropriate to load our fridges with fish and meat products and other perishable products such as desserts. Consequently, only fats (lard and butter) and products in bottles, jars or cartons were placed in the fridges. The freezer compartments were loaded with bread (eight loaves per freezer) which was pre-frozen prior to loading. The following fruit and vegetables were purchased from the local Sainsbury’s store on 27 July 2007: Baking potatoes (free-flow) (48 in bags of 4). Bananas (free-flow) (24 in bags of 6). Apples (free-flow) (6 x 1kg). Tomatoes (free-flow) (8 x 0.5kg). Carrots (free-flow) (6 x 1kg). Melons (free-flow) (x8). Pears (free-flow) (6 x 1kg). Mushrooms (free-flow) (6 x 0.5kg). Broccoli (free-flow) (6 x 0.5kg). Peppers (free-flow) (12 in bags of 2). Lemons (free-flow) (16 in bags of 2). Pineapples (free-flow) (x4). Kiwifruit (free-flow) (36 in bags of 6). Onions (free-flow) (12 x 1kg). Strawberries (packaged) (x6). Grapes (pouches) (x6). Oranges (free-flow) (36 in bags of 6).

Tomatoes, mushrooms, lemons, kiwifruit, grapes and oranges were purchased from cool display with the remaining items available from ambient display. The products selected for the experiment were those identified as big wastage items in previous surveys and were high selling items (by weight) in Sainsbury’s stores in the 4 weeks ending 17 June 2007 (data supplied by Mack Multiples). The decision was to target ‘free-flow’ items with the exception of grapes and strawberries which were only available in packaged form. Shopping commenced at 09.00 hours and concluded at 10.10 hours. On arrival at EMR (approximately 10 minutes from the Sainsbury’s store) all product units were weighed prior to allocation to controlled environment conditions as indicated in Table 72.

Table 72 Experimental design for storage experiments.

Per fridge 22oC dark 22oC light 15oC dark 15oC light Potatoes 4 4 4 4 4

Bananas 6 6

Apples 1 kg 1 kg

Tomatoes 0.5 kg 0.5 kg 0.5 kg

Carrots 1 kg 1 kg

Melons 1 1 1

Pears 1 kg 1 kg

Mushrooms 0.5 kg 0.5 kg

Broccoli 0.5 kg 0.5 kg

Peppers 2 2

Lemons 2 2 2

Pineapples 1 1

Kiwifruit 6 6

Onions 1 kg 1 kg 1 kg 1 kg 1 kg

Strawberry 1 1

Grapes 1 1

Oranges 6 6


In each of the environmental conditions products were stored in polyethylene bags provided at the retail counter and loosely sealed, i.e. with one tie. Two of the fridges contained bagged product and the remaining two contained unbagged product with the exception that strawberries and grapes, which were stored in their original packaging in all four fridges. Loading of fridges commenced at 11.15 hours, i.e. about one hour after leaving the Sainsbury’s store. The quantities of products allocated to each experimental treatment were considered appropriate for a family of four. No other sources of data were used to aid this decision. Three temperature/RH loggers were allocated to each fridge positioned on the top and bottom shelves and in one of the crispers. The schedule for the examination of products is shown in Table 73.

Table 73 Schedule for the examination of products in the first phase of the storage trials. Purchase / loading 27 July 2007 Day 0

Inspection 1 31 July 2007 Day 4

Inspection 2 3 August 2007 Day 7




Final inspection 17 August 2007 Day 21 3.2.3 Product assessments At each inspection the products were weighed and the weight (water) loss, as a percentage of the original product weight, was calculated. Non-destructive measurements of firmness were carried out on melons, tomatoes, oranges, apples, kiwifruit, pears and carrots using a ‘Bariess’ instrument fitted with a ball (5 mm for melons, oranges, apples and pears and 2.5 mm for carrots) or cylinder (0.25 cm2 for tomatoes and 0.1 cm2 for kiwifruit). Colour was assessed for apples and pears using industry standard colour cards (1, green to 4, yellow). Detailed comments were made about the quality of the products. These were based mainly on appearance but also comments were made about structural changes and smell. Photographs were also taken as appropriate to support the written descriptions of quality. There was also an overall judgement of whether the products were likely to be considered fit for consumption. Clearly this was somewhat subjective and would not be expected to concur with judgements made by all consumers but it was important to make a judgement as this has important waste implications. On one occasion only (day 3) samples of the atmosphere within fridges and bags containing products at 22oC were taken for measurement of ethylene concentration. The atmosphere of each fridge was re-circulated for at least one minute prior to extracting a 1 mL sample by syringe from a sampling port fixed into the re-circulating stream. Ethylene was measured by injecting 0.5 ml of atmosphere into a gas chromatograph fitted with an alumina column and FID detector. 3.3 Results The range in ethylene concentrations measured in the fridges (Table 74) was much higher than the range (0.011 to 0.59µl l-1) reported from Australian studies where samples were analysed from domestic fridges in 30 households (Wills et al., 2000). It is likely that the Australian survey represents fridges in normal use with frequent opening of the doors although no details were provided. The measurements in Table 74 were made after 3 days of ethylene accumulation. It was noted in the Australian survey that ethylene concentrations were higher in fridges that contained apples compared with those that didn’t. Clearly, in our study there were much higher ethylene producing products than apples being stored in the fridges that would have contributed significantly to the high levels recorded. Concentrations measured, vastly exceeded the commonly considered threshold for ethylene action (0.1 µl l-1). However, recent work suggests that the threshold level of ethylene action on non-climacteric (pronounced increase in respiration rate with ripening) produce is below 0.005 µl l-1 (Wills et al., 1999). Ethylene accumulated in the bags of produce held at 22oC despite the perforations in the bags and the fact that they were only loosely tied. As expected the climacteric fruit (bananas, pears, kiwifruit, apples, tomatoes and


melons) generally produced higher ethylene concentrations than the non-climacteric fruit (oranges, lemons, pineapples, grapes and strawberries).

Table 74 Ethylene concentrations inside fridges and bags of products held at 22oC for 3 days. Ethylene concentration (µl l-1) Fridge 1 (un-bagged products) 1.011

Fridge 2 (bagged products) 2.176

Fridge 3 (un-bagged products) 1.707

Fridge 4 (bagged products) 2.420

Ambient 22oC 0.014

Oranges 0.057

Bananas 1.038

Pears 15.745

Kiwifruit 1.574

Apples 0.174

Tomatoes 0.982

Lemons 0.048

Broccoli 0.692

Onions 0.082

Peppers 0.046

Carrots 0.122

Potatoes 0.090

Melon 23.655

Pineapple 0.201

Grapes 0.033

Strawberries 0.028 3.3.1 Lemons Commercial storage temperature: 13-15.5oC (7-13oC in terminal markets) Consumer storage advice (where given): refrigerate

Table 75 Lemons: weight loss as a percentage (%) of initial weight.

Storage duration (days) Bags

4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d Fridge Dark Yes 0 0.2 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.3

Dark No 1.8 3.1 4.8 6.2 8.1 9.8

15oC Light Yes 1.3 0.9 1.4 1.7 2.2 2.6

Light No 1.7 4.7 7.0 8.6 10.7 12.3

22oC Light Yes 1.7 2.2 3.5 4.7 6.6 8.3

Light No 2.1 6.4 11.5 15.9 21.6 25.7

Effect of bags Yes 0.8 0.9 1.5 2.0 2.7 3.4

No 1.8 4.3 7.0 9.2 12.1 14.4

SED ( 2 df) 0.25 0.29 0.31 0.49 0.65 0.78


Table 76 Lemons: firmness (shore values for 5mm ball).


4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d Fridge Dark Yes - 72.7 73.9 71.7 70.8 71.0

Dark No - 63.0 59.6 54.3 49.0 46.4

15oC Light Yes - 69.5 65.7 68.3 70.8 69.5

Light No - 60.2 56.6 54.2 50.5 48.4

22oC Light Yes - 72.5 68.9 63.8 58.6 51.6

Light No - 54.6 47.6 45.9 48.1 35.2

Effect of bags Yes - 71.8 70.6 68.9 67.8 65.8

No - 60.2 55.8 52.1 49.1 44.1

SED ( 2 df) 2.23 1.45 1.60 3.00 2.02

Table 77 Quality assessment of lemons (A – acceptable, NA – not acceptable) stored under conditions simulating those in the home. (No attempt was made to qualify further the subjective assessment of firmness or softness).


