More convenience, less waste?
An investigation of convenience foods as a method to reduce food waste and
the relationship’s moderating variables
By
GISÈLE HYETT
More convenience, less waste?
An investigation of convenience foods as a method to reduce food waste and
the relationship’s moderating variables
By
GISÈLE HYETT
University of Groningen
Faculty of Economics and Business
MSC Marketing Management
Master thesis
22nd of June 2015
Gisèle Hyett
Nieuwe Boteringestraat 102A2
9712 PS Groningen
Preface
With this thesis my student days come to an end. I wrote this thesis as the end project for my Master Marketing Management at the University of Groningen. This thesis could not have been written without the help of a couple of people.
First, I would like to thank my supervisor Dr. Jenny van Doorn. Without her help and feedback I could not have completed this process. I could always ask for input and guidance during the 20 weeks of writing my thesis. Secondly, I would like to thank my peers from the master thesis group. They have provided useful feedback during the group meetings and were always available for answering questions. I would especially like to thank Marit Drijfhout for reviewing this thesis and for the support during the entire process. I would also like to thank my parents for enabling me to be a student all these years and also for offering support when things got hard and I was not able to see the positive side of the process. Lastly, I would like to thank the people who have participated in the waste diary study. Without these people I would not have had any data for my analyses.
Abstract
This study investigates the relationship between buying convenience foods and the amount of food waste per household. It also looks at the effect of the type of convenience food bought on this relationship. To examine the relationship, the research used a food waste diary study with 86 respondents combined with a questionnaire containing background questions. It was hypothesized that purchasing convenience foods would have a negative effect on the amount of food waste per household. Buying virtue convenience foods is hypothesized to also have a negative effect on the amount of food waste per household while purchasing vice convenience foods is expected to have a positive effect on the dependent variable. We have found that purchasing convenience foods has a positive effect on the amount of food waste per household. This same relationship is found when looking at the purchasing of virtue convenience foods. The purchasing of vice convenience foods
does not affect the amount of food waste per household.
Management summary
Food waste is the food that can be consumed by consumers but instead is left to spoil or is spilled by the consumer (FAO, 2011). A significant part of the Dutch government’s resources is spent on finding methods to reduce the country's food waste. Dutch consumers trash around 50 kilos of food per consumer per year; in 2012 this was 47 kilos (Ministry of Economic Affairs, 2014). Food waste from consumers' homes has the largest environmental and cultural impact (Timmermans, 2014). The impact comes from the wasted resources, used for production, storage, and transport, and the decrease in the availability of food for others (Timmermans, 2014). The main reason for wasting food is planning issues (Williams et al., 2012). Product categories with the highest amount of food waste are perishable categories, such as dairy and vegetables (Ministry of Economic Affairs, 2014). Foods in these categories end up wasted because consumers replace them with foods that can be consumed quickly because they do not feel like cooking or experience time pressure (Evans, 2012a). Since one of the roads to reduction of the amount of food waste is the way in which foods are packaged and sold (Quested et al., 2013), convenience foods might be a method to reduce food waste.
Convenience foods help the consumer save time and effort (Buckley et al., 2007) and thus the excuses that lead to replacement might become irrelevant.
A lot of research has been conducted on food waste and convenience foods but, to the best of the author's knowledge, no research has been conducted that combines these two topics. This research looks at the relationship between the purchasing of convenience foods and the amount of food waste per household. It is expected that purchasing convenience foods will lead to less food waste per household. It is also investigated whether the type of convenience food bought has an effect on the relationship. It is expected that purchasing virtue convenience foods will decrease the amount of food waste whereas purchasing vice convenience foods will increase the amount of food waste. The problem statement of this thesis is: “ To what extent does the frequency of purchasing convenience foods affect the amount of food waste and to what extent does the relationship differ between vice and virtue convenience foods?“
data from 86 households in The Netherlands. Various multiple regression analyses were used to find the answers to the research questions. The amount of food waste per household is measured in units, which are the wasted millilitres and grams merged together.
