University Students’ Perceptions of Food Waste in the UAE

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between food waste and gender, income, and where students live. The research aligns with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals 2, 11, and 12; moreover, the massive global food shortage in 2022 due to the conflict between Russia and Ukraine makes saving food a priority. A questionnaire was used to collect data from 201 students at the United Arab Emirates University (UAEU). A large proportion of the respondents were female (71.6%). The most common reasons cited by the respondents for food waste were over purchasing (31% of respondents), attitude (26.5%), and poor management (24%), while the most common reasons for having extra-cooked food were expecting guests (46%) and wanting to eat the food that had been prepared (35%). The majority of the respondents (57%) agreed that young people waste more food than older people. The methodology used in this study could be adopted by other researchers around the globe, and the output may help in developing policies and designing educational material for food waste intervention programs. Beneficiaries may therefore include food producers/consumers, environmental departments, and charitable organizations. The research contributes to the knowledge about food waste, perception, and intervention programs.

1. Introduction

Food waste is a global problem that impacts food security, water, land, energy, labor, economy, climate, and environment [1,2]. Substantial efforts to reduce food waste have been made by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) [3], the World Food Program [4], and the United Nations Environmental Programme [5], as well as in the UN 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs) [6]. Individual citizens, including young people (those aged 15–24) can play a vital role in conserving food [7] and directing its surplus to achieve “zero hunger.” This research aligns with SDG 2 (zero hunger), SDG11 (sustainable cities and communities), and SDG 12 (responsible consumption and production).

The term Food Loss and Waste (FLW) is commonly used in literature. Food loss (FL) refers to a decrease in mass (dry matter) or nutritional value (quality) of food that was originally intended for human consumption [8]. These losses are mainly caused by inefficiencies in the food supply chains, such as poor infrastructure and logistics; lack of technology; and insufficient skills, knowledge, and management [8]. Only food that is still edible at the time of disposal is considered as waste. Food Waste (FW) is a subset of food loss and occurs when an edible item goes unconsumed [9].

The FAO has estimated that around one-third of food produced globally for human consumption is lost or wasted. This is equivalent to about 1.3 billion tons per year [3,10]. In the developed world, more than 50% of food waste takes place in homes, with less than 2% taking place at the retail store level. In addition to economic loss, food waste increases organic waste and carbon and methane emissions, with consequent impacts on the environment and global warming [11]. Wasted food accounts for 25% of all fresh water consumption globally and generates methane, which is 23 times stronger than carbon dioxide [12]. Wasted food is a precious commodity: it represents a central goal that different people gather around, and it creates economic activity in the overlap of market economy, social security, and self-sufficiency [13].

Reasons for food waste depend on country-specific factors [3]. They include over purchasing, expiring “best-before dates,” production exceeding demand, consumer attitudes, and poor management of food in households [3,7]. As well as at the consumption stage, food is wasted at the production, packaging, transportation, and retail stages [14,15,16,17,18,19]. This study considers the consumption stage, focusing on food that is thrown away despite being suitable for human consumption [3,10,20,21,22].

In the UAE, the annual value of food waste is estimated to be around USD 4 billion (14.69 billion dirhams) [23]. Statistics from the UAE show that close to 40% of the daily domestic waste produced by residents consists of discarded food [24]. This amounts to approximately 224 kg of food waste each year, more than twice that in Europe and the United States of America [25,26]. Households are considered the largest food waste generation sector, and the most common foods wasted are fruit and vegetables. Many initiatives have been taken to deal with food waste, including the Food Loss and Waste Accounting and Reporting Standard, public awareness-raising, social media, food banks, and biofuel conversion (fertilizers) [27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34]. Computer applications have been developed to facilitate the distribution and saving of unused food [35,36]. The initiatives for food saving will not succeed unless there is support from the public and the youth, especially the university students (leaders of tomorrow), which represents an important segment. Therefore, understanding their perception is crucial in designing future programs for food saving.

Many factors are associated with the food waste habits of young people and university students, including age, gender, perception, place of residence, and socioeconomic factors. Some studies indicated that females waste food more than males [37,38,39]. However, another study stated that females are more likely to reduce food waste than males [40,41]. Several studies stated that income and age are two of the main factors that affect food waste and have been highly discussed in the literature. Many studies revealed that young people tend to waste food more than elders [42,43,44]. Additionally, various studies reported that higher-income households waste more than lower-income households [37,45,46,47]. A study conducted by Stancu et al. [48] stated that the lower the income, the higher the knowledge and level of concern about food waste-related issues. Similarly, Selahudin et al. [49] found that youth with lower income have a greater awareness of food waste consequences and awareness of economic impact compared to those with higher income.