4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d Fridge Dark Yes A A firm A firm A firm A firm A

Dark No A A soft A soft A soft A soft A soft dry

15oC Light Yes A A firm A firm A firm A A

Light No A A soft A soft A soft A soft A soft dry

22oC Light Yes A A firm A firm A firm A A

Light No A A soft A soft A soft A soft dry NA Weight loss was particularly important in relation to freshness. Loss of weight resulted in lower shore values and fruit that were described as soft or spongy. Consumer acceptability of lemon quality is unknown but clearly there would be a point where product would be rejected on the basis of dehydration. Where weight loss reached 10% of the original weight the skins were described as dry. Since the extent of weight loss reflects the quality of lemons the weight loss data in Table 75 can be used to quantify the benefits of refrigeration and use of the polyethylene bags. Where bags were not used comparable weight losses occurred in fruit kept at 22oC for 7 days (6.4%) and in the fridge for 14 days (6.2%); an extension in storage life of 7 days. Lemons stored in bags in the fridge for 21 days did not loose significant weight (1.3%) and were regarded as fresh or ‘fine’. Consequently storing in bags within the fridge extended storage life by at least 14 days when compared with fruit stored without bags at 22oC. The same conclusions would be reached by using the shore data in Table 76. Advice provided by retailers to store lemons under refrigeration was endorsed by these results but additionally the use of polyethylene bags appears essential in maximising freshness and storage life. Where refrigerated storage is not available, providing the coolest possible temperature is likely to be advantageous in maintaining quality particularly where tied polyethylene bags are used.

Table 78 Summary of storage advice for lemons.

Advice to consumers Benefits of refrigeration* Benefits of refrigeration in bag*

Reduce food waste at home refrigerate in bags for freshness

Retains freshness and quality for at least 7 days longer


*Compared to room temperature (22oC) stored loose


3.3.2 Melons (Canteloupe) Commercial storage temperature: 2-5oC Consumer storage advice (where given): None

Table 79 Melons: weight loss as a percentage (%) of initial weight.



Dark No 0.4 0.8 1.5 1.9 2.7 3.2

15oC Light Yes 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.8 - -

Light No 1.7 2.0 3.0 3.9 - -

22oC Light Yes 0.8 0.7 1.2 1.7 - -

Light No 1.3 2.4 4.2 5.6 - -

Effect of bags Yes 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.8 - -

No 0.9 1.5 2.5 3.3 - -

SED (2 df) 0.06 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.07 0.13

Table 80 Melons: firmness (shore values for 5mm ball).


4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d Fridge Dark Yes 74.8 76.6 77.8 81.0 78.7 75.3

Dark No 81.3 75.8 78.4 74.2 77.4 75.0

15oC Light Yes 79.0 77.9 77.2 75.6 - -

Light No 75.0 77.1 74.6 69.7 - -

22oC Light Yes 81.2 78.8 81.4 73.9 - -

Light No 78.7 75.0 74.8 71.0 - -

Effect of bags 77.4 77.5 78.5 77.9 - -

79.1 75.9 76.6 72.3 - -

SED (2 df) 0.99 0.72 2.48 1.95 2.48 0.47

Table 81 Quality assessment of melons (A – acceptable, NA – not acceptable) stored under conditions simulating those in the home.


4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d Fridge Dark Yes A A A A A A

Dark No A A A A A A

15oC Light Yes Musty Musty Musty NA Musty

Light No A A NA rotten

22oC Light Yes Musty Musty NA rotten

Light No A A A NA browning It is only marginally appropriate to apply statistical tests where there is only one melon represented per treatment and results should be treated with caution. The melons stored under refrigeration maintained their visual quality for 21 days whereas one melon kept in each of the warmer temperatures developed rot lesions after 11 days. The internal and eating quality of melons kept in the fridge for 21 days was fine. Weight loss increased progressively with increase in storage temperature and was reduced significantly by the use of tied polyethylene bags. The effects of the bags on weight loss increased with storage temperature which was supported by a significant interactive term in the analysis of variance. Although melons tended to become softer with time there were no significant effects of storage temperature or bags on shore values. Melons stored in bags at 15oC or 22oC developed a ‘musty’ smell. In view of the lack of any beneficial effects of bags on fruit quality and the development of ‘musty’ smells in melons not kept under refrigeration, the use of bags for melons may be inappropriate.


Table 82 Summary of storage advice for melons.


Reduce food waste at home keep cool or refrigerate for freshness


[Retains freshness and quality for at least 10 days longer, and reduces weight loss]


Figure 4 Melons after 14 days of storage without bags at 22oC (left), 15oC (middle) and in the refrigerator (right). Note the improved appearance with reduced storage temperature.


3.3.3 Apples Commercial storage temperature: 0-4oC Consumer storage advice (where given): Refrigerate (generally)

Table 83 Apples: weight loss as a percentage (%) of initial weight.



Dark No 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

22oC Light Yes 0.3 0.4 0.8 1.0 1.3 1.5

Light No 0.4 0.9 1.4 1.8 2.4 2.9


No 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.4

SED ( 2 df) - 0.07 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.19

Table 84 Apples: firmness (shore values for 5 mm ball).



Dark No 80.8 80.4 80.1 80.4 79.6 78.3

22oC Light Yes 82.3 81.5 80.5 77.9 79.0 77.5

Light No 80.7 79.2 81.3 76.3 78.4 77.6


No 80.8 80.0 80.5 79.0 79.2 78.1

SED ( 2 df) 0.82 1.24 0.79 0.58 0.72 0.65

Table 85 Quality assessment of apples (A – acceptable, NA – not acceptable) stored under conditions simulating those in the home.



Dark No A A A A A A

22oC Light Yes A A A A A A

Light No A A A A A A Granny Smith apples used in the experiment maintained their visual appearance and internal quality for 21 days irrespective of storage temperature. However, it should be stressed that Granny Smith is a late-maturing cultivar with long storage potential and good shelf-life characteristics. The results are likely to have been different with earlier maturing varieties, particularly late in the storage season. Although apples kept at 22oC lost more weight than those kept in the fridge, this was insufficient to effect visual quality. Similarly, polyethylene bags reduced weight loss of apples kept at 22oC but did not effect visual quality. There were no significant effects of storage temperature or bags on shore values. Although advice provided by retailers to store apples under refrigeration seemed inappropriate for this particular consignment of apples, in general this course of action would extend storage life of apples in the home. The use of bags would also be generally advised since apple cultivars more prone to weight loss are likely to benefit from their use.


Table 86 Summary of storage advice for apples.



[none shown in this trial – BUT variety used (Granny Smith) was very robust! Expert opinion used to develop advice]

[none shown in this trial – BUT variety used (Granny Smith) was very robust! Expert opinion used to develop advice]

*Compared to room temperature (22oC) stored loose 3.3.4 Bananas Commercial storage temperature: 13-14oC Consumer storage advice (where given): Cool

Table 87 Bananas: weight loss as a percentage (%) of initial weight.


4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d 15oC Light Yes 0.5 0.7 1.1 1.5 - -

Light No 2.3 3.4 5.2 6.9 - -

22oC Light Yes 1.1 2.1 - - - -

Light No 3.4 7.9 - - - -

Effect of bags Yes 0.8 1.4 - - - -

No 2.9 5.6 - - - -

SED ( 2 df) 0.64 2.34

Table 88 Quality assessment of bananas (A – acceptable, NA – not acceptable) stored under conditions simulating those in the home.


4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d 15oC Light

Yes A A A Slight

spot A Slight

spot

Light No A A NA

22oC Light Yes

A slight spot

NA

Light No

NA severe spot

Bananas stored at 22oC lost their visual quality within 4 days, which is likely to result in consumers wasting the fruit even though the internal (eating) quality may be acceptable. Bananas kept at 15oC remained visually acceptable for 7-14 days, which endorses the advice provided by retailers to maintain cool conditions. Bananas tended to lose more weight at the higher storage temperature and the use of bags reduced weight loss, although due to limited replication the effect just failed to reach significance at the 5% level of probability. Visual quality was maintained longer where the fruit was kept in polyethylene bags. It is not appropriate to store bananas in the fridge as they are chilling sensitive and their skins become blackened, but the coolest place in the home is the best storage location and the fruit should be kept in bags.

