IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i21p11928-d667082.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Perceived Importance and Intended Purchasing Patterns of Sustainable Foods in Australian University Students

Author

Listed:
  • Katherine Kent

    (School of Health Sciences, Western Sydney University, Campbelltown, NSW 2560, Australia
    School of Health Sciences, University of Tasmania, Launceston, TAS 7250, Australia)

  • Denis Visentin

    (School of Health Sciences, University of Tasmania, Launceston, TAS 7250, Australia)

  • Corey Peterson

    (Infrastructure Services and Development, University of Tasmania, Launceston, TAS 7250, Australia)

  • Carmen Primo

    (Infrastructure Services and Development, University of Tasmania, Launceston, TAS 7250, Australia)

  • Catherine Elliott

    (Infrastructure Services and Development, University of Tasmania, Launceston, TAS 7250, Australia)

  • Margaret Otlowski

    (School of Law, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7005, Australia)

  • Sandra Murray

    (School of Health Sciences, University of Tasmania, Launceston, TAS 7250, Australia)

Abstract

Although there has been considerable research on consumers’ opinions about sustainable foods and purchasing behaviors, the experience of university students remains unclear. This study aims to characterize university students’ perceptions of the importance of sustainable foods and determine the relationship between perceptions and the frequency of purchasing sustainable foods. In a non-random sample of university students, a cross-sectional, online survey determined students’ perceptions of the importance of locally grown food and sustainable foods, and the self-reported frequency of purchasing sustainable foods. Multivariate binary logistic regression was conducted. Survey respondents ( n = 1858; 71% female; 80% domestic enrolled; 43% aged 18–24 y; 38% food insecure) perceived locally grown food (77%) and sustainable food (84%) as important, and 68% reported buying sustainable foods frequently. Students who purchased sustainable foods frequently were more likely to be female, older and food insecure, and also were significantly more likely to perceive sustainable foods as important (OR: 7.317; 95%-CI: 5.538–9.667; SE: 0.142; p < 0.001). Our results demonstrate that university students perceive sustainable foods as important and a relationship between perceptions and actions for purchasing sustainable foods is evident. Our results should inform the development of strategies within universities aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, including improving access to locally grown and sustainable foods on campus to reflect student preferences, particularly for food insecure students.