A study conducted at the University of Illinois showed that young people aged 18–24 tend to waste more food compared to people in different age groups [7]. The study also showed differences in participants’ behavior according to whether they lived on or off campus. A similar study by Radzyminska et al. [50] found that even though Polish university students were aware of the negative environmental impacts of food waste, this did not affect their behavior. Moreover, a study by Lazell [51] showed that the students’ attempts to decrease wasting food in universities in the United Kingdom were unsuccessful due to the “on-the-go” culture on campuses.

In another study conducted at Roma Tre University in Italy, 230 students (61% of them male) participated in filling out a questionnaire [52]. Many students (71.7%) agreed that wasting food negatively affects the environment. Also, most students (84.6%) agreed that wasting food causes economic loss. Furthermore, many of the students (86.7%) think that the food loss and waste phenomenon is a massive problem, and it is widespread.

A study by Singh et al. [53] indicated that students tend to increase wasting food when they are more relaxed and at leisure since they spend more time in the dining hall. For instance, the study found that in the week just before Thanksgiving, students’ food waste increased because of the relaxed and comfortable status of mind of the students. Another study found that personal values like hedonism and self-direction among young people has a significant impact on food waste habits and behavior [54].

Several recent studies analyzed the behavior and the awareness level of young people and university students toward the issue of food waste during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study of students at Romanian universities revealed that the impact of the pandemic has led to increased awareness among young people about the issue of food waste, and increased awareness of the environmental and economic consequences of food waste [55]. Therefore, more students exhibit food waste reduction behavior and adapt their food shopping to reduce food waste. The results show that a crisis is a moment in which positive attitudes and behaviors are reinforced [55]. Likewise, another study found that during the pandemic students in Indonesia and Japan became more aware of the food waste that occurred [56]. With the lockdown and the spread of COVID-19 disease, many young people did not eat out and decided to cook at home. They indirectly trained their cooking skills. They became more aware not to leave food, especially with the pandemic situation it was very difficult to find food ingredients. Additionally, this triggered them not to buy immediately, but to make a shopping list both in terms of quantity and quality and check the expiration date so that the percentage of food waste will be reduced [56].

To date, most studies related to food waste have been conducted outside the UAE. However, individual values and perceptions of the food system vary from country to country [7], and this study therefore addresses a gap in the literature in relation to food waste in the UAE. Previous studies found that young adults wasted more food than other age groups [7,51,57]. Therefore, this study focuses on young people in UAE especially students at UAE University. The objective is to understand young people’s perceptions of food waste so that behavior change interventions programs can be designed that will be effective in reducing food waste and creating a world where resources are sourced and used sustainably [58]. Three factors (independent variables) and four hypotheses were used to assess perceptions of food waste. The variables include gender, place of residence, and income, and the hypotheses are:

Hypothesis 1.

Females have more knowledge about food.

Hypothesis 2.

UAE university students have a perception that rich families waste more food.

Hypothesis 3.

Young people tend to waste more food than elders.

Hypothesis 4.

People care about food because of its economic value rather than environmental concern.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Survey Description

A questionnaire was used to collect data about students’ perceptions of food waste (Appendix A). The samples were collected at the UAE University (UAEU). The questionnaire consisted of four main sections: knowledge; perception about food waste; factors that influence food waste behavior; and suggested interventions to reduce food waste.

The knowledge section included items on the water footprint of various food products [59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66], the types of meat consumed in the UAE [67], whether young people waste more food, the most common reasons for food waste, and the most common reasons for having extra cooked food.

The perception section included questions related to the most common reason for food waste, whether young people waste more food, and whether cooking more food than needed at home reflects a family’s wealth (Appendix A).

The behavior section focused on what the respondents do, in line with social practice theory, which places emphasis on the practice rather than on the individuals [68,69,70]. Items in this section focused on which meals respondents thought would generate more unused cooked food, the most common reasons for having extra cooked food, how to deal with extra cooked food, the most common food that is not used, and the percentage of food thrown away weekly.