Table 89 Summary of storage advice for bananas.


Reduce food waste at home keep cool but don’t refrigerate. Store in bags for extra freshness

None (skins will blacken) [use of bag at room temperature retains moisture content and visual quality for longer – up to 3 days]



Figure 5 Bananas after 4 days of storage at 22oC (top) or 15oC (bottom) with (left) or without (right) bags. Note inferior visual quality of fruit kept at 22oC without bags.


3.3.5 Grapes Commercial storage temperature: 0oC Consumer storage advice (where given): Refrigerate

Table 90 Grapes: weight loss as a percentage (%) of initial weight.

Storage duration (days) With bagged product?

4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d Fridge Dark Yes 1.3 2.0 3.1 3.8 - -

Dark No 0.5 0.8 1.3 1.6 - -

22oC Light Yes 3.2 6.9 10.0 12.7 - -

Light No 1.9 2.0 5.2 8.0 - -

Yes 2.0 3.6 5.4 6.8 - - Effect of bagged/un-bagged product

No 1.0 1.1 2.6 3.7 - -

SED ( 2 df) 0.19 0.18 0.19 0.28

Table 91 Quality assessment of grapes (in pouches) (A – acceptable, NA – not acceptable) stored under conditions simulating those in the home.

Storage duration (days) With Bagged 4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d

Fridge Dark Yes A A A A A A

Dark No A A A A A A

22oC Light Yes

Brown stems

Dry stems Dry stems Dry stems Dry stems Dry stems dull fruit

Light No

Brown stems

Dry stems Dry stems Dry stems Dry stems Dry stems dull fruit

Consumer acceptability of grape quality is unknown but clearly there would be a point where product would be rejected on the basis of dehydration of the berries and / or of the stems. Where weight loss reached 2-6.9% of the original weight the stems were described as dry. Since the extent of weight loss reflects the quality of grapes, the weight loss data in Table 90 can be used to quantify the benefits of refrigeration and use of the polyethylene bags. Where grapes were stored in ambient temperatures or fridges with bagged produce comparable weight losses occurred in fruit kept at 22oC for 4 days (3.2%) and in the fridge for 11 days (3.1%); an extension in storage life of 7 days. A similar extension in storage life was indicated by comparing weight loss data for grapes stored with produce without bags. Weight loss in grapes stored for 4 days at 22oC (1.9%) was similar to that after 14 days in the refrigerators (1.6%). Clearly, the advice supplied by retailers to refrigerate needs to be observed for maximising freshness and storage life. Although all grapes were stored in their original plastic pouches, the weight loss was higher when they were stored with other bagged products. As expected, the relative humidity of the air in fridges containing bagged product was lower than where un-bagged product was stored. This would have accelerated the loss of weight from within the bags of grapes. The same effect was likely in the trays of product at ambient (22oC) temperature.

Table 92 Summary of storage advice for grapes.


Reduce food waste at home keep in original packaging and refrigerate for freshness


[pre-packed produce used in the trials]



Figure 6 Grapes after 4 days of storage (in plastic pouches) at 22oC (bottom) or under refrigeration (top). Note the brown stems of fruit kept at 22oC.


3.3.6 Kiwifruit Commercial storage temperature: 0oC Consumer storage advice (where given): Refrigerate

Table 93 Kiwifruit: weight loss as a percentage (%) of initial weight.



Dark No 0.6 0.8 1.2 1.5 1.8 1.9

22oC Light Yes 0.6 1.3 - - - -

Light No 1.1 2.8 - - - -


No 0.8 1.5 - - - -

SED ( 2 df) 0.08 0.05 0.09 0.04 0.01 0.08

Table 94 Kiwifruit: firmness (shore values for 0.1 cm2 cylinder).



Dark No 70.1 65.5 58.4 51.4 47.5 40.5

22oC Light Yes 62.6 48.9 - - - -

Light No 67.9 59.1 - - - -


No 69.4 63.4 - - - -

SED ( 2 df) 3.20 2.14 1.80 1.65 3.30 3.93

Table 95 Quality assessment of kiwifruit (A – acceptable, NA – not acceptable) stored under conditions simulating those in the home.


4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d Fridge Dark Yes A A A soft A soft A soft A soft

Dark No A A A soft A soft A soft A soft

22oC Light Yes

A Brown stain

Soft ripe

Light No A Soft ripe The storage life of the kiwifruit was difficult to judge since consumers are likely to vary with regard to their preferences for the stage of ripeness at the point of consumption. On the basis of the firmness (shore) measurements that were made, it appears that refrigeration delayed softening by 4 days (shore readings after 7 days at 22oC (59.1) and 11 days in the refrigerators (58.4) were similar). It is reasonable to equate loss of firmness with storage life and to suggest that refrigeration will extend storage life by 4 days either with or without the use of the polyethylene bags. Fruit stored in bags at 22oC was particularly soft possibly as a result of ethylene accumulation. However, there was no effect of the bags on firmness of the fruit stored under refrigeration. The advice supplied by retailers to refrigerate kiwifruit was supported by these results. The use of bags reduced weight loss of kiwifruit stored in the fridge but even in un-bagged product, the weight loss was less than 2% of the original weight after 21 days and did not affect the quality of the product. Since there was no adverse effect of bags where the fruit was stored in the fridge, it would appear convenient to purchase and store kiwifruit in the tied polyethylene bags provided by the retailer.


Table 96 Summary of storage advice for kiwifruit.




Retains freshness and quality for at least 4 days longer, and reduces weight loss slightly


3.3.7 Oranges Commercial storage temperature: 0-9oC Consumer storage advice (where given): Fridge/cool

Table 97 Oranges: weight loss as a percentage (%) of initial weight.


4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d Fridge Dark Yes -0.1 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.9

Dark No 0.3 0.5 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0

22oC Light Yes 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.6 2.9

Light No 1.6 2.4 3.6 4.5 5.7 6.5


No 0.7 1.1 1.7 2.3 3.0 3.5

SED ( 2 df) 0.17 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.17 0.20

Table 98 Oranges: firmness (shore values for 5 mm ball).

Bags Storage duration (days) 4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d

Fridge Dark Yes 61.8 61.1 61.2 59.2 61.4 60.7

Dark No 59.3 60.2 60.0 59.9 58.8 57.7

22oC Light Yes 58.8 59.7 59.8 56.7 60.4 53.9

Light No 54.4 54.2 54.8 51.1 51.7 47.3


No 56.6 58.2 58.3 57.0 56.4 54.2

SED ( 2 df) 1.57 2.16 2.48 1.84 0.35 3.52

Table 99 Quality assessment of oranges (A – acceptable, NA – not acceptable) stored under conditions simulating those in the home.



Dark No A A A A A A

22oC Light Yes A A firm A firm

A slightly soft

A slightly soft

A slightly soft

Light No A A soft A soft A soft A soft A soft Loss of firmness was associated with increased weight loss and either of these parameters can be used to estimate increased storage life by the use of refrigeration or the use of polyethylene bags. Oranges with shore values of 54.2 and weight loss of 2.4% were noted as being softer that oranges with shore values of 59.7-61.1 and weight losses of 0.1-1.2% (Tables 97 and 98). On the basis that the firmness of oranges under refrigeration remained high (57.7-60.7 after 21 days) and weight loss was low (0.9-2.0%) the extension in storage life by the use of refrigeration was at least 14 days. The use of bags had a positive effect on firmness of fruit, particularly of that kept at 22oC. Although oranges proved quite durable and tolerant of high ambient temperature, there were quality benefits of storing in the fridge.


The use of polyethylene tied bags should be used where the intention of the consumer is to display in a fruit bowl.

Table 100 Summary of storage advice for oranges.




Retains freshness and quality for at least 14 days longer, and reduces weight loss


3.3.8 Pears Commercial storage temperature: -1 to -0.5oC Consumer storage advice (where given): Refrigerate/cool

Table 101 Pears: weight loss as a percentage (%) of initial weight.



Dark No 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.0

22oC Light Yes 0.8 0.9 - - - -

Light No 1.3 2.7 - - - -


No 0.6 1.1 - - - -

SED ( 2 df) 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.13

Table 102 Pears: firmness (shore values for 5 mm ball).



