National serving of rice

The Philippine Rice Research Institute (PhilRice) is urging Malacañang to issue an executive order setting the standard size for half-cup rice portions in meals sold at government offices. This aims to minimize food waste. PhilRice proposes that government cafeterias serve as testing grounds to determine if private restaurants should also adopt this standard.

Last year, there was already a call for Congress to pass a national law mandating smaller meal sizes, particularly half-cup rice portions. The intent, much like PhilRice’s proposal, is to reduce food waste nationwide. I don’t believe the bill has been passed yet. While its intent is commendable, do we really need a law to regulate rice portion sizes?

In a previous column, I mentioned that in its Food Waste Index Report for 2021, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) noted that the world generated “around 931 million tons of food waste” in 2019, of which 61% came from households, 26% from food service, and 13% from retail. “This suggests that 17% of total global food production may be wasted (11% in households, 5% in food service, and 2% in retail),” the report added.

More recent data indicates that by 2022, at the tail end of the COVID-19 pandemic, approximately 1.05 billion tons of food were wasted globally — about 19% of food available to consumers. Food waste, as a percentage of total food production, increased by two points in just three years. Households accounted for 60% of this waste, with the remainder coming from food services and retail.

In its 2021 report, UNEP stated that “previous estimates of consumer food waste significantly underestimated its scale” and that food waste at the consumer level (household and food service) is more than double earlier estimates. Moreover, “household per capita food waste generation is found to be broadly similar across income groups.”

In short, people in various countries waste nearly a fifth of their food, most of which is generated in households in lower-middle to high-income countries. This highlights a divide: households with surplus waste food, while those experiencing hunger do not. I reckon that in poorer households — which make up the majority of our population — food is not wasted as much.
I am unaware of any country with laws mandating exact portion sizes for restaurant offerings or meals served in government cafeterias or public schools. Some jurisdictions, however, have regulations promoting healthier eating habits. Years ago, New York City tried to ban sugary drinks larger than 16 ounces in restaurants, movie theaters, and mobile food carts. The courts struck down the plan.

There are other ways to make people more conscious of their eating and food waste habits. Governments and health organizations often issue guidelines and recommendations to influence portion control, addressing obesity, diabetes, and food waste. They encourage both consumers and the food industry to adopt practices that promote healthier eating.

Public health campaigns and industry guidelines also encourage healthier portion sizes. The restaurant industry has responded by offering different portion sizes to cater to varying consumer preferences. However, legislating portion control in food and beverage services might be unnecessary, especially if reducing food waste is the primary goal.

Smaller, standardized portions can indeed reduce uneaten food, directly decreasing waste. PhilRice claims to have data supporting this from households, though not from food service settings. Hence, the call for a pilot study involving government food service providers. If the study yields positive results in mitigating waste, a broader policy can be considered.

Controlling portion sizes can also help address overconsumption, promoting healthier eating habits. Less food waste means a smaller environmental footprint, as it reduces the resources used in food production, such as water and energy. Some argue that food waste contributes to greenhouse gas emissions from landfills, so minimizing waste aids climate change mitigation.

Still, do we need “Big Brother” dictating how much we should eat or how much food should be served outside our homes?

Current data shows that most food waste occurs in households rather than in food service and retail. Government mandates on portion control cannot extend to people’s homes.

I see two main issues with legislating portion control. First, the economic impact on food businesses. Implementing and monitoring portion control will result in additional costs, although it might also lead to higher margins. Customer satisfaction could be affected, as value-seekers might be deterred. Unlimited rice offers may have to end.

The second issue is enforcement. Regulating and monitoring compliance across diverse food establishments nationwide will be challenging and costly. Even if monitoring is devolved to local government units, food inspectors will need to be deployed in addition to health inspectors. Will they carry standard measuring cups to check meals coming out of kitchens?

To ensure compliance, penalties like monetary fines would need to be imposed. Standards must also be set for how much rice fits in a government-standard half-cup measure. Moisture content may need monitoring to prevent restaurants from serving overly wet or puffed rice. Cooking standards will have to be established and enforced.

While portion control can reduce food waste, its overall impact may be limited. Given that most food waste occurs in households, legislation targeting restaurants might not address the primary source of the problem. Cultural factors, such as preferences for generous servings, may also hinder the effectiveness of such measures.

Perhaps the government, PhilRice, and the Department of Health should focus on public awareness campaigns educating consumers about the consequences of food waste. Promoting mindful consumption can help reduce waste. Incentivizing food service establishments to donate surplus food is also worth exploring.

These campaigns could be paired with efforts to improve infrastructure, such as cold chains to preserve food quality. Similar facilities could be used for cooked but unsold food. Community refrigeration and vacuum-packing facilities in poorer areas, along with public education on food preservation, can extend food shelf life. The government might also offer benefits or subsidies to businesses and households that reduce food waste.

Food waste is deeply tied to cultural norms and economic conditions. In many societies, large portions symbolize hospitality and value, making portion control measures potentially unpopular. In higher-income countries, the relative affordability of food often leads to undervaluing conservation. There is likely a correlation between food cost, food waste, and obesity.

I doubt legislation or an executive order on portion control is the best way to reduce food waste. Cup size can be arbitrary. As I’ve argued previously, weight is a more accurate measure for good portions. Perhaps food service establishments should sell meals by weight — including rice — not by portion size.

Uncooked rice is sold by weight in markets. This way, consumers might be more particular about how much they order.

The reality is that due to inflation and rising food prices, meal sizes have already become smaller in many establishments. With food costs so high, I believe more people are already mindful of waste, even at home. To maintain profitability, food establishments are also likely minimizing waste.

The next step could be Congress considering penalties for people who don’t finish their food in restaurants and government cafeterias. If the government’s intent is to prevent food waste, shouldn’t it penalize those who waste food? Customers could even be fined for every gram of unfinished food. This may sound ridiculous, but can it be more ridiculous than mandating a national serving of rice?

Marvin Tort is a former managing editor of BusinessWorld, and a former chairman of the Philippine Press Council

matort@yahoo.com