The interventions section included questions on the best method to reduce food waste, day respondents have the highest amounts of food waste, the most common foods that are not utilized, the strongest reason for caring about food, and preferences for methods of distributing extra food (Appendix A).

The sample size was calculated using Equation (1), which gives the minimum number of survey forms required for a given confidence level with a normal distribution response from a large population [71]:

$$N=\frac{z^2{s}^2}{e^2}$$

(1)

where N is the minimum sample size, z is the z-value of a given confidence level (1.65 for a 90% confidence level), s is the coefficient of variation (assumed here as 0.5), and e is the tolerance level (assumed as here 10%). In this case, the minimum sample size was determined to be 68 [49]. A total of 201 students at UAEU completed the questionnaire. The sample size used in this study is 201 students from around 14,000 student population. The sample size is considered reasonable for exploratory study. A study conducted by [52] investigating the behavior of Italian youths on reducing food waste used a sample of 233 students from around total 35,000 students. The university was selected because universities are home to one of the more wasteful segments of consumers—young adults [58].

In an initial pretesting stage, the questionnaire was administered to four colleagues, two from the College of Humanities and Social Sciences and two from the College of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine, to provide feedback. A pilot survey was also distributed to 20 students to check whether the questionnaire fulfilled the purpose of the study in terms of the appropriateness, coverage, and clarity of the questions; the identification of errors and bias; response patterns; and feedback from respondents. During the pilot study, the questionnaire was checked on different devices and browsers to confirm that it displayed correctly, and the number of questions and the time needed to complete the questionnaire were discussed with the respondents. The results of the pilot survey were used to revise and improve the questionnaire by adding, deleting, and modifying questions.

Ethical approval for the questionnaire was obtained from the Research Office at UAEU, and the survey was conducted during February 2022. Participants were informed that the content of the questionnaire would be used for research purposes only, that their participation would remain confidential, and that they could withdraw from the study at any time. The online tool Google Forms (https://www.google.com/intl/en-GB/forms/about/, accessed on 5 February 2022) was used to distribute the questionnaire. Links to the questionnaire were circulated to students via email, with reminders issued until the target sample was reached.

2.2. Statistical Analysis

The responses were coded and imported into the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software for statistical analysis (SPSS version 28.0.0, IBM, Chicago, IL, USA). Pearson chi-square, symmetric measures (Cramer’s V), Levene’s test for equality of variances, the student t-test, and analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used to analyze the correlations of responses with gender, income, and place of residence (independent variables). The Pearson chi-square test determines whether there is an association between categorical variables and evaluates how likely it is that any observed difference arose by chance. Cramer’s V measures the strength of an association between two nominal variables in terms of a value between 0 and 1. Levene’s test for equality of variances determines whether the variances of two samples or groups are approximately equal or homogeneous. The student t-test indicates whether there is a significant difference between two group means and whether any such difference could be due to chance. ANOVA is used for three or more groups of data to gain information about the relationship between dependent and independent variables [72].

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Demographic Analysis

A total of 201 students from UAEU participated in the survey, a large proportion of them females (71.6%). This was as expected, because female students represent 78% of the entire student population (14,387 students) [73]. The majority (65.2%) of the respondents live in the family home, and a large proportion (89.1%) come from high- or medium-income families with income above 10,000 Arab Emirates Dirhams per month.

3.2. Knowledge about Food Waste

The questionnaire included four items that focused on the links between food production, water footprint, and consumption of meat in the UAE (Appendix A). In the survey responses, 57% of both females and males wrongly rated the production of vegetables as consuming more water (i.e., having a larger water footprint) than the production of fruit and nuts. There were no associations between perceptions of food that consumes more water in production (chicken, red meat, or seafood) and gender, place of residence, or income (

Table 1. Analysis of responses: chicken, red meat, and seafood.

Variable	Chi-Square	Cramer’s V
Gender	0.318 (df = 2)	0.107
Place of residence	0.753 (df = 2)	0.053
Income	0.657 (df = 4)	0.078

Note. df = degree of freedom.

). However, there was a significant moderate association (Cramer’s V = 0.212) between responses for which food consumes more water in production (fruit, nuts, or vegetables) and place of residence, which indicates that the responses depended on where students live. However, there were no associations with gender or income (

Table 2. Analysis of responses: fruit, nuts, and vegetables.

