How State Organic Waste Ban Policies Can Drive Food Waste Reduction

Food is the most prevalent material disposed in municipal landfills and incinerators in the United States, amounting to 24 percent of landfill contents. This is a significant climate issue because food decomposing in landfills generates methane, a greenhouse gas 80 times as powerful as carbon dioxide in the near term. Keeping food out of landfills is a critical strategy to protect our climate and to ensure that this valuable resource is directed to better use. 

At the state level, some of the most impactful food waste reduction policies we can pass are those that limit the amount of food and other organic waste that can be disposed in landfills or incinerators. While not a silver bullet, organic waste bans cut down harmful emissions while also boosting economic activity and encouraging food waste reduction efforts, like increased food donations from surplus food that would have otherwise been wasted. Other policy tools to reduce food waste—such as tax credits for food donation—are also important, but they are often relegated to one specific sector or solution, necessitating a patchwork approach to achieve the overall reach of the more comprehensive scope of organic waste bans. 

We use the phrase “organic waste ban” in this blog to refer both to outright bans, in which food scraps and sometimes other organic materials are banned from entering landfills and incinerators (such as in Vermont's food scrap ban), as well as mandatory organics recycling requirements for businesses (such as in Connecticut's commercial organics recycling law). The primary difference here is that while outright bans typically cover all generators, including the residential sector, mandatory organics recycling laws apply only to commercial generators meeting certain generation thresholds (e.g. eight cubic yards per week of organic waste). Both types of laws can include thresholds for implementation that change over time to incorporate more generators. 

With the help of this transformative policy tool, NRDC aims to keep most food from entering landfills and incinerators by 2035, targeting areas where 80 percent of the country’s population lives. State policy is the arrowhead of our work to reduce food waste. While municipal waste is managed at the local and regional levels, cities and towns depend on favorable policy conditions at the state level to facilitate their work and stabilize the infrastructure necessary to operate beyond city borders. Additionally, state budgets, with support from federal dollars, can scale development of large infrastructure, pilot solutions across differing landscapes, and ensure businesses operate on a level playing field across state lines. 

Policy, including organic waste bans, can work in tandem with the development of physical infrastructure (like composting facilities and food rescue operations) to help rescue good food and manage the materials that otherwise would have gone to landfills or incinerators. Cities and companies are often reluctant to build new organics recycling facilities without a guarantee of a consistent supply of feedstock; organic waste bans can help incentivize this development. Some organic waste bans also include requirements for the donation of surplus food, which can help increase food rescue. Food businesses might also be motivated to prevent waste to gain exemptions from compliance thresholds, with the additional benefit of paying less to manage waste by avoiding generating it in the first place.  

There are currently 11 states with some version of organic waste bans: California, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. While most of these laws have only been in effect for a few years, there is already significant food waste reduction being reported. Just three years into its organic waste ban (which went into effect in 2020), Vermont conducted a waste characterization study that showed a 54 percent food scrap recycling rate. This is particularly impressive given that those three years represented the height of the COVID pandemic, which disrupted waste sorting, collection, and processing throughout the country. 

As highlighted in "Bans and Beyond: Designing and Implementing Organic Waste Bans and Mandatory Organics Recycling Laws," there are multiple benefits from implementing organic waste bans, including job creation, expansion of organics recycling collection and processing infrastructure, lower costs associated with sending material to landfill, and greenhouse gas reductions. Increasing the amount of surplus food rescued and redistributed can also be an overtly included goal and benefit. For example, California’s goals in passing SB1383 in 2016 included reducing organic waste disposal statewide by 75 percent by 2025 and rescuing and redistributing 20 percent of currently disposed surplus food by 2025. Since implementing the law in January 2022, CalRecycle reports that:  

• 94 percent of communities in California have instituted residential organics waste collection
• Two million tons of organic waste a year were cut from landfill disposal between 2018 to 2021 (before the law officially took effect)
• California now has 206 organic waste processing facilities (with 20 more under construction)
• 217,042 tons of unsold food were rescued in 2023 (94 percent of the 2025 target)  

California’s 2025 waste composition study will lend even more insight to the progress of the law’s implementation. 

A 2024 study posited that organic waste bans have been unsuccessful, with the exception of Massachusetts, which saw a 13.2 percent reduction in disposed waste. However, this study assessed total disposed municipal solid waste, without separating out the organic fraction. A more accurate approach might be to assess the organic fraction of disposed waste; otherwise, there is an open question as to whether disposed waste composition may have changed over the years, meaning that the organic fraction of waste could actually have decreased while other material types increased. The study also did not incorporate data on the amount of organics recycled, the amount of food donated, or other measures to reflect what is actually happening with materials that were diverted from disposal. Furthermore, several states’ policies are too new to have seen an impact, but that doesn’t mean they are unsuccessful. 

Still, it is impressive that even with the study’s shortcomings, Massachusetts is spotlighted as achieving successful reduction (again, in overall disposed waste, not specifically food waste). Some of the factors the study identified as pertinent to the overall success of the Massachusetts law are worth noting, as these might help improve outcomes for other states with organic waste bans: affordability of compliance, regulatory simplicity, and strong enforcement and monitoring. These elements should be incorporated into organic waste bans, as should requirements for surplus food donation, phased-in thresholds for waste generation that lower over time to cover more generators, and plans for ongoing monitoring and reporting. A ban should also be contextualized within a suite of state policies and regulations providing outreach and education as well as funding for the expansion of organics recycling and food rescue infrastructure.  

With food representing the largest portion of landfilled municipal solid waste in the United States and organics overall representing nearly half of all municipal solid waste generated, there is a tremendous need and opportunity to expand state-level organic waste bans, replicating successes from states with existing bans and strengthening both new bills and existing laws. 

We can also lay groundwork for new organic waste bans and increase the chances for success with existing bans by passing supporting policies and building infrastructure at both state and local levels. Fortunately, there are tools available to help states adopt these policies, including the Zero Food Waste Coalition’s state policy toolkit’s section on organic waste bans and related state laws. The toolkit offers helpful tips and resources to craft a state-level organic waste ban, including model policy language. As the toolkit notes, “organic waste bans are one of the most effective tools policymakers have at their disposal to change the way businesses and consumers manage and value their organic waste.” 

This expert blog was originally published September 26, 2024, and has been updated with new information and links.