Dark No 77.5 77.8 79.5 75.6 76.7 75.1

22oC Light Yes 58.1 38.3 - - - -

Light No 44.4 27.4 - - - -


No 66.5 61.0 - - - -

SED ( 2 df) 1.93 2.37 2.25 1.91 1.88 3.69

Table 103 Quality assessment of pears (A – acceptable, NA – not acceptable) stored under conditions simulating those in the home.



Dark No A A A A A A

22oC Light Yes A Ripe

Light No A Ripe To prevent ripening of pears in commercial storage, it is necessary to maintain storage temperatures below 0oC. Pears removed from store and placed in ambient temperatures of 20oC will normally ripen in 5-7 days. Consistent with this pattern of effects, the pears used in this experiment were judged to be fully ripe after 7 days at 22oC and no further examinations were made. Storing the pears in the fridge markedly slowed their ripening. The use of bags reduced weight loss of pears stored at 22oC but not of fruit stored in the fridge where weight loss over a 21 day period was only 1% or less of their original weight. The advice provided by retailers to store in the fridge or under cool conditions is therefore endorsed by these results. Storage in the fridge will extend the storage life in the home.


Clearly, where consumers require pears in ripe (soft and juicy) condition they need to transfer fruit to ambient temperatures to achieve this, which involves a measure of stock control.

Table 104 Summary of storage advice for pears.


Reduce food waste at home refrigerate in bags for freshness. Ripen at room temperature


[Reduced weight loss of pears stored at 22oC]


Figure 7 Pears after 7 days of storage without bags at 22oC (bottom) or under refrigeration (top). Note the retention of greenness in pears kept in the refrigerator, indicative of reduced rate of ripening.


3.3.9 Pineapples Commercial storage temperature: 7-13oC Consumer storage advice (where given): Fridge/cool

Table 105 Pineapples: weight loss as a percentage (%) of initial weight.


4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d 15oC Light Yes 0.2 0.7 - - - -

Light No 2.5 5.2 - - - -

22oC Light Yes 3.0 5.1 - - - -

Light No 5.4 11.2 - - - -

Effect of bags Yes 1.6 2.9 - - -

No 3.9 6.2 - - -

SED ( 2 df) 1.96 3.70

Table 106 Quality assessment of pineapples (A – acceptable, NA – not acceptable) stored under conditions simulating those in the home.


4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d 15oC Light Yes Musty NA

Light No A A

22oC Light Yes NA

Light No NA As expected, the storage life of pineapples at 15-22oC was short (4-7 days). It was difficult to judge when pineapples were no longer acceptable, but generally after 4-7 days the areas that comprise the leaf base and the base of the fruit were soft and brown. Storage in bags promoted mould growth on the leaves and imparted a general ‘musty’ smell. The colour of un-bagged fruit was a brighter orange than bagged fruit (Figure 8). Bags tended to reduce weight loss although due to limited replication the effect just failed to reach significance at the 5% level of probability. The most successful storage treatment was the cooler temperature (15oC) with no bags. However with only one pineapple represented per treatment it is only marginally appropriate to apply statistical tests and results should be treated with caution. Consumers need to be aware of the perishable nature of pineapples and maintain cool temperatures prior to consumption. The use of bags is not advised.

Table 107 Summary of storage advice for pineapples.


Reduce food waste at home keep cool but don’t refrigerate

None None


Figure 8 Pineapples after 7 days of storage at 22oC (top) or 15oC (bottom) with (left) or without (right) bags. Note brighter colour of un-bagged fruit.



3.3.10 Strawberries Commercial storage temperature: 0oC Consumer storage advice (where given): Refrigerate

Table 108 Strawberries: weight loss as a percentage (%) of initial weight.

Storage duration (days) With bagged product? 4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d

Fridge Dark Yes 1.4 2.4 3.8 4.9 - -

Dark No 0.5 1.1 1.9 2.5 - -

22oC Light Yes 5.4 - - - - -

Light No 7.3 - - - - -

Yes 2.7 - - - - - Effect of bagged/un-bagged product

No 2.8 - - - - -

SED ( 2 df) 0.33 0.41 0.62 0.74

Table 109 Quality assessment of strawberries (pre-packed) (A – acceptable, NA – not acceptable) stored under conditions simulating those in the home.

Storage duration (days) With bagged 4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d

Fridge Dark Yes A A A dull NA rotten

Dark No A A A dull A dull

22oC Light Yes NA rotten

Light No NA rotten Strawberries are highly perishable and storage under refrigeration is advised by retailers. After 4 days at 22oC the fruit was inedible due to the presence of fungal rots (Figure 9). Strawberries stored in fridges with bagged products lost more weight than those stored with un-bagged products and remained in an acceptable condition for 11 days compared with 14 days when stored with un-bagged product. Effects of storing packaged strawberries in fridges along with bagged or un-bagged products were similar to those described for grapes. Although all strawberries were stored in their original plastic containers, the weight loss was higher when they were stored with other bagged products. As expected, the relative humidity of the air in fridges containing bagged product was lower than where un-bagged product was stored. This would have accelerated the loss of weight from within the containers of strawberries. Clearly, the advice supplied by retailers to refrigerate needs to be observed for maximising freshness and storage life.

Table 110 Summary of storage advice for strawberries.


Reduce food waste at home keep in original packaging and refrigerate for freshness


[pre-packed produce used in trials]



Figure 9 Strawberries (pre-packed) after 4 days of storage at 22oC (bottom) or under refrigeration (top). Note fungal decay in fruit kept at 22oC.


3.3.11 Broccoli Commercial storage temperature: 0oC Consumer storage advice (where given): Refrigerate

Table 111 Broccoli: weight loss as a percentage (%) of initial weight.


4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d Fridge Dark Yes 0.5 1.2 1.7 1.9 - -

Dark No 2.4 4.2 5.8 7.1 - -

22oC Light Yes 2.0 - - - - -

Light No 15.2 - - - - -

Effect of bags Yes 1.0 - - - - -

No 6.7 - - - - -

SED ( 2 df) 0.39 0.46 0.29 0.55

Table 112 Quality assessment of broccoli (A – acceptable, NA – not acceptable) stored under conditions simulating those in the home.


4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d Fridge Dark Yes A A NA

Dark No A A NA

22oC Light Yes NA

Light No NA

The results confirm the highly perishable nature of broccoli stored at 22oC with less than 4 days of storage being achieved due to browning, off-odours and fungal growth (Figure 10). Broccoli stored in the fridge was of acceptable quality after 7 days, but was unacceptable after 11 days. The use of polyethylene tied bags resulted in a marked reduction in weight loss and made an observable difference to the turgidity of the broccoli stems but did not extend storage life. Clearly, the advice supplied by retailers to refrigerate needs to be strictly observed to achieve any significant storage life in the home. It would be prudent to use the tied polyethylene bags to conserve moisture in the product and to prevent wilting. Regular inspection of the product is advised to ensure consumption prior to the onset of yellowing.

Table 113 Summary of storage advice for broccoli.




Retains freshness and quality for at least 5 days longer, and reduces water loss (observable difference in turgidity)



Figure 10 Broccoli after 4 days of storage without bags at 22oC (bottom) or under refrigeration (top). Note yellowing and fungal growth on broccoli kept at 22oC.


3.3.12 Carrots Commercial storage temperature: 0oC Consumer storage advice (where given): Refrigerate

Table 114 Carrots: weight loss as a percentage of (%) initial weight.



Dark No 2.1 3.2 4.5 5.4 7.1 8.3

22oC Light Yes 0.5 4.8 - - - -

Light No 11.6 21.1 - - - -


No 5.3 9.2 - - - -

SED ( 2 df) 1.77 0.17 0.33 0.15 0.21 0.09

Table 115 Carrots: firmness (shore values for 2.5 mm ball).



Dark No 77.4 76.3 79.7 80.2 78.7 77.3

22oC Light Yes 81.5 - - - - -

Light No 74.8 - - - - -


No 76.5 - - - - -

SED ( 2 df) 3.05 1.93 3.68 1.18 2.68 2.46

Table 116 Quality assessment of carrots (A – acceptable, NA – not acceptable) stored under conditions simulating those in the home.