Variable	Chi-Square	Cramer’s V
Gender	0.854 (df = 2)	0.040
Place of residence	0.011 (df = 2)	0.212
Income	0.639 (df = 4)	0.079

Note. df = degree of freedom.

). Overall, the responses indicated a lack of knowledge about the links between food and water consumption. Therefore, an appropriate intervention program would introduce materials, perhaps in the form of competitions and courses, that demonstrate the connections (visible and invisible) between food production and water consumption. Barr [40] found that individuals with a good knowledge of the problems linked to food waste are more likely to avoid wasting food.

The majority of the respondents believed that people in the UAE consume more poultry (39%) and red meat (37%) than seafood (24%). Relatively high prices for seafood could be a factor in this, as well as health considerations that favor chicken over red meat; nevertheless, the taste and nutrition value of red meat (notably, lamb) may make it attractive to a large proportion of the population. The responses to these items are in line with a study conducted by the UAE Ministry of Foreign Trade, which showed that per-capita meat consumption in the UAE was 85.14 kg, 18 times greater than the world average [67]. High per-capita income may be a factor in this high level of meat consumption.

Respondents were asked to identify at which stage a large proportion of food is likely to be wasted (production, packaging, transportation, retail, or consumption). A considerable number of respondents (38%), both female and male, pointed out that a large proportion of food is indeed wasted at consumption stage (Figure 1). The result is in line with previous studies done by Gustavsson et al. and Kosseva & Webb [74,75]. There was no evidence of an association between responses to this question and gender, as the chi-square value was greater than the critical value and insignificant at α = 0.05 (p value = 0.232) (

Table 3. Item responses: stage at which food is likely to be wasted.

Gender	Production	Packaging	Transportation	Retail	Consumption	Total
Male	10	9	6	9	23	57
Female	40	16	23	12	53	144
Total	50	25	29	21	76	201

and

Table 4. Analysis of responses: stage at which food is likely to be wasted.

Variable	Chi-Square	Cramer’s V
Gender	0.232 (df = 4)	0.167
Place of residence	0.070 (df = 4)	0.208
Income	0.424 (df = 8)	0.142

Note. df = degree of freedom.

); the Cramer’s V value was also low (0.167) (Table 4). The hypothesis that females have more knowledge about food is therefore rejected (Figure 1). Weak associations were found between responses to this item and place of residence and income (Table 4).

3.3. Perceptions of Food Waste

Respondents were asked about the reasons for food waste. The reasons most commonly given were over purchasing (31%), attitude (26.5%), poor management (24%), and expiry dates (18.5%). Intervention programs could therefore encourage people to prepare a list of required items before they go shopping and teach them how to do so effectively. Stefan et al. [76] proved that the planning of shopping (making a shopping list) and shopping routines are important elements for avoiding food waste. The chi-square and Cramer’s V values showed no association of the responses with gender, place of residence, or income (

Table 5. Analysis of responses: most common reason for food waste.

Variable	Chi-Square	Cramer’s V
Gender	0.170 (df = 3)	0.158
Place of residence	0.964 (df = 3)	0.037
Income	0.325 (df = 6)	0.131

Note. df = degree of freedom.

).

Respondents were asked to rank their agreement with the statement “Young people waste more food.” A majority of them (57%) agreed with the statement, approximately a third (35%) were neutral, and the rest disagreed. This result is in line with a previous study conducted at the University of Illinois, which found that young adults (aged 18–24) wasted more food than other age groups [7]. This finding indicates that food conservation campaigns should do more to target schools and universities. Levene’s test for equality of variances showed equal variances and no significant difference between the means based on gender (

Table 6. Analysis of responses: Young people waste more food.

Gender	N	Mean	Std Deviation	Std Error Mean
Male	57	3.84	0.978	0.130
Female	144	3.67	0.982	0.082

). Because the p value (0.255) is greater than the chosen significance level (α = 0.05), we conclude that there is no association between gender and responses to this item (

Table 7. Levene’s test for equality of variance based on gender.

Assumption	F	Sig.	t	df	Significance		Mean Difference	Std Error Difference
					One-Sided p	Two-Sided p
Equal Variances Assumed	0.332	0.565	1.143	199	0.127	0.255	0.175	0.154
Equal variances not assumed			1.145	103.201	0.127	0.255	0.175	0.153

).

