Retail Potential for Upcycled Foods: Evidence from New Zealand

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The topic is interesting, topical and forward-looking. The literature is poor and new information may be useful for the advancement of knowledge.

In my opinion, the paper should be extensively revised.

Its articulation is imprecise. Chapter 2 "method" contains the results, so the two parts should be separated.

There is also a major methodological problem. The research was commissioned by Foodstuffs New Zealand and I would imagine that sourcing 1,000 subjects is not a problem for a large retail chain offering 4 supermarket $50 vouchers as a gift.

It must be clarified from a methodological point of view how the consumers were selected. Are they already customers of the retail chain? If yes, the chain has sensitive data (through loyalty cards) and the sampling can be reasoned and not random.

Then important data are missing because to carry out the online survey it is necessary to define a target to reach, a territory to cover (because the sample must have a size proportional to the size of the territory). No reference is made to family income or, in general, to the family economic situation: this is a factor that can greatly condition choices.

Time frame: 17-25 August. The survey was affected by the mandatory lockdown for the management of the COVID19 pandemic. People lost their jobs and people all over the world started to pay attention to consumption (household consumption, for example, is back in fashion).

The discussion is poor and the results discounted because of the shopping voucher competition. From an exploratory point of view, we needed to understand whether the interest in these products is determined by low spending power; by the economic difficulties caused by the COVID pandemic; by a real ethical sensitivity towards the sustainability of the food system to reduce waste.

The results are not significant and very questionable. More work needs to be done.

Author Response

Dear Reviewers,

Thank you for your thoughtful, constructive, and encouraging response to this manuscript. We are delighted that all reviewers recognize the importance and promise of this topic and its potential promise for future research. As Reviewer 1 points out, current research on this topic is very limited. In that way, this short communication is designed to point out some preliminary findings and promising areas for future work. It is not intended to present empirical generalizable findings but rather may provide fodder for future studies by this research team and others.  

Accordingly, we will respond to each reviewer's comments below:

Reviewer 1

The topic is interesting, topical, and forward-looking.

Thank you for your comment. We truly appreciate this comment.

The literature is poor and new information may be useful for the advancement of knowledge. Its articulation is imprecise. Chapter 2 "method" contains the results, so the two parts should be separated.

Thank you for this valuable suggestion. The methods section has been revised to detail the method, with specific emphasis on sampling per the comments below, and the results clearly delineated. Thank you for pointing out the poor state of the literature. Indeed, that is why we are conducting this research and have included some additional sources in the literature review.

There is also a major methodological problem. The research was commissioned by Foodstuffs New Zealand and I would imagine that sourcing 1,000 subjects is not a problem for a large retail chain offering 4 supermarket $50 vouchers as a gift.

It must be clarified from a methodological point of view how the consumers were selected. Are they already customers of the retail chain? If yes, the chain has sensitive data (through loyalty cards) and the sampling can be reasoned and not random.

Thank you for this valuable comment. The methods section has been revised to more clearly articulate how the population of Foodstuffs shoppers was sampled.

Then important data are missing because to carry out the online survey it is necessary to define a target to reach, a territory to cover (because the sample must have a size proportional to the size of the territory). No reference is made to family income or, in general, to the family economic situation: this is a factor that can greatly condition choices.

Thank you for this observation. Indeed, consistent with the comment above, the sample was designed to gain insight into the attitudes of Foodstuffs shoppers who come from the population in general. The methods section has been revised to address this comment. Variables such as family income and economic situation may affect evaluation of upcycled foods as can many other variables. The goal was to conduct a study that is focused on some of the variables we felt were key. Future research should examine more variables.

Time frame: 17-25 August. The survey was affected by the mandatory lockdown for the management of the COVID19 pandemic. People lost their jobs and people all over the world started to pay attention to consumption (household consumption, for example, is back in fashion).

Indeed, this is a great point that we added and explicitly addressed in the discussion and as a limitation. It underscores the importance of this research. A paragraph has been added to the methods and the discussion to situate the week of this data collection amidst New Zealand's response to the pandemic and the ability of the sample to conduct typical activities such as grocery shopping. 

The discussion is poor and the results discounted because of the shopping voucher competition. From an exploratory point of view, we needed to understand whether the interest in these products is determined by low spending power; by the economic difficulties caused by the COVID pandemic; by a real ethical sensitivity towards the sustainability of the food system to reduce waste.

Thank you for pointing this out. The methods section has been revised to clearly articulate the administration of the shopping voucher incentives; a customary incentive used for research. The discussion has been expanded to grapple with these exploratory questions.

The results are not significant and very questionable. More work needs to be done.