Contrary to the expectations, it was shown that the purchasing of convenience foods had a significant, positive effect on the amount of food waste per household. The purchasing of virtue convenience foods also has a significant, positive effect. The purchasing of vice convenience foods did not significantly affect the amount of food waste per household.
This thesis offers important findings for the Dutch government and food industry. The offering of timesaving food solutions to consumers might sabotage the attempts of the Dutch government to decrease food waste. A method should be thought of that facilitates meeting the demand for convenience foods but at the same time makes consumers more aware of their food wasting
Table of contents
1. Introduction ... 9
1.1 Food waste ... 9
1.2 Convenience foods ... 10
1.3 Convenience foods to reduce food waste ... 11
2. Literature review ... 13
2.1 Food waste ... 13
2.1.1 Food waste, its development, and its sources ... 13
2.1.2 Food waste in virtue and vice categories ... 14
2.2 Convenience foods ... 15
2.2.1 Reasons for using convenience foods ... 16
2.2.2 Change in the demand of convenience foods ... 17
2.2.3 Convenience foods as a method to reduce food waste ... 18
2.3 Effect of type of convenience foods on food waste ... 20
2.3.1 Effect of virtue convenience foods on food waste ... 20
2.3.2 Effect of vice convenience foods on food waste ... 21
2.4 Conceptual model ... 21
2.5 Control variables ... 22
2.5.1 Age and income per household ... 23
2.5.2 Household size ... 23
2.5.3 Hours worked per week ... 23
2.5.4 Cooking involvement ... 23
2.5.5 Frequency of eating in a restaurant and ordering takeaway, and using ready-‐meals ... 24
3. Methodology ... 24
3.1 Data collection method ... 24
3.1.1 Design of the food waste diary ... 25
3.1.2 Questionnaire ... 26
3.2 Descriptive data ... 28
3.3 Data analysis method ... 30
3.3.1 Factor analysis of check correlation between used scales ... 30
3.3.2 Models used for analysis ... 34
4. Results ... 34
4.1 Main effect: purchasing convenience foods ... 34
4.1.1 Main effect analysis ... 34
4.1.2 Robustness checks of main effect ... 36
4.2 Effect of type of convenience food on food waste ... 37
4.2.1 Main analysis for effect of type of convenience food ... 37
4.2.2 Robustness checks of effect of type of convenience food on food waste ... 38
4.3 Control variables ... 39
5. Discussion ... 40
6. Conclusion ... 42
6.1 Managerial implications ... 42
6.2 Academic contribution of the research ... 43
6.3 Limitations and future research directions ... 43
Appendices ... 52
Appendix A
Food waste diary and questionnaire ... 52
Appendix B
Factor analysis of all used scales ... 62
Appendix C
Robustness checks of main analysis ... 64
1. Introduction
1.1 Food waste
Over the years, food wastage has become an important topic in academic research. Food wastage is defined by the FAO (2011) as: “the decrease of food in subsequent stages of the food supply chain intended for human consumption”. Within the concept of food waste, we can distinguish between food loss and food waste. Food loss is regarded as food that is spilled or spoilt before it reaches its final retail or consumption stage. Food waste is the food that can be consumed but is left to spoil by consumers or retailers (FAO, 2011; Fooddrinkeurope, 2014a). Food wastage can be linked to the disposal behaviour of consumers since Douglas (1984) defined disposal as removing products from a system or moving them within the system. She states that products will be removed from the system when they are classified as dirty. Food is thus wasted when it is classified as dirty and it can become dirty through factors, such as time, that make the food go bad. Evans (2012a) defined that a product is wasted when it is disposed or when it is connected to the waste stream through some kind of process.
amount of energy and resources is used for production and transport (Williams et al., 2012). These resources end up wasted when the food is thrown away (Gustavsson et al., 2011). The impact of food waste is not only environmental but also ethical. Many people across the world are living in extreme hunger (FAO, 2011). These people could have consumed the avoidable food waste and thus the foods could have been a method to decrease hunger across the world.
