Research on Sustainable Food Literacy Education Talent Cultivation

Abstract

This research aims to develop a model for cultivating talents in sustainable food literacy education in Taiwan. The project adopts the professional and theoretical axes of the food industry, sustainable development, and food literacy. The research employs a mixed-method approach, combining qualitative and quantitative techniques, to construct sustainable food literacy assessment indicators for Taiwan. In the first year, through literature analysis and qualitative research, the core content of “sustainable food literacy” in Taiwan was extracted, resulting in four major dimensions with 24 indicator items. Then, using the Fuzzy Delphi method, the indicators were constructed, defining the core content and dimension indicators of sustainable food literacy, which include “sustainable agriculture and production”, “healthy diet and culture”, “green environmental protection and consumption”, and “food social responsibility and ethics”, encompassing a total of 20 indicators. In the second year, based on the dimensions identified in the first year, a sustainable food literacy curriculum was developed. A 10-week quasi-experimental teaching curriculum was conducted for students enrolled in the “Vegetable and Fruit Carving” elective course in two classes of the Department of Food and Beverage Management at Jingwen University of Science and Technology. By comparing the pre-test and post-test scores of students’ sustainable food literacy and their sustainable food works, as well as analyzing student learning portfolios and teacher reflections, it was shown that the curriculum developed in this research significantly enhanced students’ sustainable food literacy and their performance. The results of this two-year study can be used for the assessment of sustainable food literacy talents in Taiwan, contributing both academically and practically.

1. Introduction

1.1. Research Background

Since the outbreak of the global COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, coupled with the severe impacts of climate change, including fires and floods, the question of how Taiwan’s food and catering industry should confront the challenges posed by environmental and energy changes in order to keep pace with the global pursuit of sustainability has become an urgent task for the government, industry practitioners, and educational institutions alike. In response to global issues such as climate change, wealth disparity, and gender equality, the United Nations launched the “2030 Sustainable Development Goals” (SDGs) in 2015, outlining 17 core objectives for global governments and enterprises to strive towards sustainable development. Among them, SDG 2 aims to “ensure food security, end hunger, and promote sustainable agriculture”. When viewing environmental issues through the lens of sustainability, they become an integral part of the sustainability agenda, intertwined with economic, social, and educational research matters. Focusing solely on environmental issues, as was performed in the past, is insufficient for resolving them.

Although numerous public sector initiatives and research studies have delved into sustainable agriculture, energy conservation, carbon reduction, and food cherishing, they often approach the subject from an engineering perspective, lacking research on the cultivation of talent in sustainable food combined with literacy education. To implement Taiwan’s sustainability policies, it is necessary to consider policies and training plans at government and industry levels [1], alongside curriculum development and practical education in food and catering educational institutions. This will facilitate the nurturing of talent with sustainable food literacy in the food and catering industry, thereby driving the industry towards achieving sustainability goals. This project takes the food industry, sustainable development, food literacy, and literacy-oriented learning as its professional and theoretical axes, aiming to develop assessment indicators for “sustainable food literacy” in Taiwan’s food industry, providing a reference for talent cultivation in related fields within academia and industry.

1.2. Research Objectives

Based on the above discussion, the research objectives of this study include:

(1)

To understand the connotations of sustainable food literacy in Taiwan (knowledge, skills, attitudes).

(2)

To develop indicators for assessing sustainable food literacy in Taiwan.

(3)

To develop a sustainable food literacy curriculum for Taiwan and empirically validate its effectiveness.

In this study, sustainable food literacy is defined as a set of integrated competencies—encompassing knowledge, skills, and attitudes—that enable individuals to make environmentally, socially, and culturally responsible food decisions throughout the processes of food production, consumption, and waste management.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Education for Sustainable Development

In 2015, the United Nations announced the “2030 Sustainable Development Goals” (SDGs), which include 17 goals such as eradicating poverty, mitigating climate change, and promoting gender equality, guiding global cooperation towards sustainability. At that time, 193 countries agreed to strive to achieve these 17 SDGs by 2030. The development of “Education for Sustainable Development” (ESD) worldwide aligns with environmental education goals and is widely recognized. Similarly to environmental education, ESD emphasizes interdisciplinary integration to explore economic, social, and environmental issues, achieving transformative learning and problem-solving through diversified teaching methods, while also cultivating students’ core competencies in systems thinking, critical thinking, and problem-solving [2].

2.2. Sustainable Food and Diet Education

“Food” is a daily necessity for individuals. In the past, with the rise in global tourism and the demand for “Sustainable Food Tourism”, numerous environmental and social sustainability issues have emerged, including global warming and carbon emissions, food transportation and food miles, genetically modified crops, and local production [3,4,5,6]. Babich and Smith [7] examined selected genetically modified plants that violate socio-economic and ecological sustainability principles and also explored the potential of modern agricultural biotechnology in enhancing global food security. Food, food chains, food webs, and the nutritional levels they form constitute the “food system”.

2.3. Literacy

“Literacy” refers to the knowledge, abilities, and attitudes that are indispensable for individuals to develop holistically and cope with the complexities of social life situations. The concept of literacy emphasizes learners’ ability to apply their knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values, while also reflecting on their own learning journey. It values learners’ ability to engage with the world and act within it. Core literacy emphasizes the value and function of education, focusing on promoting individuals’ holistic development and lifelong learning through literacy in the learning process [8]. In this study, “sustainable food literacy” is defined as a comprehensive competence that integrates knowledge (e.g., understanding sustainable agricultural practices), skills (e.g., preparing meals using surplus or local ingredients), and attitudes (e.g., caring about food ethics and climate impact), enabling individuals to engage in sustainable food behaviors. For example, a person with high sustainable food literacy might choose seasonal, pesticide-free produce, minimize single-use packaging, and advocate for fair-trade food systems.

3. Research Method

3.1. Research Design Explanation

The research collects domestic and international data through literature review. The research process involves continuous organization and participant observation to develop the constructs and connotations relevant to Taiwan. Subsequently, by combining two rounds of the Fuzzy Delphi Method, scholars and experts are invited to rate and establish an assessment model for “sustainable food literacy” in Taiwan.

