The enormous amount of household food waste in developed countries is a global environmental and climate threat. To reduce household food waste, various behavior change campaigns and interventions are conducted. Most conventional behavior change interventions designed to reduce household food waste are based on the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and are information heavy. These have shown, however, to not be effective enough to result in a fast and sizable enough decrease of household food waste in developed countries, thus reducing climate and environmental impact in a timely and sizeable enough way. The more systemic, holistic and practically oriented Social Practice Theory (SPT) theoretical framework is proposed by different authors as an alternative to the conventionally used TPB theoretical framework to design (behavior) change interventions. SPT is thought to lead to greater and faster reduction of food waste at the household level and to a general change in the food supply system. Nevertheless, interventions are oftennot created according to their proposed theoretical framework and no “direct” comparison between both theoreticalframeworks at the intervention level has been conducted. This thesis compares two case studies describing food waste reduction interventions, one with a TPB theoretical framework and the other with a SPT theoretical framework. The results show that when considering food waste reduction interventions at the household levels in developed countries the SPT might be a more effective theoretical framework for an intervention design compared to a TPB theoretical framework. Specifically, the SPT theoretical framework includes more relevant system stakeholders in the intervention creation leading to a more context specific design. Additionally, the emphasis of actual “doing” in an intervention based on an SPT theoretical framework createsa potential for more long-term change, compared to a TPB theoretical framework. However, this thesis also suggests that merging of the two theories should be further research and discussed, because of the potential greater effectiveness in actual food waste reduction.