Reduction of food waste in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs) can provide multi-layered benefits for their sustainable development, through improved food security, enhanced income as well as the creation of environmentally friendly secondary markets. Food systems, however, are often characterised by a complex network of actors across the value chain, where a parochial intervention at a local scale does not always achieve a globally optimal outcome. Here, we systematically reviewed 8318 studies for the current evidence associated with the impact of interventions pursuing food waste reduction in LMICs. We first classified interventions by the target stage within the value chain and by the mechanism of action, and then further based on whether they are primarily designed to prevent or mitigate (recycle, reuse, remanufacture, repurpose and recover) the wastage of the commodity. We found a near-complete disconnect between preventive and mitigative interventions amongst the studies, with the former only investigated at production, storage and transportation stages and the latter only at wholesale and consumption stages. No identified study employed preventive and mitigative measures together to explore the combined level of efficacy. We also identified a strong bias in favour of material-based interventions, with little attention given to knowledge-based alternatives or local capacity building.

减少中低收入国家 (LMIC) 的食物浪费可以通过改善粮食安全、增加收入以及创建环境友好型二级市场为其可持续发展带来多层次的好处。然而，粮食系统的特点通常是价值链上的参与者网络复杂，地方范围内的狭隘干预并不总能达到全球最佳结果。在这里，我们系统地回顾了 8318 项研究，以获得与追求减少中低收入国家食物浪费的干预措施的影响相关的当前证据。我们首先按价值链中的目标阶段和作用机制对干预措施进行分类，然后进一步根据它们是否主要旨在预防或减轻（回收、再利用、再制造、重新利用和回收）商品的浪费。我们发现研究中的预防和缓解干预措施之间几乎完全脱节，前者仅在生产、储存和运输阶段进行调查，而后者仅在批发和消费阶段进行调查。没有确定的研究同时采用预防和缓解措施来探索综合疗效水平。我们还发现了一种强烈的偏向于以物质为基础的干预措施，而很少关注基于知识的替代方案或当地的能力建设。没有确定的研究同时采用预防和缓解措施来探索综合疗效水平。我们还发现了一种强烈的偏向于以物质为基础的干预措施，而很少关注基于知识的替代方案或当地的能力建设。没有确定的研究同时采用预防和缓解措施来探索综合疗效水平。我们还发现了一种强烈的偏向于以物质为基础的干预措施，而很少关注基于知识的替代方案或当地的能力建设。