Suggested Citation

  • Katherine Kent & Denis Visentin & Corey Peterson & Carmen Primo & Catherine Elliott & Margaret Otlowski & Sandra Murray, 2021. "The Perceived Importance and Intended Purchasing Patterns of Sustainable Foods in Australian University Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-17, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:21:p:11928-:d:667082
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/21/11928/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/21/11928/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sarah Burkhart & Michele Verdonck & Theresa Ashford & Judith Maher, 2020. "Sustainability: Nutrition and Dietetic Students’ Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-9, February.
    2. Meise, Jan Niklas & Rudolph, Thomas & Kenning, Peter & Phillips, Diane M., 2014. "Feed them facts: Value perceptions and consumer use of sustainability-related product information," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 510-519.
    3. Irene C. Kamenidou & Spyridon A. Mamalis & Stavros Pavlidis & Evangelia-Zoi G. Bara, 2019. "Segmenting the Generation Z Cohort University Students Based on Sustainable Food Consumption Behavior: A Preliminary Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-22, February.
    4. Cristina Bianca Pocol & Valentina Marinescu & Antonio Amuza & Roxana-Larisa Cadar & Anda Anca Rodideal, 2020. "Sustainable vs. Unsustainable Food Consumption Behaviour: A Study among Students from Romania, Bulgaria and Moldova," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-21, June.
    5. Hung Vu Nguyen & Cuong Hung Nguyen & Thoa Thi Bao Hoang, 2019. "Green consumption: Closing the intention‐behavior gap," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(1), pages 118-129, January.
    6. United Nations UN, 2015. "Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development," Working Papers id:7559, eSocialSciences.
    7. Nikolett Nemeth & Ildiko Rudnak & Prespa Ymeri & Csaba Fogarassy, 2019. "The Role of Cultural Factors in Sustainable Food Consumption—An Investigation of the Consumption Habits among International Students in Hungary," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-27, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tatjana Mamula Nikolić & Ivan Paunović & Mirjana Milovanović & Nenad Lozović & Marija Đurović, 2022. "Examining Generation Z’s Attitudes, Behavior and Awareness Regarding Eco-Products: A Bayesian Approach to Confirmatory Factor Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-16, February.
    2. Liu, Chih-Hsing & Horng, Jeou-Shyan & Chou, Sheng-Fang & Yu, Tai-Yi & Lee, Ming-Tsung & Lapuz, Maria Carmen B., 2023. "Discovery sustainable servicescape on behavioural intention practices and nationality: The moderating role of parasocial interaction," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    3. Chorong Youn & Hye Jung Jung, 2021. "Semantic Network Analysis to Explore the Concept of Sustainability in the Apparel and Textile Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-17, March.
    4. Irene Blanco-Gutiérrez & Consuelo Varela-Ortega & Rhys Manners, 2020. "Evaluating Animal-Based Foods and Plant-Based Alternatives Using Multi-Criteria and SWOT Analyses," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-26, October.
    5. Paulina Schiappacasse & Bernhard Müller & Le Thuy Linh, 2019. "Towards Responsible Aggregate Mining in Vietnam," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-15, August.
    6. Pina Puntillo, 2023. "Circular economy business models: Towards achieving sustainable development goals in the waste management sector—Empirical evidence and theoretical implications," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(2), pages 941-954, March.
    7. R. Ebrahimi & S. Choobchian & H. Farhadian & I. Goli & E. Farmandeh & H. Azadi, 2022. "Investigating the effect of vocational education and training on rural women’s empowerment," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-11, December.
    8. Bárbara Galleli & Elder Semprebon & Joyce Aparecida Ramos dos Santos & Noah Emanuel Brito Teles & Mateus Santos de Freitas-Martins & Raquel Teodoro da Silva Onevetch, 2021. "Institutional Pressures, Sustainable Development Goals and COVID-19: How Are Organisations Engaging?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, November.
    9. Sagarika Dey & Priyanka Devi, 2019. "Impact of TVET on Labour Market Outcomes and Women’s Empowerment in Rural Areas: A Case Study from Cachar District, Assam," Indian Journal of Human Development, , vol. 13(3), pages 357-371, December.
    10. Maria Sassi, 2020. "A SEM Approach to the Direct and Indirect Links between WaSH Services and Access to Food in Countries in Protracted Crises: The Case of Western Bahr-el-Ghazal State, South Sudan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-13, November.
    11. Olga Stepanova & Magdalena Romanov, 2021. "Urban Planning as a Strategy to Implement Social Sustainability Policy Goals? The Case of Temporary Housing for Immigrants in Gothenburg, Sweden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, February.
    12. Michel, Hanno, 2020. "From local to global: The role of knowledge, transfer, and capacity building for successful energy transitions," Discussion Papers, Research Group Digital Mobility and Social Differentiation SP III 2020-603, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    13. Hervé Corvellec & Johan Hultman & Anne Jerneck & Susanne Arvidsson & Johan Ekroos & Niklas Wahlberg & Timothy W. Luke, 2021. "Resourcification: A non‐essentialist theory of resources for sustainable development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(6), pages 1249-1256, November.
    14. Wilson Charles Wilson & Maja Slingerland & Frederick P. Baijukya & Hannah Zanten & Simon Oosting & Ken E. Giller, 2021. "Integrating the soybean-maize-chicken value chains to attain nutritious diets in Tanzania," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 13(6), pages 1595-1612, December.
    15. Jones, Lindsey & d'Errico, Marco, 2019. "Whose resilience matters? Like-for-like comparison of objective and subjective evaluations of resilience," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-1.
    16. Bin Xue & Bingsheng Liu & Tao Liang & Dong Zhao & Tao Wang & Xingbin Chen, 2022. "A heterogeneous decision criteria system evaluating sustainable infrastructure development: From the lens of multidisciplinary stakeholder engagement," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(4), pages 556-579, August.
    17. Sudheesh Ramapurath Chemmencheri, 2016. "Social Protection as a Human Right in South Asia," Indian Journal of Human Development, , vol. 10(2), pages 236-252, August.
    18. Ingrid Boas & Frank Biermann & Norichika Kanie, 2016. "Cross-sectoral strategies in global sustainability governance: towards a nexus approach," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 449-464, June.
    19. Agnieszka Gruszecka-Kosowska & Katarzyna Mazur-Włodarczyk & Agata Wódkowska, 2023. "Native vs. Unique Fruit Popularity: Exploring the Sustainable Fruit Consumption in Poland—Research Report," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-23, July.
    20. Joyeeta Gupta & Louis Lebel, 0. "Access and allocation in earth system governance: lessons learnt in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-18.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:21:p:11928-:d:667082. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.