Determining Food Choice Motivations in Turkish Adults: Sustainable and Healthy Eating Behavior, Ecological Footprint Awareness, and Food Insecurity Perspective

Overview

Journal BMC Public Health

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Public Health

Date 2024 Dec 20

PMID 39707303

Authors

Serap Incedal Irgat

Hande Bakirhan

Yunus Emre Bakirhan

Zehra Incedal Sonkaya

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Revealing motivations in food choice and investigating the potential role of sustainable healthy eating behavior, ecological footprint awareness and food security in food choice are important points for a sustainable life. This study was conducted with 5285 adults aged 19-65 residing in Turkey to investigate their food choice motivations in terms of sustainable and healthy eating behavior, ecological footprint awareness, and the food insecurity perspective.

Methods: In this context, the Food Choice Questionnaire, the Sustainable and Healthy Eating Behaviors Scale, the Awareness Scale for Reducing Ecological Footprint and the Household Food Insecurity Access Scale were used. Pearson correlation analysis was used to examine relationships between scales. The effects of sustainable and healthy eating behaviors, ecological footprint awareness, and household food insecurity on food choice motivations were examined via path analysis.

Results: A moderate positive (r = 0.47, p < 0.05) relationship was found between the participants' awareness levels of sustainable and healthy eating behaviors and reducing the ecological footprint. A weak negative (r=-0.22, p < 0.05) relationship was found between their awareness levels of ecological footprint reduction and household food insecurity, and a weak negative (r=-0.16, p < 0.05) relationship was found between sustainable and healthy eating behaviors and household food insecurity. The explanatory power of ecological footprint awareness, sustainable and healthy eating behaviors, and household food insecurity for food choices was 27.2%. It was observed that ecological footprint awareness (β = 0.21, p < 0.05) and sustainable and healthy eating behaviors (β = 0.38, p < 0.05) significantly and positively affected food choices.

Conclusions: The variables influencing food choices the most were sustainable and healthy eating behavior, ecological footprint awareness, and household food insecurity. Although there are various data in the literature on the multiple factors that determine food choices, a consensus on the effectiveness of these factors has yet to be reached. A comprehensive examination of this issue, including all the components, is needed.

References

Balan I, Gherman E, Gherman R, Brad I, Pascalau R, Popescu G . Sustainable Nutrition for Increased Food Security Related to Romanian Consumers' Behavior. Nutrients. 2022; 14(22). PMC: 9697819. DOI: 10.3390/nu14224892. View

Martinho V, Bartkiene E, Djekic I, Tarcea M, Colic Baric I, cernelic-Bizjak M . Determinants of economic motivations for food choice: insights for the understanding of consumer behaviour. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2021; 73(1):127-139. DOI: 10.1080/09637486.2021.1939659. View

Monterrosa E, Frongillo E, Drewnowski A, de Pee S, Vandevijvere S . Sociocultural Influences on Food Choices and Implications for Sustainable Healthy Diets. Food Nutr Bull. 2020; 41(2_suppl):59S-73S. DOI: 10.1177/0379572120975874. View

Rangel A . Regulation of dietary choice by the decision-making circuitry. Nat Neurosci. 2013; 16(12):1717-24. PMC: 4053793. DOI: 10.1038/nn.3561. View

Stok F, Hoffmann S, Volkert D, Boeing H, Ensenauer R, Stelmach-Mardas M . The DONE framework: Creation, evaluation, and updating of an interdisciplinary, dynamic framework 2.0 of determinants of nutrition and eating. PLoS One. 2017; 12(2):e0171077. PMC: 5289713. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0171077. View

Roudsari A, Vedadhir A, Pourmoradian S, Rahimi-Ardabili H, Shokouhi M, Milani-Bonab A . Correction: Exploring adults' motives for food choice of sustainable diet components: a qualitative study in Tehran Metropolis. BMC Nutr. 2023; 9(1):137. PMC: 10680235. DOI: 10.1186/s40795-023-00790-1. View

Wollmar M, Post A, Sjoberg A . Food choice, activity level, and carbon footprint: exploring potential for sustainable food consumption practices in young adults. Front Nutr. 2024; 11:1449054. PMC: 11370661. DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2024.1449054. View

Lohmann P, Gsottbauer E, Farrington J, Human S, Reisch L . Choice architecture promotes sustainable choices in online food-delivery apps. PNAS Nexus. 2024; 3(10):pgae422. PMC: 11450623. DOI: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae422. View

Naja F, Jomaa L, Itani L, Zidek J, El Labban S, Sibai A . Environmental footprints of food consumption and dietary patterns among Lebanese adults: a cross-sectional study. Nutr J. 2018; 17(1):85. PMC: 6136176. DOI: 10.1186/s12937-018-0393-3. View

10.

Schruff-Lim E, Van Loo E, van der Lans I, van Trijp H . Impact of food swap recommendations on dietary choices in an online supermarket: A randomized controlled trial. Appetite. 2023; 194:107158. DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2023.107158. View

11.

Guillaumie L, Boiral O, Baghdadli A, Mercille G . Integrating sustainable nutrition into health-related institutions: a systematic review of the literature. Can J Public Health. 2020; 111(6):845-861. PMC: 7728986. DOI: 10.17269/s41997-020-00394-3. View

12.

Rampalli K, Blake C, Frongillo E, Montoya J . Why understanding food choice is crucial to transform food systems for human and planetary health. BMJ Glob Health. 2023; 8(5). PMC: 10163507. DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2022-010876. View

13.

Hartmann C, Lazzarini G, Funk A, Siegrist M . Measuring consumers' knowledge of the environmental impact of foods. Appetite. 2021; 167:105622. DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2021.105622. View

14.

Kocaadam-Bozkurt B, Bozkurt O . Relationship between adherence to the Mediterranean diet, sustainable and healthy eating behaviors, and awareness of reducing the ecological footprint. Int J Environ Health Res. 2023; 33(4):430-440. DOI: 10.1080/09603123.2023.2172384. View

15.

Lombe M, Nebbitt V, Sinha A, Reynolds A . Examining effects of food insecurity and food choices on health outcomes in households in poverty. Soc Work Health Care. 2016; 55(6):440-60. DOI: 10.1080/00981389.2015.1133469. View

16.

Jansen L, van Kleef E, Van Loo E . The use of food swaps to encourage healthier online food choices: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2021; 18(1):156. PMC: 8642761. DOI: 10.1186/s12966-021-01222-8. View

17.

Mazzocchi A, De Cosmi V, Scaglioni S, Agostoni C . Towards a More Sustainable Nutrition: Complementary Feeding and Early Taste Experiences as a Basis for Future Food Choices. Nutrients. 2021; 13(8). PMC: 8398974. DOI: 10.3390/nu13082695. View

18.

Koksal E, Bilici S, Citar Daziroglu M, Govez N . Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Version of the Sustainable and Healthy Eating Behaviors Scale. Br J Nutr. 2022; :1-20. DOI: 10.1017/S0007114522002525. View

19.

Springmann M, Clark M, Mason-DCroz D, Wiebe K, Bodirsky B, Lassaletta L . Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits. Nature. 2018; 562(7728):519-525. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-018-0594-0. View

20.

Steptoe A, Pollard T, Wardle J . Development of a measure of the motives underlying the selection of food: the food choice questionnaire. Appetite. 1995; 25(3):267-84. DOI: 10.1006/appe.1995.0061. View