Research on food waste drivers shows that the main drivers are: labelling issues, storage issues, packaging issues, portion sizes, consumer awareness, knowledge about food waste, planning issues, and changing consumer preferences (European Commission & BIO intelligence service, 2010; Williams et al., 2012). With regard to planning issues, Williams et al. (2012) found that many of the questioned households ended up wasting food because they wanted to have something different for dinner than what was in the fridge at home, or they forgot something that was needed for a specific meal. It could also be the case that a planned meal does not get cooked because of time related issues, because the planned meal has gone bad, or because consumers do not feel like cooking that day.
1.2 Convenience foods
One of the big trends in food business is the increase in the demand for convenience products (Brunner et al., 2010). Convenience relates to saving time and effort when planning, buying, preparing, and consuming food or beverages (Buckley et al., 2007, Man and Fullerton, 1990). Saving time and energy does not only occur in physical activities but also in mental activities (Candel, 2001). Convenience foods are easier to prepare since they are often already cut, cleaned, and/or marinated and consumers, for example, do not need to think about which ingredients to combine (Candel, 2001). Candel (2001) stated that convenience could be seen as an important factor when consumers
determine how they will behave towards a food product.
1.3 Convenience foods to reduce food waste
Cappellini (2009) states that not much research has been performed on the topic of disposal. Consumers’ disposal behaviour is the last stage of the trajectory that goods go through (Cappellini, 2009). While a lot of research has been performed on food waste, these researches can often not be found in top academic journals (de Coverly et al, 2008). Since the reduction of food waste is an important topic for the Dutch government, possible food waste reduction methods should be researched. A lot of empirical research has been performed on convenience foods; however, to the best of the author’s knowledge there has not been done any research that combines the topic of convenience foods and food waste. Large amounts of the research on convenience foods are about the preparation stage of foods. This research focuses on that stage as well but combines it with the disposal stage of the consumption chain. It is researched whether purchasing convenience foods could be a method to reduce household food waste.
One of the roads to the reduction of food waste is through the way in which foods are packaged and sold by retailers (Quested et al., 2013). Convenience foods are foods that are packaged and/or sold in such a way that they reduce the energy and time required for preparation (Candel, 2001). Convenience foods require less involvement (Scholderer & Grunert, 2005). When looking at the characteristics of convenience foods, two lines of thought arise.
The first line of thought is that convenience foods could cause a higher amount of food waste per household. The use of convenience foods could lead to a decrease in cooking involvement and cooking skills (Evans, 2012a). This causes consumers to waste leftover ingredients instead of combining them into a new dish (Evans, 2012a).
The second line of thought is that offering convenience foods could be a way to decrease the amount of food waste per household since consumers need less time to prepare these foods and thus they are less likely to be replaced by e.g. takeaway due to excuses like a experiencing lack of time; these excuses then become irrelevant. If the foods do not get replaced it is less likely that they end up wasted which would lead to a decrease in food waste.
waste of a household. It is expected that purchasing convenience foods will lead to a smaller amount of food waste per household.
The type of convenience food is researched as a moderating variable for the amount of food waste per household. Convenience foods can belong to the virtue or vice category and it is expected that they have a different effect on food waste. Virtue foods “are less gratifying and appealing in the short term but have less negative long-‐term consequences than vices and therefore are a more prudent choice” (Van Doorn and Verhoef, 2011). Virtue foods are relatively healthier than vice foods (e.g. bread vs. chocolate) (Van Doorn and Verhoef, 2011). Vice foods “provide an immediate pleasurable experience (such as good taste), but contribute to negative long-‐term outcomes (such as future weight gain)” (Van Doorn and Verhoef, 2011). Wertenbroch (1998) states that consumers’ preferences for virtue and vice foods depends on their length of view. If they have a long-‐term view when evaluating consumption consequences, they are more likely to choose virtue foods because these are better for the consumer in the long-‐term. When they have a short-‐term view, they will probably choose vice foods. For example, when consumers perceive their health as important, they are likely to choose the virtue food product even if the taste of this product is less appealing to them than that from vice foods.
