Sustainable diet perceptions among Canadian young adults: a qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Canadian diets are unsustainable, and perceptions of sustainable diets among Canadians are not well-understood. The purpose of this study was therefore to explore perceptions of sustainable diets among Canadians. Design/methodology/approach The study sample comprised 30 Canadians aged 18–35 years (33% male; 3% gender diverse, 27% rural and 27% who did not attend university) who were recruited using online advertisements, posters, snowball sampling and word-of-mouth. Semi-structured online interview transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. Findings The study themes included: understanding of sustainable diets, sustainable diet behaviours, willingness to change, barriers to sustainable diets and strategies to support sustainable diets. Participants associated sustainable diets with health and nutrition, environmental protection, ethics and economics. The mean willingness to change eating habits to be more sustainable was 8.2 (1 = not at all willing; 10 = very willing). Barriers included a lack of food affordability, accessibility and availability, low food literacy, food systems distrust, food-related values, beliefs and norms, and dietary preferences and restrictions. Strategies to support sustainable diets included intrapersonal approaches related to improving food literacy, interpersonal factors such as shifting norms, community-based and institutional approaches to increase food accessibility and government actions such as subsidies for producers and consumers. Originality/value This study builds upon previous research by exploring perceptions of sustainable diets among a diverse sample of Canadians using in-depth interviews. Findings can inform public health messaging, behaviour change interventions and policy approaches to support the adoption of sustainable diets.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".