Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Appendix G Glossary Ability (to prevent food waste): A personâs proficiency at solving the prob- lems encountered when performing actions that help prevent food waste. Relevant aspects of ability are knowledge and skills (Van Geffen et al., 2016). Appeals: A type of intervention to change behavior for the social good (environment, other humans, etc.) where messages are provided contain- ing statistics, factors, narratives, but also possibly normative or descrip- tive content, including explicit persuasive framing and behavior change prompts with the intention of changing behavior. Appeals can be explicit (ask individuals directly to act) or implicit (give motivational factoids or information). Behavioral plasticity: The capacity and degree to which humanÂ behav- iorÂ can be altered by environmental factors such as learning and social experience. In theory, a higher degree ofÂ plasticityÂ makes an organism more flexible to change, whereas a lower degree ofÂ plasticityÂ results in an inflexibleÂ behaviorÂ pattern. Behaviors: An individual, group, organization or systemâs external reactions to both internal factors and external stimuli in its environment. Built environment: Refers to theÂ human-made environmentÂ that provides the setting forÂ human activity, ranging in scale from buildings to cities and 295
296 NATIONAL STRATEGY TO REDUCE FOOD WASTE beyond. It has been defined as âthe human-made space in which people live, work and recreate on a day-to-day basisâ (Roof and Oleru, 2008). Choice architecture: A type of intervention that influences behavior by re- moving external barriers, expediting access, or altering the structure of the environment in which people make choices. They are usually designated as nudges. There are many different types of nudges, such as those that shift perception of the quantity of food (e.g., changing plate sizes), those that shift perceived appeal or quality of the food (e.g., increasing the appeal of healthy foods) and nudges to shift behaviors to what is easier (e.g., offering healthy food in a cafeteria at the beginning of the line). Cognitive processing: Ability to take in information and transformÂ it,Â storeÂ it,Â recoverÂ it, andÂ put it to work. âReflective processingâ refers to conscious processing of information where attitudes are formed in light of rational arguments, relevant experiences, and knowledge. Tactics for interventions that appeal to this type of processing include knowledge transfer designed to increase self-efficacy. âSemireflective processingâ refers to the formation of attitudes through rules of thumb and simple heuristics or cues. Tactics for interventions that appeal to this type of processing include those focused on social norms, framing, and tailoring. âAutomatic processingâ refers to choices made on the basis of an automatic response, without the interven- tion of cognition. Tactics for interventions that appeal to this type of pro- cessing include emotional shortcuts, priming, and nudging. Context: The circumstances, conditions, or objects by which one is surrounded. Contextual factors: Characteristics unique to a particular group,Â commu- nity,Â society, or individual. These factors include, but are not limited to,Â per- sonal, social, cultural, economic, and political factorsÂ that exist in differing ways and have varying impacts across population groups. Descriptive social norm: Informal rules that describe the perception of what most people do. Driver: The factors that may either promote or mitigate the amount of food they discard. Includes causal factors; those that may be statistically correlated; and âintervening factors,â which are sometimes called âmedia- torsâ or âmoderatorsâ that help to explain causal pathways. In addition, drivers can include both the presence of factors that tend to promote a given behavior, such as, in the case of food waste, large portion sizes offered at
APPENDIX G 297 restaurants, and the absence of factors that discourage a behavior, such as lack of knowledge of the negative consequences of an action. Efficacy: Efficacy is the extent to which an intervention produces the desired results under ideal circumstances. Effectiveness: Effectiveness is the extent to which an intervention produces the desired results when provided under the usual circumstances or real world environment. Engagement: A type of intervention that creates involvement or commit- ment by cueing individuals (e.g., via goal setting or commitments) toward active psychological interaction with the focal content. Equity: The absence of avoidable, unfair, or remediable differences among groups of people, whether those groups are defined socially, economically, demographically, geographically, or by other means of stratification. Exhortation: Synonymous with advice: âa form of relating personal or in- stitutional opinions, belief systems, values, recommendations or guidance about certain situations relayed in some context to another person, group or party often offered as a guide to action and/or conduct.â (Bonaccio and Dalal, 2006). Feedback: A type of intervention where individuals are given information about their behaviors such that this information can be used to modify future actions. Feedback interventions are often effective to alter behavior (Delmas et al., 2013). Financial incentive (or economic incentive): A type of intervention offer- ing financial motivations for people to take actions. Examples are taxes, changes in monetary rewards or prices that make someone alter behavior. Food literacy: A set of knowledge and skills that help people with the daily acquisition, preparation, consumption, and storage of healthy, tasty, afford- able meals for themselves and their families. Framing: Selecting and emphasizing certain aspects to achieve a desired interpretation by using unconscious biases in information processing (Koop et al., 2019). Gamification: The use of parts of games (e.g., a digital role-playing game in which the player completes challenges or quests designed to educate them about nutrition) in a non-game setting, such as an app designed to