4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d Fridge Dark Yes A A firm A firm A firm A firm A firm

Dark No A A dry A dry A dry A dry

A dry rubbery

22oC Light Yes NA decay

Light No NA withered Carrots stored at 22oC for 4 days were inedible due to the presence of soft rots (when stored in bags) or dehydration and skin necrosis (when stored without bags). Carrots stored well in the fridge for 21 days. The use of the polyethylene tied bags was beneficial in reducing weight loss and maintaining the turgidity of carrots although this did not affect the firmness of the roots. These results confirm the advice provided by retailers that carrots should be stored under refrigeration. It is advised that carrots should be stored in bags to minimise dehydration and preserve the turgidity that consumers associate with freshness and to reduce the likelihood of wastage.

Table 117 Summary of storage advice for carrots.







Figure 11 Carrots after 7 days of storage. Top left - at 22oC in bags. Top right - at 22oC without bags. Middle - under refrigeration without bags. Bottom - under refrigeration with bags. Note the inedible condition of carrots kept at 22oC and the improved appearance of carrots kept in the refrigerator, particularly when kept in bags.


3.3.13 Mushrooms Commercial storage temperature: 0oC Consumer storage advice (where given): Refrigerate

Table 118 Mushrooms: weight loss as a percentage (%) of initial weight.


4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d Fridge Dark Yes 0.8 1.2 2.3 - - -

Dark No 18.1 30.6 44.3 - - -

22oC Light Yes 2.4 - - - - -

Light No 57.6 - - - - -


No 31.3 - - - - -

SED ( 2 df) 0.17 0.15 0.78

Table 119 Quality assessment of mushrooms (A – acceptable, NA – not acceptable) stored under conditions simulating those in the home.


4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d Fridge Dark Yes

A NA

browning odours

Dark No A A dry

A dry brown

NA

22oC Light Yes NA browning

decay

Light No NA browning

desiccation

Mushrooms are highly perishable, being subject to rapid dehydration and oxidative browning. In the absence of purpose-designed paper bags mushrooms were stored in polyethylene tied bags, which was unlikely to be ideal for storage in the home. After 4 days at 22oC the mushrooms were discarded. Although the bags almost completely prevented weight loss there was condensation of water in the bags and the mushrooms were brown and affected by rot lesions. Although mushrooms stored at 22oC without bags were not rotten they were brown and desiccated and unfit for use (Figure 12). Storing mushrooms under refrigeration delayed browning and opening of the caps and extended the storage life to 4 days (with bags) or 11 days (without bags). Although the polyethylene tied bags prevented some weight loss, the build-up of condensation in the bags resulted in the mushrooms being wet and encouraged the development of rots and off-odours. Mushrooms stored in the fridge without bags for 11 days were considered edible despite their dry, brown appearance. Clearly, the advice supplied by retailers to refrigerate mushrooms was fully endorsed. It is clear that polyethylene tied bags are unsuitable for storing mushrooms and that paper bags designed specifically for mushrooms and normally available in retail shops are likely to be most appropriate for storage.

Table 120 Summary of storage advice for mushrooms.


Reduce food waste at home refrigerate in paper bags provided for freshness

Retains quality (reduced browning) for at least 9 days longer, BUT ideally use paper bag




Figure 12 Mushrooms after 4 days of storage. Top left - at 22oC in bags. Top right - at 22oC without bags. Middle - under refrigeration without bags. Bottom - under refrigeration with bags. Note the poor condition of mushrooms kept at 22oC (brown with rot lesions (in bags) or brown and desiccated (without bags) and the improved appearance of those kept under refrigeration.


3.3.14 Onions Commercial storage temperature: 0oC Consumer storage advice (where given): Cool/dark/dry

Table 121 Onions: weight loss as a percentage of (%) initial weight.



Dark No 0 0 0 0 0.1 0.3

15oC Light Yes 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

Light No -0.1 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.8

Dark Yes 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5

Dark No -0.2 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.8

22oC Light Yes 0.4 0.5 0.8 1.1 1.6 1.9

Light No -0.1 0.5 0.8 1.1 1.6 1.9

Dark Yes 0.2 0.5 0.8 1.1 1.4 1.6

Dark No 0.8 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3


No 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.9

SED ( 2 df) 0.16 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.08 0.11

Table 122 Quality assessment of onions (A – acceptable, NA – not acceptable) stored under conditions simulating those in the home.


4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d Fridge

Dark Yes A A A A A A Slight rooting

Dark No A A A A A

A Slight rooting

15oC Light Yes A A A A A A

Light No A A A A A A

Dark Yes A A A A A

A Slight rooting

Dark No A A A A A A

22oC Light Yes A A A A A

A Slight rooting

Light No A A A A A A

Dark Yes A A A A A

A Slight rooting

Dark No A A A A A A Onions stored well over the 21 days of the experiment regardless of temperature, light and irrespective of the use of polyethylene bags. Although weight loss increased with higher storage temperatures the weight loss at 22oC over a 21 day period was less than 2% of the original weight. Some slight rooting was noted on onions stored in the crisper compartment of the fridge (with and without bags). Although this had no affect on the quality of this particular sample the effect may be more significant for other consignments with an enhanced capacity for root development. The presence of condensation in the crisper and in the bags would not be considered ideal for onions which are normally stored in a relative humidity of 65-70%. It appears unnecessary to store onions under refrigeration or to use polyethylene tied bags. The advice provided to consumers by retailers to store onions in a cool place that is preferably dry and dark would seem to be appropriate.


Table 123 Summary of storage advice for onions.


Reduce food waste at home keep in a cool, dark, place

None None


3.3.15 Sweet Peppers Commercial storage temperature: 7-13oC Consumer storage advice (where given): Refrigerate (generally)

Table 124 Sweet Peppers: weight loss as a percentage (%) of initial weight.



Dark No 1.5 2.9 4.6 5.9 8.0 9.6

22oC Light Yes 1.2 1.4 2.6 - - -

Light No 2.5 6.7 12.8 - - -

Effect of bags Yes 0.5 0.7 1.3 - - -

No 1.9 4.2 7.4 - - -

SED ( 2 df) 0.11 0.02 0.27 0.26 0.40 0.47

Table 125 Quality assessment of peppers (A – acceptable, NA – not acceptable) stored under conditions simulating those in the home.



Dark No A

A slight wilt

A soft A spongy A wilted NA wilted

22oC Light Yes A A A A A A soft

Light No A A wilted NA wilted

The major problem with the storage of sweet peppers was dehydration and associated loss of turgidity and eventual shrivelled appearance of the product, which is likely to result in rejection by the consumer (Figure 13). Storage at 22oC resulted in a higher weight loss compared with storage under refrigeration. The use of polyethylene tied bags was highly effective in reducing weight loss both in ambient conditions (22oC) and in the fridge. Peppers kept at 22oC without protection from bags were discarded after 11 days when they had lost 12.8% of their original weight and were considered too shrivelled to be acceptable. Peppers kept in the fridge without protection from bags were discarded after 21 days when they had lost 9.6% of their original weight and again were considered too shrivelled to be acceptable. These results confirm the advice provided by retailers that peppers should be stored under refrigeration. It is advised that peppers should be stored in bags to minimise dehydration and preserve the turgidity that consumers associate with freshness and to reduce the likelihood of wastage.

Table 126 Summary of storage advice for peppers.







Figure 13 Peppers after 14 days of storage at 22oC with (left) or without (right) bags. Note the superior appearance of peppers kept inside the plastic bags.

3.3.16 Potatoes (baking) Commercial storage temperature: 4oC Consumer storage advice (where given): Cool/dark

Table 127 Potatoes: weight loss as a percentage of (%) initial weight.



Dark No 2.3 3.7 7.6 6.4 8.2 9.5

15oC Light Yes 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.6 - -

Light No 2.2 3.5 4.7 5.6 - -

Dark Yes 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9

Dark No 1.5 2.8 4.0 4.9 6.3 7.1

22oC Light Yes 0.6 0.7 1.3 1.7 - -

Light No 3.7 5.1 7.5 9.4 - -

Dark Yes 0.2 0.8 1.3 1.7 2.2 2.6

Dark No 3.0 5.2 7.3 9.0 11.3 12.7


No 2.5 4.0 6.5 7.0 - -

SED ( 2 df) 0.20 0.21 1.04 0.32 1.08 1.29


Table 128 Quality assessment of potatoes (A – acceptable, NA – not acceptable) stored under conditions simulating those in the home.



