Resell imperfect food instead of discarding it as waste

Submitted through the COP31 Sustainable Transformation Awards - SKD Türkiye (WBCSD Global Network Partner)

The company is a food retailer operating hypermarket, supermarket and gourmet format stores in Türkiye, with more than 9,000 employees.

A significant share of retail food waste arises from products that remain suitable for consumption but lose commercial value due to cosmetic imperfections, minor packaging damage or limited remaining shelf life. Although these products may still meet applicable food safety and quality requirements, conventional retail practices can result in their removal from sale and eventual disposal.

Addressing this challenge requires moving beyond end-of-life waste management towards prevention and value retention. By identifying eligible products before they become waste and offering them to customers under appropriate conditions, retailers can extend their commercial life, preserve embedded resources and contribute to a more circular and resource-efficient food system.

The company took the second position and launched the practice in 2022. The objective was to extend the usable life of products suitable for human consumption, contribute to more efficient use of resources, and raise consumer awareness of food waste.

Food loss and waste is one of the strategic sustainability topics prioritised in the company's double materiality assessment and declared in TSRS reporting, which is what gives the practice standing in risk management and resource efficiency decisions rather than in campaign planning.

Location of the initiative: approximately 600 stores in hypermarket, supermarket and gourmet formats across regions and provinces of Türkiye

The model is a decision rule applied inside existing store operations, not a separate channel.

Products that continue to meet quality and food safety criteria but carry a risk of losing value - because of appearance differences, packaging defects or a short remaining shelf life - are identified and returned to the customer at more accessible prices instead of being routed to waste. Food safety is the gate: the practice applies only to products that still satisfy the company's safety criteria, which is what separates it from clearance of doubtful stock.

Coverage widened in two directions. By 2026 the model applied to 29 different product groups, extending beyond fruit and vegetables to dairy, meat products and ready-to-eat items, so that loss prevention stopped being limited to a few categories and became a feature of the whole operation. Geographically it grew from a limited start in 2022 to approximately 600 stores by August 2026, in hypermarket, supermarket and gourmet formats.

Performance is measured with three indicators: the resale rate, the ratio of food waste financial value to food turnover, and total food waste in tonnes. Results are analysed by product group, by store and by operational process, so the data supports decisions about where to intervene rather than only describing outcomes.

Customer engagement is an integral part of the initiative, as reducing food waste requires addressing consumer perceptions alongside operational processes. In-store and social media communications help customers recognise the value of eligible products with cosmetic imperfections or minor packaging damage, encouraging more conscious purchasing decisions without compromising food safety or quality standards.

The environmental result is quantified rather than asserted. A carbon footprint calculation under the GHG Protocol methodology, covering January to December 2025, established the emissions that would have arisen had the resold products become waste.

Sustainability impact

Climate

The environmental effect was quantified with a carbon footprint calculation performed in accordance with the GHG Protocol methodology, using data covering the period from January to December 2025.

By giving products a second chance through resale, the initiative prevented perfectly edible goods from becoming waste and extended their economic value. The calculation indicates that this practice avoided approximately 200 tonnes of CO2e emissions, based on the waste-treatment emissions that would otherwise have occurred. These avoided emissions correspond to Scope 3, Category 5 - Waste Generated in Operations.

The project's first year is taken as the baseline year, and the scope of the practice as well as the environmental effects are tracked annually, with performance published through GRI-aligned sustainability reporting.

Nature

Preventing a food product from becoming waste also prevents the loss of everything embedded in it - the land, water, inputs and processing consumed in producing it - so the practice reduces pressure on natural resources upstream as well as waste volumes downstream.

Because the model covers 29 product groups rather than fresh produce alone, that upstream effect spans supply chains with very different resource intensities, from horticulture to dairy and meat.

The practice also moves food loss out of the waste management frame and into the circular economy and resource efficiency approach, where the measure of success is how long a product stays in the value chain rather than how its disposal is handled.

Social

Returning safe, edible products to sale at more accessible prices creates value beyond waste reduction by broadening the choices available to customers.

The initiative also helps challenge perceptions that contribute to food waste. By showing that a misshapen vegetable or a dented package can still offer the same quality and enjoyment, and reinforcing this message through social media, the model encourages more conscious consumption both in stores and at home.

