Home › Research › Risk factors
The Impact of Store-Based online Fulfilment on Grocery Retail Food Waste: An Empirical Analysis
Pedro Amorim, Nicole DeHoratius, Fredrik Eng-Larsson, Sara Martins. Not indexed, 2026
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Problem Definition: Grocery retailers increasingly fulfil online orders from existing stores rather than from dark stores (dedicated warehouses/fulfilment centers). Theory and practice debate whether this omnichannel strategy reduces or exacerbates food waste. There is a lack of empirical evidence on the impact on waste of introducing fulfillment to brick-and-mortar stores. Our study provides the first causal estimate of this impact and traces the operational levers behind it.&nbsp; <br><br>Methodology/results:Exploiting the staggered roll-out of store-basd online fulfilment at a European grocer, we apply difference-indifferences estimators to a 48-month panel of 27 stores, and six fresh categories. The conceptual framework decomposes the waste ratio (waste-to-sales) into inventory planning (inventory-to-sales) and inventory execution (waste-to-inventory) components. Introducing online fulfilment increases the waste ratio by 0.5 percentage points-about 15 percent relative to stores that are do not serve online customers. This rise is mostly explained by higher inventory-to-sales levels driven by a 25 percent jump in demand variability; inventory execution does not deteriorate significantly.&nbsp;<br><br>Managerial Implications:Fulfilling online orders from brick-and-mortar stores can backfire on waste unless retailers mitigate added demand variability via prioritizing tailored inventory management strategies and selecting stores that may mitigate demand variability and maximize overall sales. Our findings reconcile conflicting predictions in the literature by demonstrating that pooling benefits can be overwhelmed by variability-driven stock increases when service-level targets remain unchanged.
Key findings
- Our study provides the first causal estimate of this impact and traces the operational levers behind it.&nbsp; <br><br>Methodology/results:Exploiting the staggered roll-out of store-basd online fulfilment at a European grocer, we apply difference-indifferences estimators to a 48-mont
- This rise is mostly explained by higher inventory-to-sales levels driven by a 25 percent jump in demand variability; inventory execution does not deteriorate significantly.&nbsp;<br><br>Managerial Implications:Fulfilling online orders from brick-and-mortar stores can backfire on wast
- Our findings reconcile conflicting predictions in the literature by demonstrating that pooling benefits can be overwhelmed by variability-driven stock increases when service-level targets remain unchanged.
Why it matters
This analysis of 27 stores at a European grocer found that fulfilling online orders from stores increased the food waste ratio by about 15%. It has no relevance to treating, curing, or preventing Alzheimer's disease.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 15/100
Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. It scored 15 on the same rubric, which is below the 16 cap we apply to non-peer-reviewed sources. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on impact for its field and year and institution's track record, so those were left out: it earned 14 of the 91 points we could judge it on, which is 15 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 2 / 10 | Tier 4 — not a peer-reviewed journal (Not indexed) |
| Journal's citation record | 0 / 4 | Not a journal article, so the journal's record does not count |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 4 / 10 | Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. Hosted on a preprint server. |
| How recent | 5 / 5 | 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 0 / 7 | Cited 0 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 0 / 5 | 0.0 citations a year over 2 year(s) since 2026 |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| Still being cited | 0 / 4 | Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 1 / 4 | Last-listed author Sara Martins: h-index 9 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 0 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 0 institution(s) in 0 countries — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete) |
| Indexed in PubMed | 1 / 2 | Not in PubMed, but has a DOI |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 14 / 91 | Scored on 18 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 14 of the 91 points we could judge it on is 15 out of 100. |
| Total | 15 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. This record has no journal, so the citation leaves it out. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Amorim, P., DeHoratius, N., Eng-Larsson, F., & Martins, S. (2026). The Impact of Store-Based online Fulfilment on Grocery Retail Food Waste: An Empirical Analysis. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.6387301
Vancouver
Amorim P, DeHoratius N, Eng-Larsson F, Martins S. The Impact of Store-Based online Fulfilment on Grocery Retail Food Waste: An Empirical Analysis. 2026. doi:10.2139/ssrn.6387301.
BibTeX
@article{amorim2026-6932568f,
author = {Amorim, Pedro and DeHoratius, Nicole and Eng-Larsson, Fredrik and Martins, Sara},
title = {{The Impact of Store-Based online Fulfilment on Grocery Retail Food Waste: An Empirical Analysis}},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.2139/ssrn.6387301},
url = {https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.6387301}
}
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.
Related studies in Risk factors
Also in Risk factors
356 studies in the library are filed under Risk factors with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Risk factors hub.