The majority (59%) of the respondents reported a perception that people would not buy unsold and discounted food. This perception could be attributed to the feeling that unsold food may be of low quality. However, experience in the UAE indicates that this is not always the case; for example, the fact that some hotels have high-quality unsold food led to the development of applications that promote distribution of unused food at discounted prices, including FoodKarma [36]. The Bon application also provides real-time information to its users on what food is available, with discounts ranging from 30% to 50% [35]. Because most applications are in English, food waste policies and intervention programs should promote the development of applications that include languages such as Arabic and Urdu.

No significant differences for willingness to buy unsold and discounted food were found in terms of gender, place of residence, and income (

Table 8. Item responses: willingness to buy unsold and discounted food.

Gender	N	Mean	Std Deviation	Std Error Mean
Male	57	3.56	1.102	0.146
Female	144	3.35	0.993	0.083
Place of residence
In campus	70	3.51	0.974	0.116
Off campus	131	3.36	1.053	0.092
Income
Low	22	3.36	1.329	0.283
Medium	91	3.37	0.839	0.088
High	88	3.47	1.124	0.120
Total	201

). Values of Levene’s test were insignificant for gender (significance = 0.272, two-sided significance p value = 0.198) and for place of residence (significance = 0.695, two-sided significance p value = 0.307) (p value > 0.05). Tests of homogeneity of variances based on mean (Levene statistic = 6.941) showed a significant difference based on income (significance = 0.001 < 0.05), but still no significant difference in perception between the groups according to income (significance = 0.726 > 0.05).

Respondents were asked whether cooking more food than needed in the home reflects how wealthy the family is. A significant moderate association (Cramer’s V = 0.232) was found between responses to this item and income, indicating that the responses depended on the respondents’ wealth. However, there was no association with gender or place of residence.

Responses to the item about whether people care about food more when they buy it with their own money (students who live on campus receive food that is free at the point of consumption) showed a significant moderate association (Cramer’s V = 0.218) with gender, indicating that the responses depended on whether the respondent was male or female. However, there was no association with place of residence or income.

3.4. Behavior

In terms of participation in purchasing food for their families’ needs, the majority of respondents reported that they did so sometimes (53.7%), with the remainder doing so always (26.9%), rarely (16.9%), or never (2.5%). It is clear that the participation of young people in purchasing food for their families’ needs is low, overall (26.9%). This was lower than expected, given the large proportion of female respondents (71.6%). According to a Pew Research Center analysis, 71% of mothers say that they primarily handle both meal preparation and grocery shopping, compared to approximately 20% of fathers [77]. Greater participation of young people in purchasing food for their families’ needs is very important, as it would expose them to the issues involved in management of food items. There was no significant association between gender, place of residence, or income, and level of participation in purchasing food (p value > 0.05, Cramer’s V < 0.2).

The most common reasons for having extra-cooked food were expecting guests (46% of respondents) and wanting to eat the food that had been prepared (35%) (Figure 2). In a study conducted by Principato et al. [52] for investigating the behavior of Italian youths, 81.8% agreed that “a large part of food waste is due to cooking a greater quantity of food than one’s actual needs”. The results from this study indicate that there is a cultural issue associated with food waste. It is considered a sign of generosity to host relatives and friends at any time, even without prior appointment. This is especially true on Fridays and during events such as marriage celebrations. Most of the respondents (70%) indicated that Friday had the highest levels of food waste (Figure 3), with most of this generated at lunch (48.5% of respondents), followed by breakfast (34%) and dinner (17.5%). This reflects family gatherings on Friday, which is considered a holy day and a time for social connection. Intervention programs could therefore target more material at schools and universities that address visiting protocols. Although these protocols are already covered in courses in UAE primary schools to some extent (for example, in Islamic studies), there is a need to add more material and public lectures at the university level. There were no significant associations between reasons for having extra cooked food and gender, place of residence, or income (all p values were greater than 0.05; all values of Cramer’s V were less than 0.2).

The majority of the respondents (34.7%) reported that they keep extra-cooked food (edible) in the fridge; smaller proportions said they donate such food (29.4%), give it to animals and birds (26.4%), or throw it out (9.5%). The small proportion of people who throw extra food away could therefore be encouraged to conserve or donate it instead. There was a significant association between students’ place of residence and their ways of dealing with extra-cooked food (p value < 0.05, Cramer’s V > 0.2), and low associations with gender and income (p value > 0.05, Cramer’s V < 0.2).