The research by Evans (2012a) shows that consumers often replace the virtue foods at home with something quick when experiencing certain needs (e.g. extreme hunger). It is assumed that virtue convenience foods are less likely to be replaced because they take less (mental) energy and thus excuses become less relevant. It is expected that purchasing virtue convenience foods result in a lower amount of food waste per household than purchasing vice convenience foods.
Based on research by Evans (2012a,b) it is expected that purchasing vice convenience foods
will increase the amount of household food waste. Evans (2012a) shows that consumers are likely to replace food at home with quick to prepare and/or consume foods, like takeaway; this causes the food at home to end up as waste, increasing the amount of food waste per household.
For this research, the amount of food waste will be tracked by conducting a food waste diary among consumers. This research investigates whether the replacement of foods at home is less likely to occur when consumers purchase a lot of convenience foods. In addition, it is investigated whether this effect differs for virtue and vice convenience foods. As a result, the problem statement is:
To answer the problem statement, it is divided into multiple research questions:
1. To what extent does the frequency of purchasing convenience foods affect the amount of food waste per household?
2. To what extent does the effect of purchased convenience foods on household food waste differ between virtue and vice convenience categories?
In chapter 2, existing literature is reviewed to come up with empirical evidence for the conceptual model and hypotheses. Then in chapter 3, the study design and methodology are discussed. The results from the research are shown in chapter 4, and finally in chapter 5 all results are discussed whereas in chapter 6 a conclusion is provided.
2. Literature review
2.1 Food waste
2.1.1 Food waste, its development, and its sources
The disposal of food happens when there is a decrease in value (Frow, 2001). The research by Frow (2001) states that waste is the disposal of products before the products’ “resources of value have been exhausted”. Consumers dispose things because it has lost its value and it has become useless (Evans, 2011). Michael Thompson (1979) states that food products lose their value over time and in the end, when there is zero value left, become rubbish. Food waste could thus be regarded as foods of which the value has become zero but were originally suitable for human consumption. There are a lot of different definitions and classifications for food waste (Lebensorger and Schneider, 2011). Most studies classify food waste into avoidable and unavoidable. However, there is a lot of inconsistency in these definitions. Langley et al. (2010) and Schneider and Obersteiner (2007) consider all remains and by-‐products of the preparation stage unavoidable food waste. WRAP (2009) classifies these products as avoidable or possibly avoidable food waste. Possibly avoidable food waste is waste that could have been avoided and mainly consists of food that some people eat and others do not (e.g. peel of an apple) (Lebensorger & Schneider, 2011). For this research, only
avoidable food waste is taken into account. About 1/3rd of all food production ends up as avoidable
waste (Gustavsson et al., 2011). Avoidable food waste occurs in the last stage of the consumption chain (Koivopuro et al., 2012)
This number is assumed to be the same for The Netherlands during that time. Nowadays, these numbers have increased by approximately 8% (Thönissen, 2009). Parfitt et al. (2010) state that one of the reasons for the increase in food waste is the increased food choice for consumers. Another reason is the fact that food has become cheaper over the years; this has lead consumers to care less about wasting food (Stuart, 2009). Parfitt et al. (2010) found that the decrease in the proportion of the disposable income spent on food is also a reason for the increase in food waste over the years.