3.2. Research Method Explanation

3.2.1. Qualitative Research Tools

Data collection and analysis interpretation are conducted through text collection, such as document analysis (domestic and international literature, etc.), and qualitative interviews with experts.

3.2.2. Fuzzy Delphi Method

The Delphi method is a group consensus-building technique that is highly effective in setting competency and curriculum goals as well as predicting future capabilities. It involves a group of experts and scholars forming a research team. Although it uses questionnaires, it differs from traditional surveys. Traditional surveys require only one round of questionnaires, whereas the Delphi method involves multiple rounds of questionnaire responses until a consensus is reached on the survey items. Therefore, it combines the advantages of expert meetings and traditional surveys [9,10].

The basic principles of the Delphi method can be divided into three categories: structured information flow, anonymized group decision-making, and expert judgment [10]. The selection of experts is crucial in the Delphi method. The reason why the results of Delphi method studies are recognized is that representative experts provide judgments on issues, and discussions from different perspectives make the conclusions more objective, rigorous, and valuable. The number of experts in a Delphi panel is typically 5–10 for a heterogeneous group and 15–30 for a homogeneous group. When the panel has at least 10 members, the group’s error can be minimized, and its reliability is maximized. The Delphi method provides a structured channel for information flow, utilizing a series of “structured” questionnaires for “iterative” surveys. The first questionnaire is mostly open-ended, allowing respondents to freely provide opinions based on the research questions. The purpose is to collect a wide range of data as the basis for designing the second questionnaire. The second questionnaire is revised based on the responses to the previous one. The researcher sends the new questionnaire, along with the previous group’s responses (aggregate data) and the respondent’s own reactions to each item, to the respondents for them to reconsider and provide new judgments. This process is repeated until the group reaches a consensus or the responses stabilize to a certain degree.

This study uses the Fuzzy Delphi method [11], which is an improvement over the traditional Delphi method, to converge expert consensus on criteria and solutions. The aim is to reduce biases caused by repeated questionnaire responses (such as fatigue, bandwagon effect, etc.) and to introduce fuzzy theory, allowing experts to have more tolerance for vagueness and uncertainty in their judgments. The Fuzzy Delphi method evolved from the traditional Delphi method. Since the traditional Delphi method only uses the concept of an average to represent expert consensus, there is actually a fuzzy inconsistency in expert consensus. Klir and Folger [12] proposed applying a generalized average model in the Delphi method, establishing a triangular fuzzy function based on the expert questionnaire evaluations. The minimum and maximum values in the average are the two endpoints of the expert consensus triangular fuzzy function, and a geometric function represents the degree of expert consensus. The researcher determines the critical value (s) based on the research purpose and selects appropriate evaluation criteria. The Fuzzy Delphi method was selected in this study due to its ability to combine expert consensus with tolerance for uncertainty and subjectivity, which are inherent in evaluating educational constructs like “sustainable food literacy”. Compared to the traditional Delphi method, the Fuzzy Delphi method integrates fuzzy set theory to allow experts to express their judgments using linguistic variables, which are then transformed into quantitative fuzzy numbers. This reduces the bias introduced by forced precision and helps achieve more stable consensus.

This study adopts the Fuzzy Delphi method proposed by Ishikawa et al. [13], which mainly combines the simple center of gravity method for defuzzification. The goal is to screen out the most important factors for enhancing sustainable food literacy in Taiwan. The steps are as follows:

(1)

After determining the connotation and indicator items for enhancing sustainable food literacy in Taiwan through literature review, design a Fuzzy Delphi questionnaire.

(2)

Have domain experts and scholars rate the importance of the indicator items for enhancing sustainable food literacy in Taiwan.

(3)

Use twice the standard deviation of the average values of all expert evaluations to remove outliers.

(4)

Use linguistic variables to describe fuzzy sets in a specified domain. The purpose is to convert natural language descriptions into logical statements through logical inference, and fuzzy measurements can be represented by linguistic terms or fuzzy numbers. Systematically convert the linguistic variable values provided by decision-makers into related fuzzy numbers.

In this study, the semantic wording of the expert questionnaire was converted as shown in

Table 1. Fuzzy Delphi Method Expert Evaluation Conversion Table.

Not Very Important	Not Important	Neutral	Important	Very Important
(1, 1, 3)	(1, 3, 5)	(3, 5, 7)	(5, 7, 9)	(7, 9, 9)

; the expert evaluation conversion table was used to determine the a, b, and c evaluations for each item by the experts, establishing a triangular fuzzy number for each evaluation element.

Next, the Easy Center of Gravity method was used to defuzzify the fuzzy numbers of the indicators for enhancing sustainable food literacy in Taiwan, calculating the minimum value L, geometric mean m, and maximum value u for each evaluation index, which were then converted into s values using the following formula:

$$\mathrm{S}=\left(L+M+U\right)/3,L=Min{a}_i,M=\left({\displaystyle {\sum }_{i=1}^n{b}_i}\right)/n,U=Max{c}_i$$

(1)

A screening threshold t was set, and the S values of all evaluation criteria items were compared with the threshold t using the following principles:

(1)

If S ≥ t, the item was considered a usable item and was included in the evaluation list.

(2)

If S < t, the item was considered unusable and it was recommended to refer to other indicators for screening.

In this study, relevant literature on sustainable food literacy was reviewed to compile the evaluation criteria items for this study after deletion and merging. Based on these evaluation criteria and measure items, a Fuzzy Delphi method questionnaire was designed. The average evaluation values from the survey results were calculated, and outlier evaluation values beyond two standard deviations from the mean were removed. Finally, evaluation values less than Sk were removed to obtain the results of the quantitative indicator screening criteria and measures.

