Verra Registers First Project to Reduce Food Loss and Waste

Verra confirms first food waste project registration

Verra has registered the first carbon offset project under its food loss and waste methodology. The registration confirms that VM0046, which became active in July 2023, is now being used to generate verified carbon credits from keeping food in the human supply chain rather than sending it to landfill.

This marks a practical shift for food rescue operations. Organisations diverting surplus food can now quantify emission reductions through a standardised framework and potentially access carbon finance to support their work. For UK businesses involved in food production, retail, or hospitality, the development offers insight into how waste reduction activities might be valued in carbon markets.

The methodology addresses a specific emissions problem. When food decomposes in landfill, it produces methane, a greenhouse gas with significantly higher warming potential than carbon dioxide over shorter time periods. Preventing food waste therefore delivers a measurable climate benefit alongside the social and economic value of keeping edible food available for consumption.

Verra’s VM0046 provides procedures for project developers to calculate avoided emissions when food is diverted from waste destinations. The framework covers interventions across the supply chain, from farms and processing facilities through to retail operations and food redistribution networks. Projects quantify the difference between a baseline scenario where food becomes waste and a project scenario where it remains in use.

According to industry reports, the first credits issued under this methodology are now being marketed. Carbon Herald reported that Xpansiv and Brightly are offering approximately 250,000 credits linked to a food rescue network operating across most US counties, with potential to scale to 500,000 credits. The credits are described as A-rated and ex-ante, meaning they represent projected rather than retrospective reductions.

How the carbon accounting works

The methodology requires project developers to map food loss streams and identify where food would have gone without intervention. They then quantify food flows and apply emission factors based on destination type. Landfill produces higher emissions than composting or anaerobic digestion, so the calculation reflects the specific waste route being avoided.

Credits are generated from the difference between baseline emissions and project emissions. The baseline represents business as usual, typically disposal to landfill or other high-emission destinations. The project scenario captures the lower emissions associated with keeping food in the supply chain, whether through redistribution to food banks, sale at reduced prices, or processing into secondary products.

This approach distinguishes food waste prevention from conventional waste management projects. The climate benefit comes partly from avoiding methane generation, but also from preserving the embedded value of food that has already been produced. Growing, processing, and transporting food involves emissions, so wasting it means those emissions deliver no nutritional or economic return.

Verra hosted a public webinar in October 2023 explaining the methodology’s accounting approach. The framework is designed to support various intervention types, including demand planning systems that reduce overproduction, platforms connecting surplus food with buyers, gleaning programs recovering unharvested crops, and donation schemes channeling food to charitable organisations.

Timeline from methodology to market

VM0046 became active within Verra’s Verified Carbon Standard program on 12 July 2023. The methodology was developed to create a standardised pathway for quantifying emission reductions from food loss and waste prevention, a category that had previously lacked consistent carbon accounting rules.

The first project registration represents a move from policy design to implementation. Projects can now seek validation and verification under the methodology, leading to credit issuance if they meet the required standards. Validation confirms that a project’s design complies with methodology requirements, while verification confirms that claimed reductions have occurred and been accurately measured.

In August 2024, N2OFF announced plans to pursue food waste credits using technology from its subsidiary Save Foods. The company stated it aimed to monetise emission reductions by extending shelf life and keeping food in the supply chain. This indicates commercial interest beyond redistribution projects, extending to technologies that prevent spoilage at source.

In December 2024, Verra placed its broader Methodology for Sustainable Food Systems on hold. That framework, developed with partners including Circle Economy and WRAP, was intended to cover food system interventions more widely, incorporating VM0046’s procedures alongside measures for dietary shifts and production changes. Verra noted the pause was due to resource prioritisation but left open the possibility of resuming development later.

Implications for UK food businesses

The emergence of a verified carbon market for food waste prevention has several practical implications for UK businesses. Retailers, manufacturers, and hospitality operators managing surplus food may find new financial support for waste reduction efforts. Food redistribution charities could access revenue to expand operations. Supply chain partners might incorporate carbon value into procurement decisions.

However, the category remains relatively new and will face scrutiny common to all carbon offset markets. Additionality is a key concern: would the food rescue activity have happened anyway without carbon finance? Baselines must accurately reflect what would have occurred in the project’s absence. Monitoring systems need to track food flows reliably over time. These factors will determine whether credits achieve broad market acceptance.

