How foodies support sustainable diets and food systems: A comparative study of motivations, practices and behaviors across four countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current global agrifood system is unsustainable, inequitable, unhealthy and not resilient to respond to climate change. The demand behaviour of consumers offers one avenue to help drive system change. While foodies – individuals with high interest and involvement in food - have a unique relationship with food and influence broader trends and innovation within the industry, the extent to which they are engaged in sustainability dietary practises is largely unexplored in the literature. The purpose of this study (Oct–Nov 2023) was to assess the level of engagement (LOE) of foodies and non-foodies for 15 sustainable dietary actions across behaviours representing social, economic, and environmental dimensions of sustainability. The study explored the knowledge, motivations, practices and behaviors of adult foodies versus non-foodies (n = 824) toward sustainable diets across four high-income countries of the Global North (Australia, Canada, England and the United States). Four assessment tools (12-item Foodie Index, 25-item Food Literacy Scale, 14-item Food Sustainability Concern Scale, 6-item New Ecological Paradigm Scale) were administered online to explore significant relationships with sustainable diets. Results show that LOE with sustainable dietary practices is positively associated with foodiness, food literacy, food sustainability concern, and NEP scores ( p ( r) < 0.05). Importantly, foodies have a higher LOE for each dietary behaviour than do non-foodies ( p ( F ) < 0.05). Similarly, foodies have higher food literacy and food sustainability concern, but not NEP scores ( H ). Together, these findings suggest that the greater food knowledge of foodies is leveraged into sustainable dietary action through heightened concern for food sustainability. We argue that foodies are both well-positioned and predisposed to act as agents of change in support of a more sustainable agri-food system, and that this can be promoted through targeted policy and education initiatives.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".