Citizens’ deliberation on solutions to fight urban household food waste and nexus with growing urban gardens: The case of porto metropolitan area in Portugal

IF 3.7 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Alexandra Ribeiro , Lívia Madureira , Raquel Carvalho
{"title":"Citizens’ deliberation on solutions to fight urban household food waste and nexus with growing urban gardens: The case of porto metropolitan area in Portugal","authors":"Alexandra Ribeiro ,&nbsp;Lívia Madureira ,&nbsp;Raquel Carvalho","doi":"10.1016/j.clrc.2024.100188","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Food waste is currently acknowledged as a major societal challenge, including the food waste at the household level estimated to be responsible for the wastage of one third of the food produced for human consumption. Hence, tackling household food waste (HFW) is gaining a momentum in societal and policy agendas accompanied by an increasing effort of the scientific community to deliver evidence to address the research gaps on the causes and on the solutions to address this multidimensional societal problem. The proposed solutions by published literature to mitigate HFW can be unfolded into four major types, actions to raise people awareness, participatory actions, economic incentives, and collective actions. However, there is little evidence on the household's assessment of the different types of actions and its combination. This paper contributes to this research gap by adopting an innovative participatory approach, using deliberative focus groups (DFG), and analyzing the collected data through content analysis resorting to the software Maxqda. We had conducted six DGF in the Porto metropolitan area before and during the pandemic COVID-19 crisis. Our results highlight the citizen's option for more holistic actions in comparison to separate actions as a way to effectively fight food waste at household level. Another finding of our study is that citizen's growing urban gardens found it the more effective way to reduce household food waste. These results suggest that urban policies and underlying legal frameworks should favor holistic solutions to incentivise fighting HFW and account for the urban gardens as a relevant part of the solution. In addition, the study has shown that qualitative deliberative citizen-led approaches show insightful to understand how common people perceive as alternative or complementary the different types of actions to fight HFW proposed by the literature review.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34617,"journal":{"name":"Cleaner and Responsible Consumption","volume":"13 ","pages":"Article 100188"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666784324000214/pdfft?md5=aaa490ae939e953a19d0b0684530df42&pid=1-s2.0-S2666784324000214-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cleaner and Responsible Consumption","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666784324000214","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Food waste is currently acknowledged as a major societal challenge, including the food waste at the household level estimated to be responsible for the wastage of one third of the food produced for human consumption. Hence, tackling household food waste (HFW) is gaining a momentum in societal and policy agendas accompanied by an increasing effort of the scientific community to deliver evidence to address the research gaps on the causes and on the solutions to address this multidimensional societal problem. The proposed solutions by published literature to mitigate HFW can be unfolded into four major types, actions to raise people awareness, participatory actions, economic incentives, and collective actions. However, there is little evidence on the household's assessment of the different types of actions and its combination. This paper contributes to this research gap by adopting an innovative participatory approach, using deliberative focus groups (DFG), and analyzing the collected data through content analysis resorting to the software Maxqda. We had conducted six DGF in the Porto metropolitan area before and during the pandemic COVID-19 crisis. Our results highlight the citizen's option for more holistic actions in comparison to separate actions as a way to effectively fight food waste at household level. Another finding of our study is that citizen's growing urban gardens found it the more effective way to reduce household food waste. These results suggest that urban policies and underlying legal frameworks should favor holistic solutions to incentivise fighting HFW and account for the urban gardens as a relevant part of the solution. In addition, the study has shown that qualitative deliberative citizen-led approaches show insightful to understand how common people perceive as alternative or complementary the different types of actions to fight HFW proposed by the literature review.

公民就解决城市家庭食物浪费问题的方案以及与城市菜园种植的关系进行讨论:葡萄牙波尔图大都市区案例
目前,食物浪费已被公认为一项重大的社会挑战,包括家庭层面的食物浪费,据估计,三分之一的供人类消费的食物是由家庭食物浪费造成的。因此,解决家庭食物浪费问题(HFW)在社会和政策议程中的地位日益提高,同时科学界也在不断努力提供证据,以填补在解决这一多层面社会问题的原因和解决方案方面的研究空白。已发表的文献中提出的缓解高频水问题的解决方案可分为四大类:提高人们认识的行动、参与性行动、经济激励措施和集体行动。然而,关于家庭对不同类型行动的评估及其组合的证据却很少。本文采用创新的参与式方法,利用商议式焦点小组(DFG),并借助 Maxqda 软件通过内容分析对收集到的数据进行分析,从而填补了这一研究空白。在 COVID-19 大流行危机之前和期间,我们在波尔图大都市区开展了六次 DGF。我们的研究结果表明,与单独行动相比,公民选择更全面的行动,作为在家庭层面有效打击食物浪费的一种方式。我们研究的另一项发现是,市民种植城市菜园是减少家庭食物浪费的更有效方式。这些结果表明,城市政策和基本法律框架应倾向于采取整体解决方案,激励人们反对高频食物浪费,并将城市花园作为解决方案的相关部分。此外,该研究还表明,以公民为主导的定性审议方法对于了解普通民众如何看待文献综述中提出的不同类型的消除高频食物浪费行动的替代性或互补性具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cleaner and Responsible Consumption
Cleaner and Responsible Consumption Social Sciences-Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
审稿时长
99 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信