A trend for ordering food from restaurants was clear from the responses, with 75% of respondents ordering more than 5% of their weekly meals from outside. The reasons behind this phenomenon may include an increase in the number of restaurants that provide high-quality food and a good environment, an increase in the number of family members working outside the home, and the likely lower cost (in terms of price and effort) of restaurant-prepared meals in comparison to home-prepared meals. These results show the need for higher awareness among restaurant staff, including cleaners, about how to conserve leftover food. The majority of respondents (62%) indicated their willingness to take home leftover food after eating at a restaurant.

3.5. Interventions to Reduce Food Waste

This study found that 70% of respondents reported the highest amounts of food waste on Fridays. A previous study [25] noted that food waste increases 25% during the holy month of Ramadan. Therefore, intervention programs could increase their numbers of volunteers and operations on Fridays and during Ramadan, and broadcast more food conservation messages via social media and mass media at those times. Social media plays an important role in connecting people, and this has a positive impact on food conservation [51,78].

The most common foods that are not utilized are dairy products (25.5% of respondents) and cooked rice (20.9%). Others include fruit (16.4%), meat and fish (14.4%), and vegetables and bread (11.4% each). A study conducted by Caldeira et al. [79] found that fruit and vegetables are the product group most commonly wasted, while Principato et al. [52] reported that 35% of fresh products (milk and dairy products, meat and seafood), 9%of bread, and 16%of fruit and vegetables are wasted within the home.

There was no significant association between any of the independent variables and responses to this item (p value > 0.05, Cramer’s V < 0.2). Intervention programs could therefore organize and broadcast training workshops for households on how to make good use of dairy products and how to distribute/donate cooked rice for use as animal feed and fertilizer.

The majority of respondents (60%) gave the environment as the strongest reason for caring about food waste, with 21.5% choosing social impact and 18.5% economic impact (Figure 4). This reflects the fact that young people in the UAE are increasingly aware of the environmental challenges of food waste and its impact on water, energy, and climate. This is a result of the substantial efforts made in recent years by the Ministry of Education to include environmental education as a salient element in the UAE curriculum. As part of this drive, environmental content has been incorporated into school and university curricula and textbooks. For instance, in 2018 the UAE University added a course entitled “Sustainability” as a required general education course for all its students.

Van der Werf et al. [80] found that a large proportion (58.9%) of respondents to their survey selected reduction of monetary loss as their primary motivator for reducing food waste, followed by environmental impact (23.9%) and social impact (17.2%). Their results suggest that interventions to reduce food should convey the monetary impact of food waste. In contrast, the results of the present study indicate the importance of conveying the environmental impact. The chi-square test showed a significant association between gender (male/female) and main reason for caring about food waste (p = 0.01 < 0.05), but there was no association with place of residence or income (p > 0.05). Values for Cramer’s V ranged from 0.052 to 0.214, indicating low and moderate associations between the nominal variables (environmental, social, and economic factors) and the independent variables (gender, place of residence, and income).

Preferences for methods of distributing extra food were almost evenly divided, with 35.5% of the respondents preferring to distribute extra food themselves, 34% preferring an office with a telephone (e.g., a food bank), and 30.5% opting to use an online application. Those who preferred an office argued that it would be better placed to know who is in need of food (perhaps by maintaining a database) and that the donors would not be made to feel uncomfortable by being in direct contact with people who need help. Those who preferred to distribute extra food themselves did so because they thought that this would be faster and more efficient. Because the number of social media and applications for this purpose is increasing exponentially, coupling an office (food bank) with an online application would increase visibility to donors and to people in need.

In the UAE, current practice for distributing extra cooked food is diverse: 35% of respondents distribute their food via the ERC and UAE Food Bank, 26.5% use their own means, 26% use the ERC only, and 12.5% use UAE Food Bank only. The practice adopted by an individual depends on a range of factors. For instance, UAE Food Bank received the lowest rating, which reflects its location in Dubai; the majority (65.5%) of the respondents live not in Dubai but in Al Ain. It follows that a gap analysis would be useful in enabling the ERC to add food banks in other cities, such as Al Ain and Abu Dhabi.