UK businesses already face regulatory pressure to reduce food waste. The Environment Act 2021 includes provisions for future food waste regulations, while large businesses must already report on waste under environmental reporting requirements. Some local authorities require separate food waste collection. Consequently, carbon credits from food waste prevention might complement compliance activities rather than substitute for them.

For businesses supplying public sector contracts, demonstrating measurable environmental performance increasingly matters. Carbon reduction evidence can support responses to procurement criteria addressing social value and net zero commitments. Food waste prevention projects with verified carbon credits provide quantifiable evidence of climate action.

There are also reputational considerations. Consumers increasingly expect businesses to minimise waste, particularly in food retail and hospitality. Verified carbon credits offer third-party confirmation of waste reduction claims, reducing the risk of greenwashing accusations. Nevertheless, businesses should consider whether carbon credits genuinely represent additional climate benefit rather than standard operational improvements.

Food waste prevention delivers multiple benefits

Food rescue and loss prevention projects deliver benefits beyond carbon reduction. Diverting edible food to human consumption addresses food insecurity, supports charitable organisations, and reduces disposal costs. Processing surplus into secondary products can create revenue streams. Preventing waste at source improves operational efficiency and resource use.

Carbon finance adds a climate dimension to these benefits, potentially making interventions more financially viable. A food bank expanding cold storage capacity to handle more fresh produce might offset capital costs through carbon credits. A retailer investing in demand forecasting systems could monetise the resulting waste reduction. A processor developing uses for by-products might access carbon finance alongside product revenue.

The UK generates significant food waste across the supply chain. WRAP estimates that approximately 9.5 million tonnes of food waste arise annually in the UK, of which around 70% is intended for human consumption. Retail and hospitality sectors account for approximately 16% of this total, with redistribution and prevention interventions offering practical reduction opportunities.

Methane emissions from food waste in landfill contribute to climate change in the near term. Methane has a global warming potential approximately 28 times higher than carbon dioxide over a 100-year period, and even higher over shorter timeframes. Consequently, reducing organic waste to landfill delivers relatively quick climate benefits compared to interventions targeting longer-lived greenhouse gases.

Developments to monitor going forward

Several factors will shape how this carbon market category develops. Credit pricing will determine financial viability for different project types. Market acceptance will depend on how buyers assess quality and additionality. Regulatory treatment matters: if governments mandate food waste reduction, carbon credits from those activities might lose additionality arguments.

Verification quality will be central to market credibility. Third-party verifiers must confirm that food flows have been accurately measured, baselines realistically estimated, and emission factors appropriately applied. Monitoring systems need to track food destinations reliably, distinguishing between disposal routes with different emission profiles.

The relationship between VM0046 and other carbon accounting frameworks will also matter. Businesses reporting corporate emissions under greenhouse gas protocols must ensure consistency between carbon credit claims and scope 3 reporting. Doublecounting must be avoided if both project developers and food donors claim the same emission reductions.

Verra’s decision to pause work on its broader Sustainable Food Systems methodology suggests resource constraints in developing food-related carbon accounting frameworks. Nevertheless, parallel efforts continue. The Global FoodBanking Network developed the FRAME methodology for food recovery and redistribution with support from the Global Methane Hub. This indicates continued momentum toward standardised approaches for quantifying food rescue benefits.

For UK businesses, monitoring these developments makes sense even if immediate participation in carbon markets is not planned. Understanding how food waste prevention is valued in climate terms can inform investment decisions, procurement strategies, and stakeholder communications. As carbon markets mature and regulatory expectations evolve, businesses with established measurement and reduction practices will be better positioned to respond.

What this means for carbon reporting and compliance

UK businesses face growing expectations around carbon measurement and reduction. Large companies must report greenhouse gas emissions under the Streamlined Energy and Carbon Reporting framework. Many businesses commit to science-based targets or net zero pathways that require scope 3 emissions reduction, including waste-related emissions.

Food waste generates emissions across multiple scopes. Production emissions are typically scope 3 for retailers and hospitality businesses. Waste disposal emissions might fall under scope 1 if businesses own landfill operations, or scope 3 if waste is sent to third-party facilities. Consequently, preventing food waste can contribute to scope 3 reduction targets.

