{"title":"Constructing cleaner food service production design: Quality measurement and priority paradoxes in Greater Jakarta, Indonesia","authors":"Tutur Wicaksono , Marhadi Marhadi , Glisina Dwinoor Rembulan , Md. Nekmahmud","doi":"10.1016/j.clcb.2025.100162","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The food service industry remains a major contributor to global food waste and food insecurity, a challenge that is increasingly unacceptable amid rising consumer awareness of environmental issues. This study proposes a cleaner production prioritization model using a modified Quality Function Deployment approach, supported by two structured surveys involving customers and industry practitioners. The findings reveal a significant perception gap. Customers assign the highest importance to good operational practices (CIMP = 4.29), employee training and awareness (CIMP = 4.26), and waste management (CIMP = 3.98), yet report low satisfaction in these areas. In contrast, practitioners prioritize good operational practices (IPI = 4.45), technology and equipment modification (IPI = 4.39), and employee training and awareness (IPI = 4.32), while rating waste management as least valuable for revenue growth (PRC = 1.0). To determine strategic focus, cleaner production attribute absolute scores (CPAS) were calculated and normalized into Cleaner Production Relative Scores (CPRS), identifying good operational practices (CPAS = 9.40, CPRS = 19.4 %), employee training and awareness (CPAS = 8.27, CPRS = 17.1 %), and technology and equipment modification (CPAS = 6.90, CPRS = 14.2 %) as top priorities. Integrated cleaner production training (TAA = 303, TAR = 12.5 %) and circular material utilization (TAA = 296, TAR = 12.2 %) were identified as the most impactful technical actions to address the identified gaps. These insights offer actionable guidance for aligning food service practices with customer expectations to enhance sustainability and competitive advantage.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100250,"journal":{"name":"Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy","volume":"12 ","pages":"Article 100162"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772801325000296","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The food service industry remains a major contributor to global food waste and food insecurity, a challenge that is increasingly unacceptable amid rising consumer awareness of environmental issues. This study proposes a cleaner production prioritization model using a modified Quality Function Deployment approach, supported by two structured surveys involving customers and industry practitioners. The findings reveal a significant perception gap. Customers assign the highest importance to good operational practices (CIMP = 4.29), employee training and awareness (CIMP = 4.26), and waste management (CIMP = 3.98), yet report low satisfaction in these areas. In contrast, practitioners prioritize good operational practices (IPI = 4.45), technology and equipment modification (IPI = 4.39), and employee training and awareness (IPI = 4.32), while rating waste management as least valuable for revenue growth (PRC = 1.0). To determine strategic focus, cleaner production attribute absolute scores (CPAS) were calculated and normalized into Cleaner Production Relative Scores (CPRS), identifying good operational practices (CPAS = 9.40, CPRS = 19.4 %), employee training and awareness (CPAS = 8.27, CPRS = 17.1 %), and technology and equipment modification (CPAS = 6.90, CPRS = 14.2 %) as top priorities. Integrated cleaner production training (TAA = 303, TAR = 12.5 %) and circular material utilization (TAA = 296, TAR = 12.2 %) were identified as the most impactful technical actions to address the identified gaps. These insights offer actionable guidance for aligning food service practices with customer expectations to enhance sustainability and competitive advantage.