Even though the waste process is very anxiety-‐loaded and consumers feel bad about throwing away food that could still be used or that has been left to spoil by them (Evans, 2012a), the largest amount of food waste comes from consumer homes. According to Parfitt et al (2010), a driver of food waste is that consumers fail to evaluate what food they already have at home and thus they end up buying too much food. Consumers often buy more food than they can actually consume (e.g. due to large assortments and in-‐store promotions), which is also confirmed by Evans (2012a). Respondents in his research consistently purchase more than they could use and as a consequence a large part of this food ends up wasted. Respondents in the research by Wansink et al (2000) stated that they often buy foods that are needed for specific recipes but they end up wasted because they do not use all of it or they do not even end up making the recipe. Planning issues are also one of the drivers of food waste (Williams et al., 2012). An example is that consumers plan their dinner for the entire week but end up eating out with friends or buying something quick after work due to feelings of extreme hunger or a lack of energy and/or time (Evans, 2012a). Consumers stated that: “something always comes up” (Evans, 2011), this withholds them from eating the food they have at home. Research found that the largest amount of avoidable food waste arises from products that have expired because they were forgotten or not used in time (Kantor et al., 1997). Due to the extensive constrain on the environment over the last century, decreasing the amount of consumer food waste has become very important (Black and Cherrier, 2012). Parfitt et al. (2010) found that one of the best ways to reduce food waste is through consumers.
2.1.2 Food waste in virtue and vice categories
of food waste in the fruit and vegetable category followed by other perishable foods like dairy products, meat, and fish. Combined with earlier researches, these findings are not really unexpected. Perishable foods like fruit and vegetables have a shorter shelf life and therefore consumers are more cautious when consuming them. For these categories, consumers focus more on best-‐before and use-‐before labels (Williams et al., 2012). Research by WRAP (2012) shows that one of the main reasons for throwing out perishable foods is that they are not used in time. Based on these numbers it can be assumed that virtue foods are more likely to end up as waste due to their perishability.
Research by Marlette, Templeton, and Panemangalore (2005) found that vice foods are wasted less by highschool children when they are offered as lunch in the cafeteria. The students were more likely to trash virtue foods like salads rather than vice foods like chicken nuggets. One of the researches by WRAP (2012) also shows that vice categories belong to the categories in which the least food is wasted. The research by WRAP (2009) found that vice foods like cake and deserts account for approximately 190,000 tonnes (4%) of avoidable food waste. This is followed by confectionairy and snacks, which account for approximately 67,000 tonnes per year. WRAP (2009) also found that in the UK alone, around 660,000 tonnes of pre-‐prepared and homemade meals are wasted. Vice foods are often less perishable than virtue foods and are thus more likely to be stored to be consumed at another moment in time; this decreases the likelihood of them being wasted (Gupta, 1988).
2.2 Convenience foods
spend less time on planning what they will eat and how they will combine various ingredients into a meal. Consumers’ orientation towards convenience determines their behaviour towards convenience food products (Buckley et al., 2007).
Convenience can occur in all stages of the consumption process (e.g. planning, buying, storing, preparing, disposal) (Gofton, 1995). Brown (1989) gathered these stages of the consumption process into 5 classes of convenience. The classes are time, place, acquisition, use and execution. The research by Yale and Venkatesh (1986) found that convenience of food products is often shown in: timesaving (e.g. fully prepared dinners for the microwave), portability (e.g. drinks in small, portable bottles), accessibility (e.g. AH to go), appropriateness, avoidance of unpleasantness, and handiness (pre-‐cut vegetables). According to Havlicek et al. (1983), convenience foods can be divided into four categories: non-‐convenience, basic convenience, complex convenience, and manufactured convenience. Non-‐convenience foods contain no home-‐prepared counterparts and contain only fresh and home-‐processed ingredients (Havlicek et al., 1983). All elements of these meals need to be prepared by the consumer at home. Basic convenience foods contain only single processed items whereas complex convenience foods contain ingredients that contain high time-‐ and energy-‐saving skills and require little culinary skills (Havlicek et al., 1983). Manufactured convenience foods consist only of manufactured counterparts. These foods are ready to eat immediately and might only have to be heated (Havlicek et al., 1983). These categories also come up in the research by Richardson et al. (1985), who state that convenience foods can be basic or complex. When a food product is basic it means that only time and energy needs to be invested into preparation. For complex foods culinary knowledge is required as well.