3.2.3. Curriculum Development

Based on the research findings from the previous year and relevant literature, and following the curriculum development theories and steps proposed by Tyler [14], this study developed a teaching curriculum model suitable for cultivating sustainable food literacy in higher technical and vocational education. The curriculum spans one semester, totaling 10 weeks with three hours per week. It encompasses both theory and practical operations, employing a situational teaching strategy for instructional activities, including teaching objectives, content, methods, unit activities, teaching resources, and assessment. The content is divided into four units: “Sustainable Agriculture and Production”, “Healthy Eating and Culture”, “Green Environmental Protection and Consumption”, and “Food Social Responsibility and Ethics.” Each lesson plan unit includes lectures with multimedia aids (videos, music, interactive computer activities, slides, photos of dishes), and the curriculum covers both theoretical and practical aspects of sustainable food literacy. The curriculum was revised after validity reviews by three relevant teaching experts and subsequently implemented in the second year using a quasi-experimental approach for teaching intervention.

3.2.4. Quasi-Experimental Educational Research

The subjects of this experiment were all 39 students enrolled in the “Fruit and Vegetable Carving” course in the second year of the Hospitality Management Department at Jingwen University of Science and Technology, forming the experimental group. The control group consisted of 36 students with similar backgrounds who enrolled in the same course in another semester (taught by the same instructor). The instructor for the experimental group was a participant in this research project, who had participated in and shared research for two years and possessed 20 years of practical and teaching experience in the culinary field.

This study employed a pre-post single-group quasi-experimental design. The “Food Waste Utilization Competence” scale [15] was used as a pre-test and post-test tool to assess students’ progress in sustainable food literacy and related creations. During the pre-test and post-test process, students were asked to create a sustainable pork dish within three hours. Six experts in the field were invited to evaluate the “Sustainable Food Creations” using a consensus rating scale. Finally, SPSS 12.0 statistical software was used to conduct ANCOVA analysis to determine if there were significant differences in the pre-test and post-test scores of the creations and the tests.

The independent variable in this study was whether or not the participants received the experimental treatment (i.e., the experimental group versus the control group). The dependent variables were the post-test scores of the participants on the sustainable food creations and related scales. The covariate was the pre-test scores on the sustainable food creations and related scales. Based on the research literature, the following research hypothesis was proposed:

Hypothesis 1.

After controlling for the influence of the pre-test, the experimental group will score higher on the “Sustainable Food Creations” scale than the control group.

4. Research Results and Discussion

4.1. Results of Sustainable Food Literacy Dimensions and Indicators

This study collected and analyzed literature and conducted in-depth interviews with qualitative experts. The above methods were combined to determine the indicators of “sustainable food literacy” in Taiwan, including 20 indicators in four dimensions: “sustainable agriculture and production”, “healthy diet and culture”, “green environmental protection and consumption”, and “food social responsibility and ethics”.

4.2. Analysis of Expert Questionnaire Based on Fuzzy Delphi Method

This study collected the opinions of experts and scholars through the application of the modified expert prediction method—Fuzzy Delphi technique to understand the priority of “sustainable food literacy” dimensions and indicator items. Dalkey [16] believed that the Delphi method should use more than 10 experts, the degree of error will be reduced, and the credibility will be relatively improved. Therefore, 15 experts were interviewed in this study. The 15 experts were selected based on their professional qualifications, relevance to the research domain, and practical experience in food literacy, sustainability education, agriculture, and hospitality. The panel included 6 university professors (PhD) in food and hospitality management or sustainability education, 6 senior vocational high school or college instructors (Master’s or above) involved in food or environmental curriculum design, and 3 industry professionals (more than 10 years of managerial or policy-level experience in food, agriculture, or green procurement sectors). Their diverse backgrounds ensured that both academic and applied perspectives were incorporated into the indicator development process. The Fuzzy Delphi questionnaire uses the group opinions of experts on improving the Taiwan’s “sustainable food literacy” and measures to obtain a consensus on the importance of improving “sustainable food literacy” and measures. The entire questionnaire was administered from January to April 2013, and a total of two Fuzzy Delphi expert questionnaire surveys were conducted. The questionnaire content is mainly divided into four dimensions, and the indicator construction is discussed based on the degree of importance. In addition, at the end of each dimension of the questionnaire, experts and scholars are asked to provide other opinions that do not include the above items. The semantic level of importance is divided into five levels, from not important (1) to very important (5). After collecting the questionnaires, this study first deleted the extreme values of each evaluation item that were outside the double standard deviation. Then, the fuzzy values of the 15 experts were integrated using the Fuzzy Delphi method to establish a triangular fuzzy number for each item to enhance the importance of “sustainable food literacy”. Finally, the fuzzy weights $\left(a_k,b_k,c_k\right)$ of the criteria and measures evaluation items were converted into importance ${\mathrm{S}}_k$ using the simplified centroid method. The execution steps are described below.

(1)

Collecting opinions from experts and scholars

Through the group opinions of experts and scholars on improving “sustainable food literacy”, we obtained the consensus of the initial evaluation project importance assessment value. The questionnaires were conducted as follows: 15 questionnaires were distributed in the first questionnaire, and 15 questionnaires were collected, with a questionnaire collection rate of 100%; 15 Fuzzy Delphi questionnaires were distributed in the second questionnaire, and 15 questionnaires were collected, with a collection rate of 100%. In addition, the (arithmetic and geometric) mean, standard deviation, mode, CV value, Fuzzy Delphi s-value and last expert options of each item were provided in the second questionnaire survey, so that experts and scholars can gauge everyone’s opinions as a reference without direct contact with others. After that, statistical analysis was performed on each item of the collected questionnaires, and outliers falling outside the double standard deviation were deleted.

(2)

Establishing triangular fuzzy numbers

The fuzzy values converted from the semantic variable conversion table are integrated with the fuzzy values of m (m = 15) experts using the Fuzzy Delphi method to establish the importance of each triangular fuzzy number for improving sustainable food literacy. In this study, one of the sustainable food literacy aspects of green environmental protection and consumption is “using simple packaging to support environmental protection”.

(3)

Improving sustainable food literacy screening

The weight of the improvement is defuzzified using the simple centroid method. The example of “using simple packaging to support environmental protection”, one from the “sustainable food literacy” category of green environmental protection and consumption, is as follows.