298 NATIONAL STRATEGY TO REDUCE FOOD WASTE track a behavior by using points and badges (Johnson et al., 2017). As an intervention type, gamification could be considered either an engagement (i.e., it prompts people to set goals and then captures goal pursuit behavior) or feedback (i.e., feedback that is given a hedonic, motivational structure through the addition of incentives). Habits: Context-behavior associations in memory that develop as people repeatedly experience rewards for a given action in a given context. Ha- bitual behavior is cued directly by context and does not require supporting goals and conscious intentions (Mazar and Wood, 2018). Injunctive messages: Communications that tell actors what to do or avoid doing in a given context; also called prescriptive messages (Winter et al., 2000). Information interventions: A type of intervention where messages are of- fered containing statistics, facts, or narratives, but without explicit persua- sive framing or behavior change prompts. For example, statistics about amounts of food waste or their impacts. Injunctive social norm: Informal rules that describe the perception of what most people approve or disapprove (Cialdini et al., 1991). Intention: AnÂ anticipated outcome that is intended or that guides your planned actions. Intervention: An intervention is a combination of program elements or strategies designed to produce behavior changes among individuals or an entire population. Interventions that include multiple strategies are typically the most effective in producing desired and lasting change. For this report, the committee categorizes interventions into information, appeals, engage- ment, social comparison/social influence approaches, and choice architec- ture/nudges, feedback approaches, financial incentives (Nisa et al., 2019). Knowledge: Familiarity, awareness, or understanding of someone or some- thing, such as facts, information, descriptions, or skills, which is acquired through experience or education by perceiving, discovering, or learn- ing.Â KnowledgeÂ can refer to a theoretical or practical understanding of a subject. Licensing effect: A case where a prior normatively desirable behavior boosts peopleâs self-concepts, thus reducing negative self-attributions associated
APPENDIX G 299 with subsequent behaviors that may not align with norms (Khan and Dhar, 2006). Moral norms: Informal rules establishing that something aligns with an abstract right or wrong. Motivation (to prevent food waste): A personâs willingness to perform ac- tions that reduce the likelihood or amount of food waste being generated. Relevant aspects of motivation are attitude, awareness, and social norms (Van Geffen et al., 2016). Norms: Informal rules that govern behavior in groups and societies. Norms in this context refers to moral norms (i.e., when people feel that doing something aligns with an abstract right or wrong), injunctive social norms (i.e., feelings about what one ought to do), and descriptive social norms (i.e., perceptions of what most people are doing) that are strongly corre- lated with behavior. Nudge: A modification of the way choices are presented (choice architec- ture) that influences behavior by such means as removing external barri- ers, expediting access, or altering the structure of the environment. In the context of food waste, a nudge might, for example, shift perception of the quantity of food (e.g., changing plate sizes); shift the appeal or quality of food (e.g., increasing the appeal of healthy foods); or make a behavior easier (e.g., offering healthy food in a cafeteria at the beginning of the line). Nudges may involve relatively small amounts of economic valueâthose that do not substantially change oneâs economic position or power, but that may cue a feeling of loss or gain that is disproportionate to the actual loss or gain experienced. Economic incentives, by contrast, are explicitly intended to shape behavior by changing oneâs economic position or power in consequential ways. Opportunity (to prevent food waste): The availability and accessibility of materials and resources required to prevent food waste. Relevant aspects of opportunity are time and schedule, material and technologies, and eco- nomic and other contextual factors, material and technologies, policy, and infrastructure (Van Geffen et al., 2016). Personal value: Internalized cognitive structures that guide choices by evok- ing a sense of basic principles of right and wrong, a sense of priorities, and a willingness to make meaning and see patterns (Oyserman, 2015).
