Which Consumer Perceptions Should Be Used in Food Waste Reduction Campaigns: Food Security, Food Safety or Environmental Concerns?
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is of high quality in all of its aspects: substantive, formal, methodological, and linguistic, not to mention that the addressed topic is very important. The study was well designed, methods properly selected and used, and analyses were performed with the highest technical standards. Results were clearly presented and discussed. The authors' concern for methodological correctness and the valuable practical applications of the presented research results are particularly worth emphasizing.
The article will be highly attractive not only to the Journal readers but also to the wilder public, including legislative bodies and organizations responsible for promoting sustainability.
Very minor suggestions are as follows:
- Please, consider a more precise statement of the study purpose in the abstract;
- Please, specify whether the in-person survey mentioned in the text was a Pen-and-Paper Personal Interview (PAPI) or a Computer-Assisted Personal Interview (CAPI);
- The Authors perfectly well presented all variables. However, regarding the leftovers they only mentioned setting their threshold at 5% of the food remaining after a meal and did not explain how the leftovers were measured (weighted? estimated roughly by the volume or amount on the plate?) and who was determining the amount of the leftovers (researchers, respondents or maybe restaurant workers?). I would suggest a paragraph of explanation in a footnote or a short appendix as the “leftover” category is of critical importance to this paper so it should be clear how they were identified;
- All hypothesized directions of exogeneous variables impacts were clearly described. Still, it might be valuable to present the set of the hypotheses in a more synthetic/summary form, e.g. the table/diagram showing the assumed relationships;
- It seems that starting from the second paragraph the in-text references are not following the guidelines (used in the 1st paragraph).
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Congratulations to the authors for this initiative! Although the conclusions of the article could be more specifically detailed in the presented, I sincerely appreciate the quality of the material and the initiative in this field of the researchers.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your assurance. We have revised the conclusions to make them more specific.
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper "Which consumer perceptions should be used in food waste reduction campaigns: food security, food safety, or environmental concerns?" is an interesting study in which the authors attempt to investigate various consumer perceptions that may influence their food waste behavior. The authors analyze the results using probit models and primary data collected from three cities. The paper is well-structured and well-written. However, the paper has some flaws that the authors must address before it can be accepted for publication. Here are my questions, comments, and suggestions:
While the introduction is well-written, the concept of social marketing described at the end does not appear to be adequately explained and how it is implemented in the rest of your analysis. Please revise that section.
My main concerns are with the paper's methodology and how the survey was conducted. According to the authors, they conducted a survey on consumers in three different cities while they were waiting for their meals to arrive at the table. If informed consent was obtained, the authors were required to inform the respondents about the purpose of the study. This information may potentially skew the results, and consumers may be mindful of their eating and take-home behaviors. How did the authors implement controls to avoid skewed results?
Table 1 shows the perception survey questions and variable explanations. How were these survey items developed (or pre-tested) by the authors? What is the validity of these constructs? Why didn't the authors use pre-existing scales to assess the consumers' perceptions? If you used pre-existing items, please provide citations.
There are some important controls missing from the analysis:
- In Chinese culture, during a business meal (formal situations), people are usually more aware of the host's feelings, as is the host. So not taking leftovers home could be due to a variety of cultural reasons. A dinner with colleagues, business people, friends and family members, for example, may have completely different psychological mechanisms at work. Please include data on this (business vs. family dinners) in your analysis if you have it.
- Meal time/day: Weekend dinners (lunches) may have different dynamics at work when it comes to consumer take-home behavior than weekday dinners (lunches). Was the survey conducted during the week or on the weekend? Please include this variable in your analysis if you have data. This is an important control that is missing.
In the discussion section, there is no literature support. Please compare your findings to those of previous studies in light of the comments above.
Please discuss the limitations of your research.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have revised the manuscript as per the comments and it can be accepted for publication in the present form.