The screening threshold t value is set as the total average value of the evaluation items. The t value is the screening threshold value of the expert consensus. Generally speaking, the total average value is usually used as the t value. In order to compare the improvement of “sustainable food literacy” with the t value, the comparison principle is as follows:

(1)

If, then the project is an important project that experts agree on, so the project is included in the evaluation table.

(2)

If, then the project is not an important project that experts consider, and it is recommended to refer to other indicators for screening.

In addition, when testing the results of the Delphi questionnaire, in order to reconfirm the consistency of the expert consensus (Consensus), the coefficient of variation (CV) is used to measure the consensus difference between each expert. The expression of the coefficient of variation is the standard deviation divided by the arithmetic mean. Its purpose is to standardize the unit and solve the problem that the data units are different and the differences cannot be compared with each other. The formula is as follows:

When the CV value is smaller, the consensus of the experts is higher, and vice versa. According to the suggestions of [17], when the CV is less than or equal to 0.3, it means that the experts have high consistency, when the CV is between 0.3 and 0.5, it means that the experts have moderate consistency, and when the CV is greater than 0.5, the reason must be explained. Finally, in order to present the expert consensus results that are less affected by extreme evaluation values, the mode and geometric mean will be calculated and used as a reference for screening criteria and measures. In summary, the analysis summary of the first Fuzzy Delphi method in this study is as follows.

(4)

Analysis of the results of the first questionnaire

Many studies use the mean and standard deviation to present the results of each collection of Delphi questionnaires. Under the feedback characteristics of the Delphi method, the mean not only lists the scores of each item in each collection of questionnaires but also determines the importance of each item according to the score. At the same time, through the mean, participating experts and scholars can obtain the opinions of other experts and scholars on each item without direct contact with others, and use it as a reference. In terms of standard deviation, the size of the standard deviation number can be used to test whether the experts and scholars have consistent views on each item. The larger the standard deviation, the greater the controversy among the respondents about the item, and vice versa. In terms of result convergence, stability can be used to test whether the experts and scholars have consistent views on the item. Therefore, after collecting all the questionnaire data, this study not only summarizes and organizes the content of the open-ended questionnaire and discusses it comprehensively with the results of indicator construction, but also uses the mean, standard deviation, and stability as the analysis of subsequent results in terms of questionnaire quantification.

The first questionnaire collection mainly focuses on the importance of the indicators proposed for this study, expressed in a five-level scale, with scores of 1–5. The content indicators of the first questionnaire are divided into four major dimensions, with a total of 20 indicators. After the questionnaire is collected, the opinions of experts and scholars are integrated, and appropriate revisions are made to the description of each indicator, and then the average and standard deviation of the importance and feasibility of each indicator are calculated, respectively. In the questionnaires returned by experts and scholars, the opinions raised are used as a reference and modifications are made to make the respondents as clear and easy to understand as possible. The revisions made to the content of the indicators of each dimension are sorted as described in

Table 2. Criteria for the first round of screening results.

Criteria	Item	Sub-Criteria
Sustainable Agriculture and Production a	a1	Understand the management methods and characteristics of Taiwan’s local agricultural industry
	a2	Understand how to properly operate agriculture to maintain ecological balance and sustainable development of resources
	a3	Understand agricultural production and marketing issues and how agriculture affects global economic development and human life
	a4	Understanding the types, sources and characteristics of food ingredients is the basic concept of sustainable agriculture and production
	a5	Concerned about global food issues and understanding the importance of promoting a fair and sustainable food system
Healthy Diet and Culture b	b1	Understand the types of Taiwanese products, special cooking methods, and identify with local culture
	b2	Emphasis on dietary diversity (multiple dishes, multiple ingredients)
	b3	Learn the correct and healthy cooking methods
	b4	Use food that is safe and quality certified, or food that is tested for pesticide residues and meets safety standards
	b5	Understand the impact of dietary problems on health
Green Environmental Protection and Consumption c	c1	Understand the principle of simplicity in daily life and choose to buy agricultural products that have low environmental pollution
	c2	Possess green environmental management knowledge
	c3	Pay attention to the environmental problems caused by food and catering activities
	c4	Pay attention to the impact of climate change on the environment
	c5	Can transform packaged food or leftovers
Food Social Responsibility and Ethics d	d1	Willing to provide minimum safety protection for customers’ food products
	d2	Value honesty in advertising and labeling of products and services
	d3	Willing to set an example and attach importance to dietary ethics
	d4	Willing to reconcile social responsibility and corporate profits
	d5	Value employees’ social conscience and integrity

.

In the second questionnaire filling content, the average, standard deviation, mode, and last option of each indicator filled in by each expert and scholar in the first time are provided as a reference for the opinions of experts and scholars when filling in the questionnaire for the second time. In terms of standard deviation, if the standard deviation of an item in the first questionnaire collection is more significant, it means that the respondents have greater controversy over the item. If the standard deviation of the second collection is still significant, it needs to be discussed.

Overall, the arithmetic and geometric means of the first expert Delphi method were between 4.2 and 4.8, and the semantic wording of the expert evaluation was important to very important, indicating that the quality of the criteria was affirmed by the experts; the CV was less than or equal to 0.3, which also showed that the experts had a high consensus. After eliminating outliers exceeding two standard deviations, this study used the total mean (3.84) as the t-value of the screening threshold. Therefore, according to the statistical summary results in Table 2, the indicators > 3.84 in the criteria should be retained in the first stage. Therefore, in the sustainable agriculture and production aspects, including “1. Understanding Taiwan’s local agricultural industry. It is recommended that six criteria be retained, including “management methods and characteristics of agriculture” (4.261), “3. Understand how to properly operate agriculture to maintain ecological balance and sustainable development of resources” (4.237), “4. Understand agricultural production and marketing issues, and understand that agriculture will affect global economic development and human life” (4.191), “6. Support natural farming ingredients” (4.082), “8. Understand the types, sources and characteristics of ingredients, which is the basic concept of sustainable agriculture and production” (4.214), and “9. Care about global food issues and understand the importance of promoting a fair and sustainable food system” (4.146).