Dark No A A A spongy A spongy A spongy A spongy

15oC Light Yes A green NA

Light No A spongy NA

Dark Yes A A A firm A firm A firm A firm

Dark No A A A spongy A spongy A spongy A spongy

22oC Light Yes A green NA

Light No A green NA

Dark Yes A A A A A A

Dark No A A A spongy A spongy A spongy NA wilted After only 4 days of storage in the light at 15oC and 22oC potatoes had developed significant greening. It is anticipated that with the normal cycling of day and night the potatoes would have taken longer to green than under the conditions of the experiment where light was applied continuously. Where potatoes were kept in the dark, no greening developed over a 21-day period irrespective of storage temperature. The advice provided to consumers by retailers to store potatoes in a dark place was supported by these results. Potatoes stored without polyethylene bags lost water readily and eventually the texture of the tubers was described as spongy or rubbery. Potatoes stored at 22oC for 21 days without bags were considered too rubbery for baking purposes. At this point the potatoes had lost 12.7% of their original weight. The lowest weight loss occurred at 15oC which endorses the advice provided to consumers by retailers to store potatoes in a cool place. There was no effect of light on weight loss. It is clear that potatoes should be stored in the dark and the use of polyethylene tied bags is essential to prevent excessive moisture loss which could lead to wastage. Although refrigeration is not essential, the quality of the potatoes from the fridge was slightly superior to those kept at higher temperatures, where slight sprouting was evident, particularly where bags were used.

Table 129 Summary of storage advice for potatoes.


Reduce food waste at home keep in bags in a cool, dark, place for freshness

None without the use of a bag. Faster loss of moisture in fridge loose versus loose at 15oC

[use of bag, either at room temperature or in the fridge retained freshness and quality for at least 10 days longer]


Figure 14 Potatoes after 11 days of storage. From top to bottom - 22oC in the light, 22oC in the dark, 15oC in the light, 15oC in the dark. Potatoes stored in bags on the left of each photograph. Note the greening of potatoes kept in the light.



3.3.17 Tomatoes Commercial storage temperature: 8-10oC Consumer storage advice (where given): Fridge/cool

Table 130 Tomatoes: weight loss as a percentage of (%) initial weight.



Dark No 0.9 1.5 2.1 2.8 3.8 4.4

15oC Light Yes 0.8 0.8 1.1 1.4 - -

Light No 1.0 2.4 3.5 4.3 - -

22oC Light Yes 0.6 1.2 1.9 2.8 - -

Light No 1.4 2.8 4.9 6.5 - -


No 1.1 2.0 3.2 4.1 - -

SED ( 2 df) 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.13 0.02

Table 131 Tomatoes: firmness (shore values for 0.25 cm2 cylinder).



Dark No 66.3 58.0 54.4 50.1 47.5 43.3

15oC Light Yes 69.9 62.1 63.9 52.5 - -

Light No 47.1 51.8 47.5 39.8 - -

22oC Light Yes 57.2 53.8 43.3 44.0 - -

Light No 60.5 51.6 44.1 41.1 - -


No 60.0 54.9 50.1 45.3 - -

SED ( 2 df) 2.50 3.64 2.23 2.25 2.67 0.52

Table 132 Quality assessment of tomatoes (A – acceptable, NA – not acceptable) stored under conditions simulating those in the home.


4d 7d 11d 14d 18d 21d Fridge Dark Yes

A A A A soft A soft A Calyx mould

Dark No A A A A soft A soft

NA soft wilted

15oC Light Yes A Calyx mould

A Calyx mould

A Calyx mould

NA soft decay

Light No A A soft A soft

NA very soft

22oC Light Yes A Calyx mould

A Calyx mould

NA very soft decay

Light No A A A very ripe

NA very soft

Refrigeration extended the storage life of tomatoes by slowing the colour change from orange to red and maintaining the firmness of the fruit (Figure 15). The firmness benefit was generally more evident from squeezing the fruit than from the objective tests for firmness. Weight loss increased at higher storage temperatures and was reduced significantly by the use of polyethylene tied bags. However, the use of bags did not affect the firmness of the fruit or the visual assessment of quality.


The storage of tomatoes in the fridge is considered to impair flavour as a result of chilling injury. Where the consumer preference is for maximum flavour, it might be pertinent to store under cool conditions rather than in the fridge. However, where the intention is to slow ripening and maximise firmness retention the fridge would be the preferred option. Given the general lack of cool space in most homes, it may be more appropriate to store in the fridge to avoid wasting tomatoes but allowing fruit to warm to room temperature prior to consumption to maximise flavour.

Table 133 Summary of storage advice for tomatoes.






Figure 15 Tomatoes after 14 days of storage without bags at 22oC (left), 15oC (middle) and in the refrigerator (right). Note the retention of orange colour in fruit kept in the refrigerator.


4.0 Conclusions It is well known in the fresh produce industry that most fruit and vegetables keep longer at low temperatures (and high humidity) and, where advice is currently being given to consumers, it is largely consistent with this. For example, many pre-packed apples do carry storage advice along the lines of “refrigerate for freshness” or “keep refrigerated”. However this research has revealed that in some cases this advice is not given on pre-packed produce, in very few cases is any advice given on how to store produce bought loose and little advice is currently available on retail websites. The survey (of five of the main UK retailers) revealed that advice was given on most pre-packed produce by most of the retailers (four of the five had storage information on more than 85% of pre-packed fresh fruit and vegetables; but one had storage information on only 37% of these products), but the situation was very different for fresh fruit and vegetables sold loose (free flow). The five retailers gave storage advice on only 6 – 19% (average 7%) of loose produce. There is a clear need to ensure that the correct storage advice is available to all consumers, regardless of how or where they shop. From the consumer research, it was found that the vast majority (90%) of fruit and vegetables purchased for household consumption came from supermarkets. In addition, some seasonal produce came from gardens. Once the produce was in the home, fruit tended to be stored loose, at ambient temperature in the kitchen, while vegetables were stored loose, or in a plastic bag in the fruit and vegetable compartment in the fridge. Half of the consumers surveyed stated that they would like more information on storage to be provided on the packaging though consumers also need to be persuaded of the benefits of following storage advice when given. The most common tips were to remove the original packaging from the fruit and vegetables before storage. Consumers were discarding fruit and vegetables because they considered them to be mouldy or slimy in appearance, or because the texture was off. These items appeared to be disposed of following a visual inspection and were past the point at which a consumer would prepare them. Despite this, consumers were not recognising that they had bought more than they needed, although there was clear evidence here to demonstrate the contrary. The fruit and vegetables thrown away in the largest quantities were bananas, lettuces, apples, cabbages and potatoes respectively. These new research findings have highlighted an opportunity for retailers to enable their customers to get more out of their fresh fruit and vegetables, by:

Reviewing the advice currently given to customers, on-pack, in-store and on-line. Introducing advice where it is lacking, and making all advice clear and prominent. Complementing this basic storage advice with relevant tips and information (for example, recipes).

As expected, the experimental programme undertaken as part of this project showed that for most products there were major benefits of storing under refrigeration. Additionally, most products benefited from being stored in loosely-tied perforated polyethylene bags supplied free to consumers by the multiple retailers (Sainsbury’s in this particular case). The table in Appendix 3 summarises the benefits of refrigeration and polyethylene bags for all ‘free-flow’ products tested in the experiment. The wording is suggested as accurate, succinct messages to be provided to consumers. There are several ways retailers can provide consumers with improved storage advice based on these results, and several examples are given below (Figures 16-18), as implemented by project partner Sainsbury’s.

Figure 16 Example of providing improved storage advice to consumers – a “barker” card at point of sale.


Figure 17 Example of providing improved storage advice to consumers – on-line.

Figure 18 Example of providing improved storage advice to consumers – on pack (increased font size).