Within the company, daily performance indicators enable store teams to see the direct impact of their decisions. This visibility transforms food waste from a perceived cost of doing business into a measurable and manageable issue, empowering employees to take ownership and contribute to tangible environmental, social and commercial value.

Business impact

Benefits

The initiative preserves the economic value of products that would otherwise be written off entirely, transforming potential losses into sales while reducing waste. By embedding the practice into existing store operations without requiring dedicated capital investment, the model delivers measurable environmental and commercial value through a practical, scalable and cost-efficient solution.

That economic contribution to store operations, alongside the environmental benefit, is the single most important reason the practice has been sustainable over the medium and long term: it scales in line with business results rather than against them, so it does not compete with commercial priorities for attention.

Performance is monitored through the resale rate and related indicators and shared daily with all relevant teams, so improvement opportunities surface quickly. Results are reviewed quarterly at Sustainability Committee meetings attended by Executive Committee members, where decisions on improvement areas and further roll-out are taken.

The target is to raise the resale rate to 30 per cent by the end of 2026 - this remains a target rather than an achieved result. Because performance data is analysed by product group, store and process, the practice also improves the quality of decisions about ordering, handling and shelf-life management more broadly.

Costs

No special financing mechanism is required. The model is built on existing processes, data tracking and employee awareness, and can be implemented at low additional cost, which is what makes it accessible to operators without a sustainability capital budget.

The real costs are operational. Store labour is needed to identify eligible items, check them against food safety and quality criteria, handle and mark them, and place them for sale; employee training and communication have to be funded continuously rather than once; and data tracking, together with the digitalisation work under way to standardise processes and strengthen data collection, carries its own cost.

There is a commercial trade-off. Products returned to sale are offered at more accessible prices, so the revenue recovered is lower than the original ticket; the benefit comes from avoiding a total write-off, not from a full-price sale.

The two principal risks in scaling are consumer perception of products with appearance differences or a short remaining shelf life, and consistency of operational application across stores. Both are managed through communication work, employee training and regular monitoring of the performance indicators - which is where most of the ongoing effort is spent.

Impact beyond sustainability and business

Co-benefits

The approach can be readily applied beyond food retail, as producers, wholesalers, distributors and food service operators face similar forms of product loss. Its core principle is relevant and applicable across the entire value chain: once food safety has been assured, priority should be given to retaining the product's value rather than disposing of it, regardless of the business model or operating format.

Within the value chain it strengthens shared responsibility between producers, suppliers, employees and consumers, because each of them influences whether a product reaches a customer before its shelf life ends.

The data produced has secondary value: analysis by product group, store and process reveals where losses originate, which informs decisions about the life cycle of products across the value chain rather than only at the point of sale.

Potential side-effects

Consumer perception is the binding constraint. Shoppers may associate appearance differences or short remaining shelf life with lower quality, and a poorly communicated implementation risks transferring that association to the wider assortment. Communication and employee training are therefore part of the operating model, not an optional extra.

Operational consistency is the second risk. A practice applied strictly in some stores and loosely in others produces uneven customer experience and unreliable data, which is why standardisation through digitalisation is being pursued.

Typical business profile

The model is particularly suited to multi-format food retailers, as it can be seamlessly integrated into different store environments and adapted to varying operational needs.

As its decision-making framework and indicators are format-independent, the model can also be adapted by producers, wholesalers, distributors and food service operators managing perishable stock.

Successful implementation requires collaboration between sales coordination, sustainability and field operations teams, supported by the ability to track store-level indicators daily.

Approach

1. Set the eligibility rule around food safety first: Define precisely which products qualify - those that continue to meet quality and food safety criteria but carry loss risk from appearance differences, packaging defects or short remaining shelf life - so that the practice is never confused with selling doubtful stock.

2. Pilot in a limited scope and learn from the field: Start small, and evaluate the experience of the first phase systematically before extending, because store-level handling constraints are only visible in operation.

3. Write the practice into standard operating procedures: Integrate identification, handling, pricing and placement into the routines store teams already follow, so the model does not depend on a campaign or on individual initiative.

4. Train store teams and explain the reasoning: Make clear why a product qualifies and why it does not, since inconsistent application across stores is the main operational risk and produces unreliable data.