In terms of healthy diet and culture, it is recommended to retain “10. Understand the types of Taiwanese products, special cooking methods, and identify with local culture” (4.181), “11. Pay attention to dietary diversity (multiple dishes, multiple ingredients)” (3.874), “12. Be able to distinguish the differences between food and understand the process of processed food from farm to table” (4.281), “13. Understand the importance of diet to individuals and cultivate the ability to choose ideal food” (4.124), “15. Understand the correct healthy cooking methods for meals” (4.191), “16. Use food with safety and quality certification, or food with pesticide residue inspection within safety standards” (4.169), “17. Understand the impact of dietary problems on health” (4.082).

In the dimension of green environmental protection and consumption, 13 items were retained according to the condition of >3.84, including “22. Understand the principle of simplicity in daily life and choose to buy agricultural products with low environmental pollution” (4.191), “23. Have green environmental management knowledge” (4.237), “24. Pay attention to the environmental problems caused by food and catering activities” (4.261), “25. Pay attention to the impact of climate change on the environment” (3.851), “27. Properly deal with waste that is harmful to the environment” (4.169), “28. Pay attention to the compliance of imported and exported agricultural products with national safety and quality standards” (4.261), “29. Use recyclable containers or packaging” (4.214), “30. Pay attention to not causing air and water pollution in the manufacturing process of products” (4.146), “31. Pay attention to energy saving and carbon reduction” (4.214), “34. Be able to transform packaged food or leftovers” (3.851), “35. Use durable or reusable packaging materials” (4.191), “36. Use simple packaging to support environmental protection and promote the 3R principle: Recycle, Reuse, Refill” (4.261), “38. Willing to encourage consumers to pack up leftover food and not waste food (not applicable to buffet restaurants” (4.124).

Finally, in terms of the dimension of food social responsibility and ethics, nine criteria are retained, including “40. Willing to provide a minimum standard of food products that can protect customers” (4.169), “42. Attach importance to honesty in advertising and labeling of products and services” (4.191), “43. Willing to set an example and attach importance to food ethics” (4.237), “44. Attach importance to the ethical role in the production and processing of agricultural and food products” (4.169), “45. Willing to promote the motivation of food ethics (based on social responsibility)” (4.103), “46. Willing to reconcile social responsibility and company profits” (4.261), “47. Possessing an ethical view of food hygiene and safety” (4.169), “48. Attach importance to employees’ social conscience and employee integrity” (4.237), and “50. Concerned about the balance between the company and stakeholders” (4.214).

Based on the value quantification index, this study retained 35 items in the first phase. Considering the simplicity and effectiveness of the criteria, 12 criteria with relatively low importance (arithmetic mean less than 4.55) were deleted. In addition, in response to the suggestions provided by the experts in the first round, synonymous criteria were merged (such as the 22nd criterion of green environmental protection and consumption and the 35th and 36th criteria) to solve the problem of similar criteria duplication; overly general criteria were deleted (such as “31. Pay attention to energy conservation and carbon reduction”). Therefore, a total of 20 items were retained in the first round and continued to be tested in the second round of questionnaires. The results of the first round of screening are shown in

Table 3. Criteria for the first round of screening results.

Criteria	Item	Sub-Criteria
Sustainable Agriculture and Production a	a1	Understand the management methods and characteristics of Taiwan’s local agricultural industry
	a2	Understand how to properly operate agriculture to maintain ecological balance and sustainable development of resources
	a3	Understand agricultural production and marketing issues and how agriculture affects global economic development and human life
	a4	Understanding the types, sources and characteristics of food ingredients is the basic concept of sustainable agriculture and production
	a5	Concerned about global food issues and understanding the importance of promoting a fair and sustainable food system
Healthy Diet and Culture b	b1	Understand the types of Taiwanese products, special cooking methods, and identify with local culture
	b2	Emphasis on dietary diversity (multiple dishes, multiple ingredients)
	b3	Learn the correct and healthy cooking methods
	b4	Use food that is safe and quality certified, or food that is tested for pesticide residues and meets safety standards
	b5	Understand the impact of dietary problems on health
Green Environmental Protection and Consumption c	c1	Understand the principle of simplicity in daily life and choose to buy agricultural products that have low environmental pollution
	c2	Possess green environmental management knowledge
	c3	Pay attention to the environmental problems caused by food and catering activities
	c4	Pay attention to the impact of climate change on the environment
	c5	Can transform packaged food or leftovers
Food Social Responsibility and Ethics d	d1	Willing to provide minimum safety protection for customers’ food products
	d2	Value honesty in advertising and labeling of products and services
	d3	Willing to set an example and attach importance to dietary ethics
	d4	Willing to reconcile social responsibility and corporate profits
	d5	Value employees’ social conscience and integrity

.

Franchak et al. [18] believe that stability is achieved when the difference between the average of the previous and next rounds is less than 15%. Stability is calculated as a percentage using the formula: total number of changes in responses by all members of a certain item/number of members. If the item reaches a value of less than 15% in any of the two questionnaires, the item is considered stable. Stability can help researchers decide when to stop sending questionnaires.

(5)

Analysis of the results of the second questionnaire

After collecting the results of the second questionnaire, we conducted a statistical analysis. The arithmetic and geometric means of each criterion were all higher than 4.4, indicating that most of the semantic expressions evaluated by the experts were very important, and their CVs were all less than 0.12, indicating that after the second round of the Fuzzy Delphi method, the consensus of the experts was further improved. If the total average of 3.878 is used as the threshold value, it can be found that all criterion values are higher than the threshold value, ranging from 3.9 to 4.3, so all criteria are recommended to be retained in this round. Please refer to

Table 4. Summary of analysis results of the second Fuzzy Delphi expert questionnaire on sustainable food literacy criteria.