4. Recommendations

The following recommendations could help in reducing food waste:

• Education: The study showed that there is a lack of knowledge about the links between food and water consumption, and young people waste more food. Therefore, it is important to introduce environmental education among the young generation in schools and universities. The introduction of food waste-related courses at universities and schools would provide a unique opportunity for changing the food waste behavior of students, given that they take many of their meals on campus. Such programs should address specific behavioral factors in order to develop university and community cultures whose members are aware of the impacts of food waste and mindful of how to reduce it. The greater the individuals’ knowledge and awareness of the problem of food waste, the more likely they are to modify their behavior positively [52,81].
• Public awareness: Since most of the respondents (70%) indicated that Friday had the highest levels of food waste, special campaigns could be arranged ahead of Friday. The findings can be used to design material for food waste intervention programs, thereby contributing to protecting the environment, saving money, and achieving the UN SDGs (notably, the goals for zero hunger, sustainable cities and communities, and responsible consumption and production). In particular, flyers could be distributed at schools, universities, restaurants, hotels, malls, and hostels to reduce food waste. To achieve sustainability, there is a need for continuous training for skilled practitioners in the food chain (example, housewives, food banks officers, donors, and recipients of food).
• Compassion: Practice in the UAE already includes the donation and distribution of excess food to people in need, and these activities should be promoted to enrich the spirit of philanthropy, solidarity, and compassion among members of the community [34]. Development of local applications would help in the distribution of surplus food to those who need it by linking producers and consumers. The applications could be in different languages to cater for diversity of UAE residents. Social media also plays an important role in connecting people, and this has a positive impact on food conservation [51,78].
• Infrastructure for extra food: The food banks can help in sharing food to prevent food waste and in ensuring safety of food [82]. Therefore, there is a need to increase the number of food banks. Encourage community to use discarded food for feeding animals, birds, and recycle it properly (preparation of infrastructure for recycling/composting food and kitchen waste).
• Food waste audits: Perform regular food waste audits at institutions such as universities to give real statistics about food wasted and how to prevent this. Companies specialized in waste reduction techniques such as Winnow and LeanPath can be involved. These companies sell training, scales, and software to corporations with cafeterias and to college/university cafeterias.
• Future research: Responses to a questionnaire may not reflect real behaviors and there is a distinct gap between the intentions of the respondents and their actions [50,83]. It is recommended that future research work could apply social practice theory to understand food waste in the context of daily practices.
• Fund: Food waste is a complex problem and its reduction needs a multidisciplinary approach that takes into account many factors such as culture, socioeconomic status, education, policies, and use of advanced technologies. Therefore, there is a need to allocate funds to support education and research dealing with food waste.

5. Conclusions

This study assesses university students’ perceptions of food waste and provides guidance on the causes of food waste, the types of food wasted, and which days have higher levels of food waste, as well as recommendations for intervention programs. Four hypotheses were tested: females have more knowledge about food, rich families waste more food, young people waste more food, and people care about food because of its economic value. No significant gender difference was found with respect to knowledge about food. There was a significant moderate association between higher-income families and more food waste, which indicates that some food waste behaviors depend on income category; there was no such association with gender or place of residence. The majority of respondents (57%) agreed that young people waste more food, while approximately one-third (35%) were neutral, and the rest disagreed. A large proportion of respondents (60%) cited the environment as the strongest reason for caring about food waste, compared to only 21.5% for social impact and 18.5% for economic impact.

The limitations of this study are:

• One of the limitations of this study is the low response rate. This could be attributed to the perception of some students that the survey was seeking to monitor their use of food, which would have made them reluctant to participate even if the questionnaire was circulated many times. Incentives such as gifts/awards could be used to encourage more participation.
• The data is collected from one university in UAE and a large proportion of the respondents are females (71.6%). This is not sufficient to generalize the outcomes. It is questionable whether the answers will be consistent when undertaking the survey at other universities (comparison). Future work could target other universities.
• The convenience sampling method was adopted in this study because of a budget constraint. The method is widely used in the literature [52]. However, it does not allow for a direct statistical generalization of the results. Therefore, probabilistic sampling design could be used in future work.
• The target group in this study is young people (students) at the university. Other age groups, and other sectors such as retail shops, restaurants, hotels, housewives, dining services employees, and recipients of donated food could be included in future work. These groups are important in addressing the creation, reduction, and ultimate prevention of food waste.