5.0 Suggestions for further work Work is required to determine the actual levels of water loss and product deterioration that lead to product rejection by consumers. It would be very interesting to condition products to provide a range of qualities and subject these to a sub-set of consumers to accept or reject and provide reasons for doing so. Qualitative methods including assisted shopping and in-home ethnographic techniques could help to understand more of the underlying attitudes, motivations and behaviours around throwing away edible fruit and vegetables. This could clarify some of the complexities raised in this study. Larger scale quantitative research could confirm some of the demographic trends of interest noted here. Specifically with respect to who throws away more fruit and vegetables, how what is thrown away is related to what is purchased, and who uses on-pack storage information and why. We need to know more about consumer behaviour as regards bag use and how they rationalise keeping pre-packed products in their original packaging with either decanting ‘free-flow’ products or using free produce bags for storage. It seems worth testing technologies that are available to remove ethylene from refrigerators such as ‘Extrafresh’ ethylene absorbing discs (Bioconservacion, Spain), rigid containers and flexible bags designed for extending storage life of products contained in refrigerators such as ‘Stayfresh Longer’ reusable bags (Lakeland UK).


Appendix 1 References MAUL, F., S.A. SARGENT, C.A. SIMS, E.A. BALDWIN, M.O. BALABAN AND D.J. HUBER (2000). Recommended

commercial storage temperatures affect tomato flavour and aroma quality. Journal of Food Science 65(7):1228-1237

Optimal Fruit, Vegetables and Nuts Storage Database (Sydney Postharvest Laboratory)

http://www.postharvest.com.au SCHOUTEN, S.P. (1985). Significance of ethylene in post-harvest handling of vegetables. In Ethylene and Plant

Development, 353-62. Eds Roberts, J.A. and Tucker, G.A. Butterworths, London WILLS, R.B.H., KU, V.V.V., SHOHET, D. AND KIM, G.H. (1999). Importance of low ethylene levels to delay

senescence of non-climacteric fruit and vegetables. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 39:221-4 WILLS, R.B.H., WARTON, M.A. AND KU, V.V.V. (2000). Ethylene levels associated with fruit and vegetables during

marketing. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 40: 465-470 USDA Agriculture Handbook Number 66. http://www.ba.ars.usda.gov/hb66


Appendix 2 Materials used in consumer research FRUIT AND VEGETABLES STUDY – AUGUST 2007 Respondent number: ____________________________________________________________ Name: ____________________________________________________________ Instructions Please read prior to beginning the study Thank you for agreeing to participate in this study. Your input is very valuable and helps in the understanding of fruit and vegetable consumption. Please remember, you are giving your opinions, so there are no right or wrong answers. You will have to complete two different questionnaires: * Questionnaire 1 consists of general questions about fruit and vegetables Please complete it before the day of your main grocery shopping * Questionnaire 2 is a daily diary The questions are about your fruit and vegetable stock take, purchase and waste. Please indicate the amount in number of pieces or the approximate weight in grammes when it is asked. Please start completing it on the day of your main grocery shopping for seven days. If you have any questions or if you need any help, please do not hesitate to contact Xavi or Katell (0118 9184183). QUESTIONNAIRE 1 Q1 Looking at the following list, please rank how important you think it is to keep each one in the

fridge For instance, if it is most important to you that you put your jams and jellies in the fridge, please rank this as “1”. If meat or fish are the most important to store in the fridge, please rank this item as “1”. If you are the least concerned that your bread is kept in the fridge, please rank this item as “10”. Bread Butter Jams/Jellies Fruit Cheese Leftovers Meat/Fish Milk/Yoghurts Sauces Vegetables

Q2 For the fruit and vegetables that you prefer to keep in the fridge, how frequently are you not

able to put them in the fridge? (Please circle the most appropriate box)

Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always I never

store them in the fridge

Fruit Apples 1 2 3 4 5 6



I never store them in the fridge

Bananas 1 2 3 4 5 6 Easypeels 1 2 3 4 5 6 Grapes 1 2 3 4 5 6 Melons 1 2 3 4 5 6 Oranges 1 2 3 4 5 6 Pears 1 2 3 4 5 6 Strawberries 1 2 3 4 5 6 Other seasonable fruit (berries, plums, peaches …)

1 2 3 4 5 6

Other exotic fruit (mango, pineapple, passion fruit …)

1 2 3 4 5 6

Vegetables Broccoli 1 2 3 4 5 6 Cabbage 1 2 3 4 5 6 Carrots 1 2 3 4 5 6 Cauliflower 1 2 4 4 5 6 Cucumber 1 2 3 4 5 6 Lettuce 1 2 3 4 5 6 Mushrooms 1 2 3 4 5 6 Onions 1 2 3 4 5 6 Peppers 1 2 3 4 5 6 Potatoes 1 2 3 4 5 6 Other vegetables 1 2 3 4 5 6 Q3 How many fridges do you have? (Please state a number) Larder style fridge (small, self-contained fridge) Larder style fridge with a freezer compartment inside American style fridge (large fridge plus large freezer) Fridge with separate freezer section Q4 How many shelves and compartments do(es) your fridge(s) have?

Fridge 1 Fridge 2 Fridge 3 Shelves (main body) Shelves (door) Plastic salad compartments Q5 Could you please indicate which fruit and vegetables most disappoint you because they

don’t last long enough? (Please tick the most appropriate boxes)

Fruit Vegetables Apples Broccoli Bananas Cabbage Easypeels Carrots Grapes Cauliflower Melons Cucumber Oranges Lettuce Pears Mushrooms Strawberries Onions Other seasonal fruit (berries, plums, peaches …)

Other vegetables


Q6 How frequently do you read the following types of information on labels when buying fresh fruit and vegetables? (Please circle the most appropriate box)


Food dates (best before, display until etc.)

1 2 3 4 5

Storage information 1 2 3 4 5 Nutritional content 1 2 3 4 5 Ingredients 1 2 3 4 5 Allergy information 1 2 3 4 5 Cooking information 1 2 3 4 5 Country of origin 1 2 3 4 5 Weight/number of 1 2 3 4 5 Type of item – e.g. Granny Smith 1 2 3 4 5 Price 1 2 3 4 5 Other information 1 2 3 4 5 Q7 If you read the following types of information on labels, how frequently do you follow

them? (Please circle the most appropriate box) Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always Food dates (best before, display until etc.)

1 2 3 4 5

Storage information 1 2 3 4 5 Cooking information 1 2 3 4 5 Other information 1 2 3 4 5 Q8 Would you like to have more information about how to store your fruit/vegetables? (Please

tick as many as apply) On packaging Leaflet Point of sale Online Other way No need Fruit Vegetables Q9 Do you have nay tips for storing or improving shelf-life of fruit/vegetables? ____________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Q10 How many occupants are there in total within your household? Adults Children Q11 How many people eat at home on average? (Please indicate a number) Lunch Dinner During the week During the weekend Q12 Into which of the following age groups do you fall? (Please circle the appropriate box) Under 25 1 25-34 2 35-44 3 45-54 4


55-64 5 Over 65 6 Q13 Into which of the following age groups do the other members of your household fall?

(Write in number of occupants within each age band) Under 5 5-15 16-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 Over 65 Q14 What is the occupation of the chief income earner? ______________________________________________________________________________ Q15 What is your ethnic group? (Please circle the most appropriate box) White British White Irish White other Mixed – white and black Caribbean Mixed – white and black African Mixed – white and Asian Mixed – other Asian/Asian British – Indian Asian/Asian British – Pakistani Asian/Asian British – Bangladeshi Asian/Asian British – other Black/Black British – African Black/Black British – other Chinese


Q16 – Daily Diary (5 day period)

Where was it stored? What was thrown away?