Facet	Criteria	Arithmetic Mean	Geometric Mean	Mode	Standard Deviation	CV (Note)	Fuzzy Delphi s-Value	$\mathbf{Keep}\mathbf{the}\mathbf{Questions}\mathbf{According}\mathbf{to}{\mathbf{S}}_{\mathit{k}}$ Value Suggestion
Sustainable Agriculture and Production	1. Understand the management methods and characteristics of Taiwan’s local agricultural industry	4.933	4.926	5	0.258	0.052	4.309	☑
	2. Understand how to properly operate agriculture to maintain ecological balance and sustainable development of resources	4.733	4.711	5	0.458	0.097	4.237	☑
	3. Understand agricultural production and marketing issues and understand that agriculture will affect global economic development and human life	4.733	4.711	5	0.458	0.097	4.237	☑
	4. Understanding the types, sources and characteristics of food ingredients is the basic concept of sustainable agriculture and production	4.667	4.642	5	0.488	0.105	4.214	☑
	5. Concerned about global food issues and understanding the importance of promoting a fair and sustainable food system	4.600	4.573	5	0.507	0.110	4.191	☑
Healthy diet and culture	6. Understand the types of Taiwanese products, special cooking methods, and identify with local culture	4.800	4.761	5	0.561	0.117	3.920	☑
	7. Pay attention to dietary diversity (multiple dishes, multiple ingredients)	4.733	4.711	5	0.458	0.097	4.237	☑
	8. Understand the correct and healthy cooking methods	4.600	4.573	5	0.507	0.110	4.191	☑
	9. Use food with safety and quality certification, or food with pesticide residue inspection within safety standards	4.733	4.711	5	0.458	0.097	4.237	☑
	10. Understand the impact of dietary problems on health	4.467	4.439	4	0.516	0.116	4.146	☑
Green environmental protection and consumption	11. Understand the principle of simplicity in daily life and choose to buy agricultural products that have low environmental pollution	4.600	4.573	5	0.507	0.110	4.191	☑
	12. Possess green environmental management knowledge	4.733	4.711	5	0.458	0.097	4.237	☑
	13. Pay attention to the environmental problems caused by food and catering activities	4.733	4.711	5	0.458	0.097	4.237	☑
	14. Pay attention to the impact of climate change on the environment	4.667	4.642	5	0.488	0.105	4.214	☑
	15. Ability to transform packaged food or leftovers	4.533	4.506	5	0.516	0.114	4.169	☑
Food Social Responsibility and Ethics	16. Willing to provide minimum safety protection for customers’ food products	4.533	4.506	5	0.516	0.114	4.169	☑
	17. Value honesty in advertising and labeling of products and services	4.667	4.642	5	0.488	0.105	4.214	☑
	18. Willing to set an example and pay attention to dietary ethics	4.867	4.853	5	0.352	0.072	4.284	☑
	19. Willing to reconcile social responsibility and corporate profits	4.600	4.573	5	0.507	0.110	4.191	☑
	20. Value employees’ social conscience and integrity	4.667	4.642	5	0.488	0.105	4.214	☑

Note: CV < or = 0.3 indicates high expert agreement, 0.3 < CV ≤ 0.5 indicates moderate agreement, and CV > 0.5.

for the analysis results of the second round of the Fuzzy Delphi method expert questionnaire.

In order to determine whether to conduct the third round of the Fuzzy Delphi method, this study measured the stability of the scores of the experts and scholars on the importance of the indicators in the first round and the scores in the second round (the calculation method of stability is expressed as a percentage, and the formula is: the total number of changes in the responses of all members to a certain item/the number of members). Franchak et al. [18] believed that when the difference between the average of the opinions in the previous and subsequent rounds is less than 15%, it can be considered to have reached the stability standard. Therefore, if the item reaches a value less than 15% in any of the second rounds of questionnaires, the item can be considered to have reached stability, and it can also be decided when to stop sending questionnaires. Among the 16 criteria, all report a stability of less than 15%. The results of the stability measurement of the second round of questionnaires are shown in

Table 5. Second round questionnaire stability measurement results.

Facet	Item	Mean	Importance Stability	Facet	Item	Mean	Importance Stability
			2nd Delphi				2nd Delphi
Sustainable Agriculture and Production a	a1	4.933	2.70%	Healthy diet and culture b	b1	4.800	4.17%
	a2	4.733	0.00%		b2	4.733	1.41%
	a3	4.733	2.82%		b3	4.600	0.00%
	a4	4.667	0.00%		b4	4.733	1.41%
	a5	4.600	2.90%		b5	4.467	4.48%
Green environmental protection and consumption c	c1	4.600	0.00%	Food Social Responsibility and Ethics d	d1	4.533	2.94%
	c2	4.733	0.00%		d2	4.667	1.43%
	c3	4.733	1.41%		d3	4.867	2.74%
	c4	4.667	1.43%		d4	4.600	4.35%
	c5	4.533	1.47%		d5	4.667	1.43%

.

In constructing the sustainable food literacy dimensions and indicator framework for Taiwan catering talents, the analysis results show that a total of 5 indicators were selected in the “sustainable agriculture and production” dimension; a total of 5 indicators were selected in the “healthy diet and culture” dimension; a total of 5 indicators were selected in the “green environment protection and consumption” dimension; and a total of 5 indicators were selected in the “food social responsibility and ethics” dimension (

Table 6. Statistical results of mean and standard deviation of sustainable food literacy dimensions.

Facet	Indicator Content	Importance
		Mean	Standard Deviation	CV Value	${\mathbf{S}}_{\mathit{k}}$	Stability
Sustainable Agriculture and Production	1. Understand the management methods and characteristics of Taiwan’s local agricultural industry	4.933	0.258	0.052	4.309	2.70%
	2. Understand how to properly operate agriculture to maintain ecological balance and sustainable development of resources	4.733	0.458	0.097	4.237	0.00%
	3. Understand agricultural production and marketing issues and understand that agriculture will affect global economic development and human life	4.733	0.458	0.097	4.237	2.82%
	4. Understanding the types, sources and characteristics of food ingredients is the basic concept of sustainable agriculture and production	4.667	0.488	0.105	4.214	0.00%
	5. Care about global food issues and understand the importance of promoting a fair and sustainable food system	4.600	0.507	0.110	4.191	2.90%

,

Table 7. Statistical results of the mean and standard deviation of employee integrity.

