Comparing different food banks: A case study application of a proposed standard

Food banks are increasingly recognised as essential actors in reducing food waste and addressing food insecurity by redistributing surplus food outside formal retail systems. Their appraisal is critical for enabling mutual learning, strengthening international collaboration, benchmarking performance, and enhancing donor credibility. This paper introduces a novel methodology for cross-country comparison of food banks, grounded in the Realist Evaluation's Context–Mechanism–Outcome perspective and structured through a value chain lens to organise and identify indicators. The framework comprises 101 dimensions, representing the most comprehensive comparative assessment of food redistribution organisations to date. The methodology is applied in a case study comparing FoodForward South Africa (FFSA) and Team Austria Tafel (TAT). The application demonstrates both the usability of the framework and the relevance of the identified dimensions for comparative analysis. Findings highlight substantial differences between the South African and Austrian food banks across nearly all dimensions, including scale, operational models, organisational structures, infrastructure, finances, and regulatory contexts. These contrasts underscore the diverse environments in which food banks function. In South Africa's dispersed, high-need context, FFSA's hybrid warehousing and outbound delivery model achieves a broad daily reach. Conversely, in Austria's dense context, TAT's collection-based model operates effectively but at a smaller scale. Despite these differences, both food banks play indispensable roles in reducing waste and supporting vulnerable populations. The study underscores the importance of contextualising evaluation frameworks and offers a transferable tool for systematically comparing food banks across diverse socio-economic settings.