How did you store your fresh fruit/vegetables that you

obtained today? (Please tick as many as apply)

What did you throw away today, how much and in where? This relates to fruit and

vegetables other than non-edible scraps/peels/cores, etc. (Please indicate the amount in number of pieces or approximate

weight in grammes)

Was there a date on the fruit/veg? If yes, please

write down in format as

found on the fruit/veg

Why did you throw away these fruit/vegetables? (Please tick as many as apply)

In

stor

e bo

x Tu

pper

war

e

Loos

e

In p

last

ic b

ag

In p

aper

bag

Oth

er p

acka

ging

Gen

eral

bin

Com

post

/foo

d w

aste

bin

Hom

e co

mpo

st

Food

mac

erat

or

Pets

/ani

mal

foo

d

Oth

er

‘Use

By’

‘Bes

t Be

foe’

Gon

e pa

st ‘U

se B

y’

or ‘B

est

Bef

ore’

da

tes

It w

as o

n of

fer

and

I bo

ught

mor

e th

an

I ne

eded

Mou

ldy/

slim

y

Appe

aran

ce/c

olur

of

f

Text

ure

off

Smel

l off

Prep

ared

too

muc

h fo

od

Did

n’t

like

it

Nee

ded

mor

e so

ace

Anot

her

reas

on

Fruit

Apples

Bananas

Easypeels

Grapes

Melons

Oranges







weight in grammes)





Inst

ore

box

Tupp

erw

are

Loos

e

In p

last

ic b

ag

In p

aper

bag

Oth

er p

acka

ging

Gen

eral

bin

Com

post

/foo

d w

aste

bin

Hom

e co

mpo

st

Food

mac

erat

or

Pets

/ani

mal

foo

d

Oth

er

‘Use

By’

‘Bes

t Be

foe’

Gon

e pa

st ‘U

se B

y’

or ‘B

est

Bef

ore’

da

tes

It w

as o

n of

fer

and

I bo

ught

mor

e th

an

I ne

eded

Mou

ldy/

slim

y

Appe

aran

ce/c

olur

of

f

Text

ure

off

Smel

l off

Prep

ared

too

muc

h fo

od

Did

n’t

like

it

Nee

ded

mor

e so

ace

Anot

her

reas

on

Pears

Strawberries

Other seasonal fruit

Other exotic fruit

Prepared salads

Vegetables

Broccoli







weight in grammes)





Inst

ore

box

Tupp

erw

are

Loos

e

In p

last

ic b

ag

In p

aper

bag

Oth

er p

acka

ging

Gen

eral

bin

Com

post

/foo

d w

aste

bin

Hom

e co

mpo

st

Food

mac

erat

or

Pets

/ani

mal

foo

d

Oth

er

‘Use

By’

‘Bes

t Be

foe’

Gon

e pa

st ‘U

se B

y’

or ‘B

est

Bef

ore’

da

tes

It w

as o

n of

fer

and

I bo

ught

mor

e th

an

I ne

eded

Mou

ldy/

slim

y

Appe

aran

ce/c

olur

of

f

Text

ure

off

Smel

l off

Prep

ared

too

muc

h fo

od

Did

n’t

like

it

Nee

ded

mor

e so

ace

Anot

her

reas

on

Cabbage

Carrots

Cauliflower

Cucumber

Lettuce

Mushrooms

Onions







weight in grammes)





Inst

ore

box

Tupp

erw

are

Loos

e

In p

last

ic b

ag

In p

aper

bag

Oth

er p

acka

ging

Gen

eral

bin

Com

post

/foo

d w

aste

bin

Hom

e co

mpo

st

Food

mac

erat

or

Pets

/ani

mal

foo

d

Oth

er

‘Use

By’

‘Bes

t Be

foe’

Gon

e pa

st ‘U

se B

y’

or ‘B

est

Bef

ore’

da

tes

It w

as o

n of

fer

and

I bo

ught

mor

e th

an

I ne

eded

Mou

ldy/

slim

y

Appe

aran

ce/c

olur

of

f

Text

ure

off

Smel

l off

Prep

ared

too

muc

h fo

od

Did

n’t

like

it

Nee

ded

mor

e so

ace

Anot

her

reas

on

Peppers

Potatoes

Prepared salads

Other vegetables


QUESTIONNAIRE 2 Respondent Number: ____________________________________________________________ Name: ____________________________________________________________ Please read prior to beginning the study Thank you for agreeing to participate in the second part of the study. Your input is very valuable and helps in the understanding of fruit and vegetable consumption. Please remember, there are no right or wrong answers. You will have to complete this questionnaire which consists of a stock-take of your fridge. Please complete it within the next 3 to 4 days, if possible, and send it back to RSSL via the reply-paid envelope. If you have any questions or if you need any help, please do not hesitate to contact Xavi or Katell (0118 918 4183). Q1 Please circle the description that best describes your main fridge Larder style fridge (small self-contained fridge) 1 Larder style fridge with a freezer compartment inside 2 American fridge (large fridge plus large freezer) 3 Fridge with separate freezer section 4 Q2 How many shelves and compartments dues this fridge have? (Please put the appropriate

number) Shelves (main body) Shelves (door) Plastic salad compartments Q3 How full approximately is your fridge currently? (Please circle the most appropriate

answer) Less than one-quarter full 1 One-quarter full 2 Half full 3 Three-quarters full 4 Completely full 5 Q4 How full approximately is your fridge compared to normal? Please circle the most

appropriate answer Not as full as usual 1 As full as usual 2 Fuller than usual 3


Q5 Please fill in the table below as best you can for a stock take of your main fridge as above How much and which kind of food is currently in your fridge? (Please indicate the approximate weight in grammes or volume in ml). We do not need a description of the food, but just an estimate of the amount per category (e.g. if there are 2-litre bottles

of milk, 1 full and 1 half full, the entry will be 1500 ml – 1 pack of 6 yoghurts = 600 g)

Upper shelf Lower shelf Fruit and veg compartment

In door

Fresh meat, fish and eggs g

Packaged chilled food/ready meals

g

Butter and cheese g

Yoghurts and dairy desserts g

Milk ml

Beer ml

Wine ml

Soft drinks (fizzy drinks, squash, juices)

ml

Other drinks ml

James, sauces, pickles in jars or cans, etc.

g

Bread, rolls, etc. g

g Leftovers

ml

g Other (please estimate the amount of anything not included as above) ml

How much and which kind of fruit and vegetables are currently in your fridge? (Please indicate the number of pieces or approximate weight in grammes)

Fruit Upper shelf Lower shelf Fruit and veg compartment

In door

Apples

Bananas

Easypeels

Grapes

Melons

Oranges

Pears

Strawberries

Other seasonal fruit


Upper shelf Lower shelf Fruit and veg compartment

In door

Other exotic fruit

Prepared fruit salads

Vegetables

Broccoli

Cabbage

Carrots

Cauliflower

Cucumber

Lettuce

Mushrooms

Onions

Peppers

Potatoes

Prepared vegetable salads

Other vegetables


Appendix 3 Summary of EMR storage advice and benefits Commodity Advice to consumers Benefits of refrigeration* Benefits of refrigeration in

bag*

Lemons Reduce food waste at home refrigerate in bags for freshness



Melons Reduce food waste at home keep cool or refrigerate.


[Retains freshness and quality for at least 14 days longer, and reduces weight loss]

Peppers Reduce food waste at home refrigerate in bags for freshness



Tomatoes Reduce food waste at home keep cool or refrigerate in bags for freshness.



Potatoes Reduce food waste at home keep in bags in a cool dark place for freshness.

None without use of a bag. Faster loss of moisture in fridge loose versus loose at 15oC

[use of bag, either at room temperature or in the fridge retained freshness and quality for at least 10 days longer]

Oranges Reduce food waste at home keep cool or refrigerate in bags for freshness.



Apples Reduce food waste at home refrigerate in bags for freshness

[None shown in this trial - BUT variety used (Granny Smith) was very robust! Expert opinion used to develop advice]

[None shown in this trial - BUT variety used (Granny Smith) was very robust! Expert opinion used to develop advice]

Strawberry Reduce food waste at home keep in original packaging and refrigerate for freshness.



Grapes Reduce food waste at home keep in original packaging and refrigerate for freshness.



Kiwifruit Reduce food waste at home refrigerate in bags for freshness


Retains freshness and quality for at least 4 days longer, and reduces weight loss slightly

Pears Reduce food waste at home refrigerate in bags for freshness. Ripen at room temperature


[Reduced weight loss of pears stored at 22oC]

Broccoli Reduce food waste at home refrigerate in bags for freshness


Retains freshness and quality for at least 5 days longer, and reduces water loss (observable difference in turgidity)

Carrots Reduce food waste at home refrigerate in bags for freshness



Mushrooms Reduce food waste at home refrigerate in paper bags provided for freshness.



Onion Reduce food waste at home keep in a cool, dark, dry place.

None None

Bananas Reduce food waste at home keep cool but don’t refrigerate. Store in bags for extra freshness.

None (skins will blacken) [use of bag at room temperature retains moisture content and visual quality for longer – up to 3 days]

Pineapples Reduce food waste at home keep cool but don’t refrigerate.

None None

* compared to room temperature stored loose

www.wrap.org.uk/retail

Documents

Helping consumers reduce fruit and vegetable waste: Final report