Facet	Indicator Content	Importance
		Mean	Standard Deviation	CV Value	${\mathbf{S}}_{\mathit{k}}$	Stability
Healthy diet and culture	6. Understand the types of Taiwanese products, special cooking methods, and identify with local culture	4.800	0.561	0.117	3.920	4.17%
	7. Emphasis on dietary diversity (multiple dishes, multiple ingredients)	4.733	0.458	0.097	4.237	1.41%
	8. Understand the correct and healthy cooking methods	4.600	0.507	0.110	4.191	0.00%
	9. Use food with safety and quality certification, or food with pesticide residue inspection within safety standards.	4.733	0.458	0.097	4.237	1.41%
	10. Understand the impact of dietary problems on health	4.467	0.516	0.116	4.146	4.48%

,

Table 8. Statistical results of the mean and standard deviation of environmental protection dimensions.

Facet	Indicator Content	Importance
		Mean	Standard Deviation	CV Value	${\mathbf{S}}_{\mathit{k}}$	Stability
Green environmental protection and consumption	11. Understand the principle of simplicity in daily life and choose to buy agricultural products that have low environmental pollution	4.600	0.507	0.110	4.191	0.00%
	12. Have green environmental management knowledge	4.733	0.458	0.097	4.237	0.00%
	13. Pay attention to the environmental problems caused by food and catering activities	4.733	0.458	0.097	4.237	1.41%
	14. Pay attention to the impact of climate change on the environment	4.667	0.488	0.105	4.214	1.43%
	15. Ability to transform packaged food or leftovers	4.533	0.516	0.114	4.169	1.47%

and

Table 9. Statistical results of the mean and standard deviation of the dimensions of caring about the interests of the general public.

Facet	Indicator Content	Importance
		Mean	Standard Deviation	CV Value	${\mathbf{S}}_{\mathit{k}}$	Stability
Food Social Responsibility and Ethics	16. Willing to provide minimum safety protection for customers’ food products	4.533	0.516	0.114	4.169	2.94%
	17. Value honesty in advertising and labeling of products and services	4.667	0.488	0.105	4.214	1.43%
	18. Willing to set an example and pay attention to dietary ethics	4.867	0.352	0.072	4.284	2.74%
	19. Willing to reconcile social responsibility and corporate profits	4.600	0.507	0.110	4.191	4.35%
	20. Value employees’ social conscience and integrity	4.667	0.488	0.105	4.214	1.43%

).

4.3. Sustainable Food Literacy Course Effectiveness

4.3.1. Sustainable Food Literacy Curriculum Development

This study developed a teaching course model suitable for cultivating sustainable food literacy in higher vocational education. The course lasts for 10 weeks in one semester, for a duration of three hours per week, and includes theory and practical operations. Teaching activities are carried out using situational teaching strategies, including teaching objectives, content, teaching methods, unit activities, teaching resources, teaching evaluation, etc. The course content includes four major units, namely “Sustainable Agriculture and Production”, “Healthy Diet and Culture”, “Green Environmental Protection and Consumption”, and “Food Social Responsibility and Ethics” (

Table 10. Teaching intervention and teaching activity design for integrating sustainable food literacy into curriculum content.

Week Number	Unit Theme	Content Outline	Activity Design
1	1. Course introduction and scale pre-test	United Nations Sustainable Development Goals Sustainable food literacy awareness Explain the scale related to sustainable literacy	Course description (1.5 h) Grouping Fill in the questionnaire
2	Implementation pre-test	Sustainable food work test (Chinese food preparation-sustainable food work development)-pre-test	Implement practical tests Have the ability to develop sustainable food (ugly fruits and vegetables) works, conduct evaluation and scoring (expert consensus evaluation) Evaluation of sustainable food works
3	The connotation of sustainable food literacy	- Sustainable agriculture and production - Healthy diet and culture - Green environment protection and consumption - Food social responsibility and ethics	How to perceive sustainable food literacy Definition of sustainable food literacy Reflection assignment
4	Food and Agriculture Industry and Responsibility	Organic farms and social responsibility Green dining	Off-campus teaching-visiting organic farms and incorporating local food into dishes Reflection assignment
5	Food and Agriculture Culture Preservation	Sustainable development education Sustainability and local culture	Food and agriculture sustainability and local cultural development Reflection assignment
6	Diet education and health promotion	Dietary education and food power Dietary education and health Dietary safety and hygiene	Food Power and Food Education ◎Literacy-oriented teaching Reflection Assignment
7	Green environmental protection Leftover food and zero hunger	Corporate social responsibility in the catering industry Leftover food/food conservation and ugly fruits and vegetables Food banks	Field trip—visit to food bank enterprise ◎Situational teaching Reflection Assignment
8	Use leftover food and food prototype materials to prepare dishes	Discuss food waste and food conservation Verify and revise dish development	Collaborative teaching with teachers ◎Situational teaching ◎Literacy-oriented teaching
9	Team discussion	Repeated verification and revision of dish development	Collaborative teaching with teachers ◎Situational teaching
10	Implementation post-test Scale post-test	Sustainable food practical test (Chinese food preparation—sustainable food dish development)—post-test	Implement practical tests Sustainable food (ugly fruits and vegetables) works evaluation Sustainable food works development and scoring (expert consensus evaluation)

).

4.3.2. Quasi-Experimental Teaching Effectiveness

The results of the quasi-experimental teaching research are mainly to present the results of experimental teaching, focusing on the impact of students’ sustainable food literacy and sustainable food works, as well as teachers’ reflection notes and student interview records.

Regarding the evaluation of sustainable food works, this study conducted a consensus evaluation of sustainable food works through 6 experts. The evaluation scores were first analyzed by item analysis. Through missing value test, descriptive statistics, extreme group comparison and homogeneity test, the 12 items of the work scale were all higher than the recommended standard values. The inter-rater reliability of the 6 raters ranged from 0.41 to 0.83 (

Table 11. Inter-rater reliability.