5. Track a small set of indicators and share them daily: Use the resale rate, the ratio of food waste to food turnover and total food waste in tonnes, and circulate results to all relevant teams daily so that variance is visible while it can still be acted on.

6. Extend product coverage group by group: Move outwards from fruit and vegetables to categories with different supply, storage and consumption dynamics - dairy, meat products and ready-to-eat items - reaching 29 product groups.

7. Roll out across formats and geography on the evidence: Scale gradually on the basis of results, as the practice did in reaching approximately 600 stores across hypermarket, supermarket and gourmet formats by August 2026.

8. Quantify the environmental result and govern it at executive level: Calculate avoided emissions under the GHG Protocol - approximately 200 tonnes of CO2e for January to December 2025 - publish through GRI-aligned reporting, and review results quarterly at Sustainability Committee meetings attended by Executive Committee members.

Stakeholders involved

• Project leads: Implementation is led by the Sales Coordination General Management, with the sustainability team and field operations coordinating delivery. That leadership placement is a deliberate design choice: because the practice sits with the function that owns store commercial performance rather than with an environmental function, it is managed as part of the operating routine. Governance runs above it. Results are evaluated quarterly at Sustainability Committee meetings attended by members of the Executive Committee, where improvement areas and roll-out decisions are taken.

• Company functions: Store operations teams implement the practice daily and provide field insights that support its continuous improvement. The sales coordination team manages its operational development, while the sustainability team brings a broader perspective by sharing relevant good practices, identifying opportunities to increase impact, calculating environmental benefits and ensuring consistent data tracking for sustainability disclosures. Store feedback, resale performance and customer behaviour are reviewed regularly to guide further development. Ongoing digitalisation efforts aim to standardise processes, improve data quality and encourage greater employee participation.

• Main providers: No external solution provider is involved. The practice runs on existing operations, existing data and existing store teams, which is a large part of why it could be scaled without a dedicated financing mechanism. That also means the transferable asset is the operating procedure and the indicator set rather than a technology, so a replicating company is not dependent on a vendor relationship.

• Other: Customers determine whether the model works: their feedback is used in deciding which product groups to include, in developing the communication approach, and in supporting decisions on further roll-out. Employees are the second decisive group, since the practice depends on daily judgement at store level. Producers, suppliers and distributors in the wider value chain are affected by the shift in how the life cycle of a product is decided, and the practice strengthens shared responsibility between them, employees and consumers.

Key parameters to consider

The practice started in 2022, and the project's first year is taken as the baseline year. Coverage reached 29 product groups and approximately 600 stores by August 2026. The environmental calculation covers January to December 2025 under the GHG Protocol methodology.

Three indicators carry the practice: the resale rate, the ratio of food waste financial value to food turnover, and total food waste in tonnes. The resale rate is shared daily with all relevant teams, while the scope of the practice - including the number of participating stores and product groups covered - is monitored monthly, and its environmental impact is assessed annually.

The stated ambition is to raise the resale rate to 30 per cent by the end of 2026 and to apply the practice at all of the company's locations - both are targets, not achieved positions.

Food loss and waste is prioritised in the company's double materiality assessment and declared in TSRS reporting; performance results are published through GRI-aligned sustainability reports. Corporate disclosure is aligned with ISSB (IFRS S1 and S2), and subject to independent third-party external assurance.

No dedicated financing mechanism is required; the model rests on existing processes, data tracking and employee awareness.

Implementation and operations tips

Make food safety the first gate and say so publicly. The practice only holds if customers and employees are confident that eligibility is decided on safety criteria, with appearance, packaging and shelf life considered afterwards.

Report the indicator daily, not monthly. Perishable stock decisions are made hourly at store level; a monthly report arrives after the product has already been thrown away.

Widen the category coverage deliberately. Moving from fruit and vegetables into dairy, meat and ready-to-eat items is what turned a produce initiative into an operation-wide model covering 29 product groups.

Consistency across stores matters more than campaign communication. Uneven application produces both a poor customer experience and data that cannot be trusted, which is why employee training and digital standardisation carry most of the implementation effort.

Frame the practice around its commercial benefits from the outset. The practice gains long-term traction by generating financial value for store operations while also delivering environmental benefits. If positioned solely as a sustainability initiative, it may be perceived as competing with business priorities rather than contributing to them.

External links

• 2025 sustainability report

• Sustainability reports library