Carbon credits from food waste prevention projects offer a different value proposition than direct operational improvements. Credits represent avoided emissions that can potentially be sold or retired to offset other emission sources. Direct waste reduction improves operational efficiency and reduces costs. Both approaches have roles in a comprehensive carbon management strategy.

Public sector suppliers should note that carbon reduction increasingly features in tender evaluation. Some contracting authorities require bidders to demonstrate alignment with net zero commitments or submit carbon reduction plans. Verified emission reductions from food waste prevention could strengthen tender responses, particularly for food service contracts.

Nevertheless, businesses should prioritise waste reduction over carbon credit generation. Prevention delivers financial savings and operational benefits regardless of carbon market participation. Credits might provide additional value, but they should complement rather than replace fundamental waste management improvements. Our compliance team helps businesses integrate carbon reporting with operational sustainability measures, ensuring that reduction efforts deliver both regulatory compliance and commercial benefit.

Summary of key developments

• Verra has registered the first project under its VM0046 Methodology for Reducing Food Loss and Waste, which became active in July 2023.
• The methodology quantifies emission reductions from keeping food in the human supply chain instead of sending it to landfill or other waste destinations.
• Industry reports indicate that the first credits issued under VM0046 are now being marketed, with an initial tranche of approximately 250,000 credits linked to a US food rescue network.
• The framework covers interventions across the supply chain, from farms and processing facilities to retail operations and food redistribution programs.
• Carbon credits from food waste prevention could provide financial support for reduction activities, though the category will face scrutiny around additionality, baseline accuracy, and monitoring quality.
• UK businesses face growing regulatory and commercial pressure to reduce food waste, with carbon accounting providing one measure of progress alongside operational and reputational benefits.

Connecting food waste reduction to broader carbon strategies

Food waste prevention sits within broader carbon reduction strategies that many UK businesses are developing. Companies committed to net zero targets must address emissions across their value chains, including waste. Scope 3 emissions often represent the largest share of a business’s carbon footprint, particularly for retailers and hospitality operators whose products and supply chains generate significant indirect emissions.

Measuring and reducing food waste supports these wider commitments. However, businesses need clear accounting boundaries to avoid doublecounting. If a retailer claims scope 3 reductions from food waste prevention, and a food bank claims carbon credits from receiving that food, the same emission reduction gets counted twice. Verra’s methodology includes procedures to allocate credits, but businesses must ensure their carbon accounting remains consistent.

Similarly, businesses purchasing carbon credits to offset residual emissions should assess whether food waste credits meet their quality criteria. Credits should represent genuine additionality, meaning the reduction would not have happened without carbon finance. Baselines should reflect realistic counterfactuals rather than artificially high waste scenarios. Monitoring should provide confidence that claimed food diversions actually occurred.

For businesses developing carbon reduction plans, food waste prevention offers relatively accessible opportunities. Many interventions require operational changes rather than capital investment. Improved stock management reduces both waste and working capital requirements. Donation schemes provide social benefits alongside emission reductions. Technology platforms connecting surplus food with buyers can be implemented quickly.

Nevertheless, businesses should consider whether carbon credits genuinely enhance the value of waste reduction activities or merely add complexity to existing initiatives. In many cases, operational savings and reputational benefits provide sufficient incentive for waste prevention. Carbon credits might offer additional value in specific contexts, such as projects requiring upfront investment with longer payback periods.

Where to find authoritative guidance

Businesses considering food waste reduction projects or seeking to understand carbon accounting implications should consult official sources. Verra publishes detailed methodology documentation and project registration information through its Verified Carbon Standard program. The methodology specification includes accounting procedures, eligibility criteria, and monitoring requirements.

UK regulatory guidance on food waste comes from several sources. WRAP provides practical resources on food waste prevention, measurement, and redistribution through its business support programs. The Environment Agency publishes guidance on waste classification and disposal routes. Defra oversees food waste policy development under the Environment Act 2021.

For carbon reporting requirements, businesses should refer to the government’s environmental reporting guidelines, which cover mandatory greenhouse gas emissions reporting. The guidance explains how to calculate emissions from waste and other sources, including appropriate emission factors and scope allocation.

Carbon market developments move quickly, so monitoring industry sources helps businesses stay informed. However, businesses should focus on verified information from methodology developers, registries, and regulators rather than commercial claims that may overstate project benefits or market readiness. Our team tracks these developments and helps businesses assess which carbon market opportunities align with their operational priorities and compliance requirements.