WRAP urges COP31 to harden food waste targets as 1.05bn tonnes tally looms

Governments meeting at COP31 in Antalya, Türkiye, from 9–20 November face a call from WRAP to strengthen national food waste reduction plans, write food loss and waste into their climate commitments, and increase investment in prevention.

The environmental NGO argues that expanding approaches already proven at national scale would cut greenhouse gas emissions, improve food security, and lower costs for businesses and households. The intervention lands at a summit where food systems remain a contested negotiating item, and where WRAP wants measurable reduction targets rather than statements of intent.

What is the scale of the problem?

The headline figure comes from the United Nations Environment Programme's Food Waste Index Report 2024, co-authored with WRAP. It estimated that households, food service businesses and retailers generated 1.05 billion tonnes of food waste in 2022, a figure that includes inedible parts.

UNEP calculates that food loss and waste across the wider supply chain accounts for an estimated 8–10% of annual global greenhouse gas emissions.

Catherine David, chief executive of WRAP, framed the case in both economic and environmental terms. She said: "By acting to prevent food waste, we can put money back into people's pockets and reduce the pressure on our precious land and natural resources."

David added: "We know what works, and many countries around the world are already acting, but we need to scale this."

What does WRAP point to as evidence?

WRAP highlights its Food Pact Network as its working model of collaboration between businesses, governments and other organisations. The network connects around 920 organisations through ten national and regional pacts.

According to WRAP's 2025–26 impact report, published in October 2026, activity across those pacts has prevented 220,000 tonnes of food waste and avoided an estimated 680,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions.

The same reporting shows that more than 2.7 million tonnes of surplus food have been redistributed through charitable and commercial outlets.

These are voluntary, pact-based results rather than regulatory outcomes, and the distinction matters for how they transfer to national policy. WRAP's argument to governments is that the delivery infrastructure exists and needs funding and targets behind it, not invention.

Who is WRAP working with at the summit?

Alongside its own recommendations, WRAP is supporting a joint appeal through the Global Action Drive, a coalition of international NGOs that includes the Global FoodBanking Network and the World Resources Institute.

The coalition makes three demands of governments:

• Translate existing food loss and waste commitments into policies, implementation plans and measurable reduction targets, supported by monitoring and evaluation.
• Include food loss and waste reduction in relevant COP31 negotiated outcomes.
• Direct greater funding to national and local organisations delivering projects on the ground.

The emphasis on implementation plans and monitoring signals the coalition's central concern: pledges made in prior climate and food systems fora have not consistently carried deadlines, baselines or enforcement mechanisms.

What happens at COP31 itself?

WRAP's programme at the summit includes events examining the relationship between food waste, methane emissions and food security. Methane is the operative pollutant for the waste stream, given the gas profile of decomposing food in landfill.

On 11 November, WRAP will co-host an event at the UK Pavilion with Defra and the Welsh Government. That session focuses on approaches to food waste prevention and methane reduction, drawing on experience from the UK and South Africa.

WRAP is also participating in a discussion on financing food loss and waste reduction, hosted by Global Methane Hub, the IKEA Foundation and the Global FoodBanking Network.

The milestone to watch is the summit's close on 20 November. Whether food loss and waste reduction appears in the negotiated outcomes, and with what funding attached to national and local delivery organisations, will determine whether this appeal converts into tracked commitments or joins the backlog of unimplemented pledges.