Reimagining Chicago Retailers as Climate Catalysts
2024
City of Chicago Dept. of Public Health + Institute of Design at Illinois Tech
Positioned Chicago to lead in retailer-led climate action by convening 18 cross-sector stakeholders—retailers, food rescuers, policymakers, and community leaders—through a foresight process that reframed food waste as a climate equity issue. Facilitated strategic alignment to co-develop three implementable pathways supporting Chicago’s 62% carbon reduction target by 2040. Delivered an upstream intervention model enabling retailers to meet climate goals while strengthening food resilience and generating shared value, aligned with Project Drawdown and ReFED benchmarks.
18
stakeholders
- 62%
3
pathways
Food systems account for over one-third of global greenhouse gas emissions, with food waste alone responsible for nearly 10%, more than triple the aviation sector’s impact[^1][^2]. Despite its climate weight, food waste remains framed as a behavioral issue, not a structural failure. Project Drawdown ranks it among the most effective climate solutions[^3], yet policy and investment still concentrate downstream, on household composting or consumer awareness, while approximately half of food waste occurs upstream, embedded in supply chains, logistics, and retail systems[^4]. This project convened 18 cross-sector actors to explore how retailers could operate as climate infrastructure. Using strategic foresight, we reframed food waste from an operational nuisance to a systemic climate equity signal, linking upstream intervention to emissions reduction, resilience building, and institutional accountability.
Footnotes [^1]: FAO (2021). *Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Agrifood Systems*. [^2]: Our World in Data (2022). *Emissions by Sector*. Aviation is ~2.5–3.5%. [^3]: Project Drawdown (2020). *Table of Solutions by Scenario*. [^4]: UNEP Food Waste Index Report (2021); ReFED Insights Engine (2023).
Surface —
The research combined participatory foresight, EN-ROADS climate simulations, stock-and-flow modeling, stakeholder mapping, and narrative analysis. These methods showed that food waste results from structural breakdowns—not individual disposal decisions. Stock-and-flow models revealed that most waste happens upstream, while policies still focus on household behavior. EN-ROADS simulations highlighted the mismatch between emission sources and funding priorities. Narrative analysis revealed competing logics: waste as climate risk, operational liability, or dignity loss.
[Data Viz: Where Food Waste Happens – and Where Policy Doesn’t]
Interviews surfaced structural friction. Retailers pointed to unclear liability, misaligned KPIs, and operational bottlenecks. Food rescuers cited coordination delays and infrastructure gaps. Community leaders described how waste represented a breakdown in dignity and trust. City departments highlighted silos across climate, waste, and public health mandates.
[Data Viz: System Blind Spots Across the Food Ecosystem]
These findings reframed upstream retail as a climate opportunity—positioning retailers as system actors in equity-centered climate adaptation.
[Data Viz: How Communities Experience Waste – Insights Beyond Metrics]
Shift —
Disconnection in daily operations reflects a deeper misalignment in how futures are imagined. Food waste signals a systems failure, not just an efficiency gap. Retailers are expected to act without space to reconsider their roles. The foresight process exposed a deeper need: structures that allow institutions to anticipate change and build together.
Workshops and modeling identified four barrier categories that block retailers from advancing climate-aligned strategies. These constraints also limit how futures are conceived. Each category became a point for scenario development, guiding where collective imagination could unlock new action.
[Data Viz: Systemic Barriers to Retail Food Waste Reform – A Multi-Level Diagnostic Map]
To move from insight to action, the team applied Horizon Scanning, STEEP analysis, EN-ROADS simulation, and the Three Horizons model to stress-test assumptions and uncover viable pathways.
[Data Viz: Signals to System Impact – Mapping Disruptions to Design]
This process resulted in three transformation pathways. Each targets a different barrier and proposes roles for coordinated action. Together, they show how food waste can shift from a sunk cost to a shared resource, powered by collaboration, equity, and anticipatory governance.
[Data Viz: Pathways to 2030 – Adapted from Sharpe et al., 2016]
Sustain —
Strategic foresight becomes sustainable when it builds capacity to navigate uncertainty and creates structures for shared action. Stakeholder workshops identified capabilities, tensions, and indicators for pilot activation.
Pathway-Ready Capabilities
Each pathway required specific coordination capabilities. Consumer transformation called for policy alignment between food access and transit planning, as well as retailer readiness to respond to demand shifts. Pre-competitive collaboration focused on knowledge sharing, dynamic pricing systems, and new roles like Repurposing Specialists. Wellness hubs demanded trust-building between retailers and community groups, with stronger ties to health systems and mutual aid networks.
Friction Points Shaping Execution
Three structural tensions emerged:
Conflicting goals between public mandates and retail operations
Inadequate infrastructure relative to climate urgency
Misaligned timelines between institutional rollouts and community relationships
Metrics That Guide and Align
Participants co-developed indicators tracking both implementation and system learning. These included diversion volumes, stakeholder participation, and coordination performance. Capability indicators tracked role development and technology integration. System outcomes linked food waste reduction to Chicago’s broader climate strategy. These metrics positioned pilots as feedback mechanisms for scale, accountability, and adjustment.
Sight Note —
Success meant different things: carbon reduction, dignity, operational momentum. The food system made these goals compete.
EN-ROADS revealed fracture points. Climate alignment unraveled when stakeholders mapped different pressures.
Futures work drifted toward status quo unless friction became part of the design.
Divergence held more value than consensus. Chicago’s food system learned more when no one collapsed their perspective.