Thank you. As previously mentioned, this is a short communication to communicate exploratory findings. The publication of this piece indeed allows other scholars to conduct further work. 

Reviewer 2 Report

Manuscript ID: sustainability-1123562 reports on the advances of understanding of how consumers perceive upcycled foods and provides actionable insights to practitioners in the food industry. The findings from this research provide practical and direct insights to industry practitioners who must play a key role in shaping consumer acceptance of upcycled foods and try to convince the community that upcycled foods may act as the welfare of human beings existence.

The short communication is perfectly written. I found no grammatical errors and data presented are useful for the literature. I encourage the authors to provide a statistical model for predicting the trend in the use of upcycled foods in future studies. In the current study, a statistical analysis section is also required.

Based on the aforementioned, I suggest a minor revision of the short communication.

Author Response

Dear Reviewers,

Thank you for your thoughtful, constructive, and encouraging response to this manuscript. We are delighted that all reviewers recognize the importance and promise of this topic and its potential promise for future research. As Reviewer 1 points out, current research on this topic is very limited. In that way, this short communication is designed to point out some preliminary findings and promising areas for future work. It is not intended to present empirical generalizable findings but rather may provide fodder for future studies by this research team and others.  

Accordingly, we will respond to each reviewer's comments below:

Reviewer 2

Manuscript ID: sustainability-1123562 reports on the advances of understanding of how consumers perceive upcycled foods and provides actionable insights to practitioners in the food industry. The findings from this research provide practical and direct insights to industry practitioners who must play a key role in shaping consumer acceptance of upcycled foods and try to convince the community that upcycled foods may act as the welfare of human beings existence.

The short communication is perfectly written. I found no grammatical errors and data presented are useful for the literature. I encourage the authors to provide a statistical model for predicting the trend in the use of upcycled foods in future studies. In the current study, a statistical analysis section is also required.

Based on the aforementioned, I suggest a minor revision of the short communication.

Thank you for this encouraging feedback. A statistical model is not feasibly generated from the sampling method used in this study. However, it will be possible and advisable, we agree, for future work.

To elaborate further on the statistical analysis approach, we have included an additional paragraph in the methods section.

Reviewer 3 Report

It is a necessary research that helps to understand the general logistics and retail distribution system in the retail channel. The structure is adequate and exposes the problem according to the scientific and social needs. The methodology is considered correct and no serious deficiencies are found in it. 
However, although the references are up to date, there is a lack of specific retail references that could be useful in order to give a more global character to the final text. 
Suggestions are, therefore, made: 

Boakye, M.; Hakan, C. The impact of supply chain integration on firms’ business and operational performance at the food retail sector/industry. Journal of Management Marketing and Logistics 2018, 5, 1, 18-30.

Lee, K. Grocery shopping, food waste, and the retail landscape of cities: The case of Seoul. Journal of Cleaner Production 2018, 172, 325-334

Jiménez-Marín, G. Distribución comercial, retail y marketing mix. Las nuevas variables. In Mut Camacho, M.; Camarero Calandria, E. (coords). Nuevos tratamientos informativos y persuasivos 2017. Madrid: Tecnos, 113-120.

Albizzati, P.F.; Tonini, D.; Boyer Chammard, C.; Fruergaard Astrup, T. Valorisation of surplus food in the French retail sector: Environmental and economic impacts. Waste Management 2019, 90, 141-151.

Moran, A.; Roberto, C. The Retail Food Environment: Time for a Change. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2020 17(23), 8846;

Author Response

Dear Reviewers,

Thank you for your thoughtful, constructive, and encouraging response to this manuscript. We are delighted that all reviewers recognize the importance and promise of this topic and its potential promise for future research. As Reviewer 1 points out, current research on this topic is very limited. In that way, this short communication is designed to point out some preliminary findings and promising areas for future work. It is not intended to present empirical generalizable findings but rather may provide fodder for future studies by this research team and others.  

Accordingly, we will respond to each reviewer's comments below:

Reviewer 3

It is a necessary research that helps to understand the general logistics and retail distribution system in the retail channel. The structure is adequate and exposes the problem according to the scientific and social needs. The methodology is considered correct and no serious deficiencies are found in it.

Thank you for this feedback. We are happy that we were able to engage in research that is appreciated.

However, although the references are up to date, there is a lack of specific retail references that could be useful in order to give a more global character to the final text.

Thank you for this comment and suggesting literature that we could include. At several places in the revised manuscript, we have added retailing literature, including some of the papers you have suggested.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Considering that these are preliminary results and that the paragraph on methodology has been fixed, I think it can be published
Good work