2.2.1 Reasons for using convenience foods
when cooking. Instant extreme needs like hunger lead to the purchase of foods that can be prepared quickly. The research by Evans (2012a) mentioned consumers with a lack of time and/or extreme hunger that purchased something quick rather than preparing the meal they have at home; these consumers rely mostly on convenience foods to satisfy their needs. Evans (2012a) also indicated that consumers who travel a lot for work or private appointments tend to rely a lot on convenience foods. These consumers buy something on the road rather than taking the food they have at home with them. Evans’ (2012a) research indicated that the foods at home end up as waste because they get replaced. The consumers with this lifestyle indicated that they “get something quick from the local supermarket like a ready meal or they order takeaway” (Evans, 2012a).
2.2.2 Change in the demand of convenience foods
Over the years, consumers indicated that they prefer foods that are quick, easy and healthy (Houwelling, 2009). One of the interviewees from the report by Houweling (2009) states that there has been a shift from the need for conventional foods to a need for pre-‐prepared foods in The Netherlands. Foodsector trends that have gained the most interest over the years are: ease, health, and affordability (Houweling, 2009); more than 86% of the entrepreneurs in the food branch stated that ease was one of the most important trends in this sector (Supplychainmagazine, 2010). These trends also show up in the growth rates of the convenience food market. Over the last couple of years, the convenience food market has grown with ±5,5% per year. It is expected that the convenience foods market will continue to grow with 3-‐4% per year over the coming years (Topvers, 2012). The convenience foods market covers around 3,6 billion euros per year which accounts for about 6,5% of the total food market (Houweling, 2009). Based on these figures it can be concluded that nowadays consumers rely more on convenience foods than a couple of years ago and thus the demand for convenience foods has increased. The increase in the demand is shown in consumers’ preference for convenience in packaging, preparation, and consumption (Van Dam & Van Trijp, 1994; Anderson and Shugan, 1991). Convenience has become one of the food product attributes that determine a consumer’s preference for the product (Candel, 2001). Convenience was found to be the most important motivation when evaluating food (Marquis, 2005). Houweling (2009) indicates that the need for convenience foods will continue to grow steadily over the next years.
During the last century, it became normal for women to have a job (Traill, 1997) and to have a more active social life (Candel, 2001). Working hours also became longer (Traill, 1997). This changed consumer behaviour and caused women to spend less time in the kitchen. Cooking became less present in the daily lives of consumers (Brunner et al., 2010; IGD, 1998). Swodoba and Morschett (2001) found that consumers have the desire to spend less time in the kitchen and on performing food-‐related activities. IGD (1998) confirmed this finding and also found that consumers have the need to spend less time on preparing meals and cleaning up afterwards. Dutch consumers became less traditional and more open to purchasing convenience foods to fulfil their needs and make their lives easier (Euromonitor, 2014). The increase in single-‐person households has also caused an increase in the demand for convenience food products (Bord bia, 2002).
2.2.3 Convenience foods as a method to reduce food waste
As mentioned earlier, it is assumed that purchasing convenience foods can have two outcomes on food waste. The first line of thought is that convenience foods could cause a higher amount of household food waste. The increase in the amount of food waste per household could come from three things.
The first cause might be the high perishability of virtue convenience foods. It was found that
virtue convenience foods are often more perishable than their non-‐convenience equivalent (Gisslen, 2011; de Vries, 1997). Due to processing, the perishability of convenience foods often increases (e.g. Pealed potatoes are less protected against environmental influences). It could thus be that since consumers have less time to consume these foods until they go bad, they are more likely to end up wasted.
The second cause might be consumers' focus on food labels for convenience foods. Williams
et al. (2012) found that consumers focus more on use-‐before and best before labels for perishable food categories. Since convenience foods almost always contain a best before label, it might be that consumers throw out these foods as soon as the date on the package has expired instead of personally evaluating whether the food has gone bad. Therefore it could be that convenience foods are thrown away sooner than non-‐convenience foods, leading to more food waste.