300 NATIONAL STRATEGY TO REDUCE FOOD WASTE Practices: Practices are broadly recognizable activities or groups of behav- iors such as throwing out food, cooking food, wasting food, or shopping for food. Behavior focuses on the individual; practices focus on the activi- ties and the groups of behaviors (Lee and Soma, 2016). Priming: The exposure to one stimulusâsuch as words or a smellâinflu- ences a response to a subsequent stimulus. Unconsciously processed cues (primes) can lead to goal-directed cognition and behavior (Koop et al., 2019). Proenvironmental identity: The extent to which people indicate that envi- ronmentalism is a central partÂ of who they are. Punishment: Linking a behavior to any consequence that decreases the be- haviorâs rate, frequency or probability. Punishment needs to be tailored to the individual, group, or organization, to follow the behavior in time, and to be seen as a consequence of the behavior. Punishment should be avoided because of negative side effects. If used, emphasis should be on positive reinforcement. Regulations: A rule or directive made and maintained by an authority. Self-efficacy: A personâs estimate or personal judgment of his or her own ability to succeed in reaching a specific goal, for example, quitting smoking or losing weight, or a more general goal, for example, continuing to remain at a prescribed weight level. Skills: A subset of ability that reflects the use of oneâs knowledge effectively and readily in execution or performance.Â For example, a person needs the skills to integrate knowledge about preventing food waste into their daily life and into their current food management behaviors. Social comparisons: A type of intervention that provides a comparative reference with respect to the behaviors of others, such as neighbors, col- leagues/friends or fellow citizens, based on principles of social influence and social comparison. These principles explain how individuals evaluate their own opinions and abilities by comparing themselves to others in order to reduce uncertainty in these domains, and learn how to define the self.Â Social marketing: The adaptation of commercial marketing technologies to programs designed to influence the voluntary behavior of target audiences to improve their personal welfare and that of the society of which they are a part (Andreasen, 1994).
APPENDIX G 301 Social modeling: Learning that occurs by observing othersâ behavior, also known as social learning. This behavior forms an idea of how new behav- iors are performed, and on later occasions, this coded information serves as a guide for action (Bandura, 1962). Societal values: Norms, priorities, and guidelines, which describe what people ought to do if they are to do the âright,â âmoral,â âvaluedâ thing, specifically as held by a group or community; scripts or cultural ideals held in common by members of a group; the groupâs âsocial mind.â (Oyserman, 2015). Strategy: In general, a plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major or overall aim. In behavioral science, strategies are combined into a specific intervention to produce behavior changes among individuals or an entire population. REFERENCES Andreasen, A.R. 1994. Social marketing: Its definition and domain. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 13(1):108-114. Bandura, A. 1962. Social leaning through imitation. In Nebraska symposium on motivation, edited by M.R. Jones. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Pp. 211-272. Bonaccio, S., and R.S. Dalal. 2006. Advice taking and decision-making: An integrative litera- ture review, and implications for the organizational sciences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 101(2):127-151. Cialdini, R.B., C.A. Kallgren, and R.R. Reno. 1991. A focus theory of normative conduct: A theoretical refinement and reevaluation of the role of norms in human behavior. In Advances in experimental social psychology. Vol. 24, edited by M.P. Zanna. Academic Press. Pp. 201-234. Delmas, M.A., M. Fischlein, and O.I. Asensio. 2013. Information strategies and energy con- servation behavior: A meta-analysis of experimental studies from 1975 to 2012. Energy Policy 61:729-739. Johnson, D., E. Horton, R. Mulcahy, and M. Foth. 2017. Gamification and serious games within the domain of domestic energy consumption: A systematic review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 73:249-264. Khan, U., and R. Dhar. 2006. Licensing effect in consumer choice. Journal of Marketing Research 43(2):259-266. Koop, S.H.A., A.J. Van Dorssen, and S. Brouwer. 2019. Enhancing domestic water conserva- tion behaviour: A review of empirical studies on influencing tactics. Journal of Environ- mental Management 247:867-876. Lee, K., and T. Soma. 2016. From âfarm to tableâ to âfarm to dumpâ: Emerging research on urban household food waste in the global south. In Conversations in food studies, edited by C.R. Anderson, J. Brady and C.Z. Levkoe. Winnipeg, Manitoba: University of Manitoba Press. Mazar, A., and W. Wood. 2018. Defining habit in psychology. In The psychology of habit: Theory, mechanisms, change, and contexts, edited by B. Verplanken. Cham: Springer International Publishing. Pp. 13-29.
302 NATIONAL STRATEGY TO REDUCE FOOD WASTE Nisa, C.F., J.J. Belanger, B.M. Schumpe, and D.G. Faller. 2019. Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials testing behavioural interventions to promote household action on cli- mate change. Nature Communications 10(1):4545. Oyserman, D. 2015. Values, psychology of. International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences 25:36-40. Roof, K., and N. Oleru. 2008. Public health: Seattle and King Countyâs push for the built environment. Journal of Environmental Health 71(1):24-27. Van Geffen, L.E.J., E. van Herpen, and J.C.M. van Trijp. 2016. Causes & determinants of consumers food waste. Refresh deliverable 1.1. Available: https://eu-refresh.org/ causes-determinants-consumers-food-waste. Winter, P.L., B.J. Sagarin, K. Rhoads, D.W. Barrett, and R.B. Cialdini. 2000. Choosing to encourage or discourage: Perceived effectiveness of prescriptive versus proscriptive mes- sages. Environmental Management 26(6):589-594.