The third cause comes from the research by Evans (2012a), in which it is stated that cooking
decrease in the consumer’s culinary skills. Households that rely more on manufactured meals or convenience foods are likely to have a decreased level of culinary expertise and little ability to come up with new recipes based on leftover ingredients (Evans, 2012a). These households are more likely to throw out the leftover ingredients rather than using them for something else (Evans, 2012a). These three causes might lead to an increase in the amount of food waste per household when purchasing convenience foods.
The second line of thought is that offering convenience foods could be a way to decrease the amount of food waste of household in two situations.
Consumers often have intentions that end up not being carried out (Evans, 2012a). Meals are
convenience foods, it may be assumed that the common excuses (e.g. a lack of time) are less likely to lead to food waste because they become irrelevant. If this is the case, purchasing convenience foods should lead to a decrease in food waste.
The second situation in which convenience foods could decrease the amount of household waste is when consumers experience a lack of culinary skills. The research by Evans (2012a) indicated that a lack of culinary skills could lead to the wasting of leftover ingredients. Since convenience foods are sometimes already combined into a ready meal they might be less likely to end up as waste due to a lack of culinary skills. If this is the case, purchasing convenience foods should decrease the amount of food waste per household.
Based on the strength of arguments for the effect of convenience foods on the amount of food waste, we assume that purchasing convenience foods might function as a method through which food waste can be decreased (Havlicek et al., 1983). It is assumed that consumers who buy more convenience foods are less likely to replace these foods with something quick (e.g. takeaway) and thus they waste less food. Also in the short-‐term, convenience foods help overcome the problem of not having culinary skills and thus less food will be wasted. It is expected that the purchasing of convenience foods has a negative effect on the amount of food wasted by consumers.
H1: Consumers who purchase a large amount of convenience foods will waste less food than consumers who purchase a small amount of convenience foods
2.3 Effect of type of convenience foods on food waste
2.3.1 Effect of virtue convenience foods on food waste
will be a decrease in food waste. Based on this argumentation it is hypothesized that buying virtue convenience foods leads to a smaller amount of food waste than buying vice convenience foods. H2a: Purchasing virtue convenience foods leads to a smaller amount of food waste than purchasing vice convenience foods
2.3.2 Effect of vice convenience foods on food waste
Vice foods are more likely to be chosen on impulse and when there is little time between the point of purchase and the actual consumption of the food (Milkman et al, 2010). They also require more self-‐ control than virtue foods (Wertenbroch, 1998). It could thus be that vice convenience foods are chosen more often when the consumer experiences conditions like hunger or time pressure. Finally, there is a higher preference among consumers for vice foods than for virtue foods (Milkman et al, 2008). The preference for vice foods in combination with the extreme needs is likely to make the consumer forget about the foods they already have at home (Evans, 2012a). Under these conditions consumers are likely to purchase vice foods that can be consumed quickly instead of consuming the foods they have at home (Evans, 2012b). Consumers will look for reasons that justify their decision for vice foods due to the feelings of regret that are likely to occur after purchasing vice foods (Khan and Dhar, 2006). Reasons like the needs mentioned before are perceived as valuable reasons that justify the choice for vice foods (Khan and Dhar, 2006). Since unplanned meals often consist of mainly unhealthy ingredients (Milkman et al, 2008), the fresh ingredients that the consumer has ready at home for the planned meal are likely to be wasted. The assumption is that vice convenience foods will function as a replacement of the foods the consumer already has at home (Evans, 2012a).
Since convenience is one of the main reasons for consumers to like a product (Candel, 2001), it can be assumed that consumers will prefer these foods more than non-‐convenience foods at home. It is assumed that convenience vice foods can be a method to reduce the stress that is felt under certain conditions. This is confirmed by Evans (2012a) who found that consumers not only want something that can be consumed quickly but the food should also be easy to prepare. It is thus hypothesized that buying vice convenience foods leads to a larger amount of food waste than buying virtue convenience foods since they will act like a replacement for the food at home.
H2b: Purchasing vice convenience foods will lead to a larger amount of food waste than purchasing virtue convenience foods
2.4 Conceptual model
Type of convenience food
-‐ Virtue convenience foods (H2a) -‐ Vice convenience foods (H2b)
waste. Paragraph 2.2 showed that there is also a large amount of research on convenience foods available. However, to the best of the author’s knowledge there is no research that combines consumer food waste and convenience foods and looks at the relationship between them. This research looks at the relationship between the purchasing of convenience food and the amount of food waste. The conceptual model of this research can be found in figure 1.
For this research it is assumed that the purchasing of convenience foods decreases the amount of food waste by these households. When a product is high in convenience and can be prepared quickly, it is less likely to be replaced by foods like takeaway and thus is less likely to end up as waste. The type of convenience food is expected to have an influence of the amount of food waste. The assumption is made that virtue foods at home are likely to be replaced by vice convenience foods due to time pressure and needs like hunger; the virtue foods then end up as waste since they are highly perishable. It is assumed that virtue convenience foods are less likely to be replaced by vice convenience foods since they take less time to prepare, this will decrease the amount of food waste. It is thus hypothesized that purchasing virtue convenience foods will lead to a smaller amount of food waste than purchasing vice convenience foods. As a consequence it is thus hypothesized that purchasing vice convenience foods will lead to a larger amount of food waste since they will replace the virtue foods at home.
Figure 1 Conceptual model
2.5 Control variables
When looking at the relationship between the frequency of purchasing convenience foods purchased and the amount of food waste of households and the effect of type of convenience food on this relationship, there are certain variables that need to be controlled for. These control variables can have an effect on the dependent variable themselves, which would correlate when you investigate
Frequency of purchasing
convenience foods
the relationship between the independent and dependent variable (Malhotra, 2010). Correlation would lead to biased results and would decrease the validity of the research. The control variables help to “remove extraneous variation from the dependent variable” (Malhotra, 2010). This is important because you only want to know the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable and want to exclude the effects of any other variable. The control variable coefficients that come out of the analyses will help investigate the effect that the control variables have on the amount of food waste per household. In this research, next to the typical demographic control variables like age and income, five additional control variables were taken into account namely: household size, job type, cooking involvement, frequency of eating-‐out/ordering takeaway, and frequency of using ready-‐meals.
2.5.1 Age and income per household
Based on the research by Lyndhurst, Cox, and Downing (2007) it is expected that age will have a negative effect on the amount of food waste per household. For income, a positive effect is expected on the dependent variable. Based on the research by Evans (2012a) it is expected that households with higher income work more hours and thus are more likely to waste food at home due to replacement of these foods because of e.g. time pressure.
2.5.2 Household size
Based on the research by Koivupuro et al (2012), it is expected that people in a multi-‐person household waste more than people in a single-‐person household. In this research the amount of food waste per household increases when the number of people in the household increases, however the amount of food waste per person decreased when there were more people in the household.
2.5.3 Hours worked per week
Wasserman and Schneider (2005) found that being employed full-‐time had a positive correlation with the amount of food waste. These people have less time to think about what food they already have at home and feel less obliged to plan what they will have for dinner. It could thus be argued that people who work more hours are more likely to get takeaway or get something that can be prepared quickly (Evans, 2012a). These foods are likely to replace the meal at home, resulting in the food at home to get wasted. It is thus assumed that the more hours the consumer works per week, the larger the amount of food waste of its household.
2.5.4 Cooking involvement
will waste less food since they will not throw away the excess food but will eat it at another point in time. It can thus be assumed that consumers' level of cooking involvement will affect the amount of food wasted by that consumer and it thus should be controlled for.
2.5.5 Frequency of eating in a restaurant and ordering takeaway, and using ready-‐meals
The frequency of eating in a restaurant or ordering takeaway is expected to have a positive effect on the amount of food waste per household. Evans (2012a) stated that consumers often replace the planned meal at home with eating out. This causes the meal at home to end up wasted. A negative effect is expected for using ready-‐meals. Based on the research by Evans (2012a) and the timesaving characteristics of ready-‐meals it is expected that consumers are less likely to replace these meals with things like takeaway. This will lead to less food waste per household.