	1	2	3	4	5	6
Rater 1	1.00
Rater 2	0.616 **	1.00
Rater 3	0.831 **	0.741 **	1.00
Rater 4	0.471 *	0.618 **	0.621 **	1.00
Rater 5	0.779 **	0.521 **	0.767 **	0.410 *	1.00
Rater 6	0.529 **	0.453 *	0.491 **	0.586 **	0.441 *	1.00

Note: ** p < 0.01 * p < 0.05.

), which generally reached a medium-high correlation. The internal consistency Cronbach’s α value of the overall evaluation scale was 0.98, and the reliability of each facet ranged from 0.88 to 0.93, indicating that the evaluation scale has good reliability (

Table 12. Reliability analysis results of the “Sustainable Food Works” scale.

Scale Dimensions	Cronbach α Coefficient
Professional Skills	0.92
Local and Diverse Ingredients	0.93
Selection of Leftovers	0.93
Environmentally Friendly Utensils	0.88
Full Scale	0.98

).

4.3.3. The Impact of Situational Teaching on Students’ Sustainable Food Works

Experts used the “Sustainable Food Works Evaluation Scale” to conduct consensus evaluation, and the average, standard deviation and t-test results of the pre- and post-test scores were obtained. From the table, it can be seen that the average score of each dimension of the students’ works in the post-test was significantly higher than the pre-test. Its professional skills; local diverse ingredients; selection of leftovers; and environmentally friendly utensils all reached a significant level, and the research hypothesis 1 was supported. This means that the students’ works have achieved significant progress in each dimension (

Table 13. Summary of the dimensions and total scores of students in the “Sustainable Food Project” assessment in the pre- and post-test t-test.

Sustainable Food Works	Group	M	SD	t Value
Professional Skills	Post-test Pre-test	9.58 5.52	2.84 2.49	9.70 **
Local and Diverse Ingredients	Post-test Pre-test	9.04 5.30	2.57 3.97	9.91 **
Selection of Leftovers	Post-test Pre-test	9.17 4.22	3.06 2.78	7.78 **
Environmentally Friendly Utensils	Post-test Pre-test	9.44 5.29	2.55 2.85	9.75 **

** p < 0.01.

).

4.3.4. The Impact of Situational Teaching on Students’ Sustainable Food Literacy

After the situational teaching experiment, the mean, standard deviation and t-test results of the scores obtained from the pre- and post-tests using the “surplus food utilization function” scale are shown in the following table. From

Table 14. Summary of students’ pre- and post-test t-test scores on the sub-test and total scores of “food waste utilization function”.

Tests	Group	N	M	SD	t Value
Knowledge	Post-test Pre-test	39 39	4.92 3.65	3.00 4.62	2.42 *
Attitudes	Post-test Pre-test	39 39	4.68 3.16	3.57 2.67	3.25 *
Skills	Post-test Pre-test	39 39	4.86 3.35	3.64 2.75	2.18 *

* p < 0.05.

, it can be seen that the average scores of each dimension of the scale in the post-test of the students in the test are significantly higher than the pre-test scores, and all dimensions have reached significant differences. This means that after the experimental teaching, the students have made significant progress in the surplus food utilization function, that is, sustainable food literacy. These statistical findings suggest that integrating situational teaching strategies and sustainability-focused content significantly improves students’ knowledge, attitudes, and skills related to food sustainability. In practice, this indicates that vocational and hospitality programs should incorporate contextualized learning scenarios, such as field visits, local food preparation, and collaborative design of food waste reduction strategies [4,7]. Educators may consider using interdisciplinary modules that merge sustainability education with culinary creativity, as these approaches have shown measurable learning gains [5,15]. The statistically significant improvements across all assessed dimensions demonstrate the feasibility and pedagogical value of embedding sustainable food literacy into culinary education.

4.3.5. Analysis of Teacher Reflection Notes and Student Interview Records

In the teaching process, school education improves students’ literacy through situational teaching and innovative curriculum design and teaching activities, so that students can use appropriate strategies and skills to solve life difficulties. Through student interviews and teacher reflection notes, this study sorted out the reasons why situational teaching activities help improve students’ sustainable food literacy and sustainable food works as follows:

(1)

Integration across disciplines enhances the depth and breadth of students’ thinking

In this course, we have designed sustainable food literacy covering four dimensions of knowledge, attitude and skills in the course. At the same time, we have also introduced the concepts of food and agriculture education and local culture into the course topics, so that students’ creative works can have themes and extension. After 10 weeks of holistic courses, students’ works were evaluated and agreed upon by experts, and it was found that each dimension of the works had significant improvements.

The course includes Taiwan’s environmental climate change, sustainable agriculture and food culture, which I am very interested in. Especially for Taiwan’s unique agricultural products, I think they are quite special. Because I am in Taiwan, I hope that I can make Taiwanese cuisine that foreigners like and are impressed by in the future.

(2)

The content of the situational activities enhances students’ learning interest.

The course design includes rich teaching materials similar to the farm situation (including a large number of pictures, videos, special lectures and text descriptions) and adopts a variety of teaching methods, integrating group discussion strategies to enhance students’ learning interest and creative motivation. Such discussion and mutual evaluation courses also promote students’ intrinsic motivation and sense of achievement, making them deeply interested in such teaching content. In the early stages of the creative process, creators can experience a flow similar to the peak experience when they devote their efforts to the process that matches their abilities. This flow experience itself is one of the great sources of pleasure [19,20].

Now I love the fruit and vegetable carving class. Our group will spend a lot of time thinking about it. As long as the teacher has a theme, we will frantically look for materials to think about it.

In fact, I think this class is really good, that is there are many interesting speeches, a lot of pictures, videos and text explanations during class. I think this kind of class is very interesting.

The more we argue in our group, the better the work will be. The more we argue, the happier everyone is, because the work will become more and more refined. For example, we didn’t intend to make so many things for the sculpture originally, it was just a pumpkin and a cucumber, but the tomato ears were the result of continuous discussion and argument.

5. Conclusions

This study uses literature collection and Fuzzy Delphi to develop the connotation and indicators of “sustainable food literacy” that catering talents in Taiwan should possess. Through literature collection and analysis, the connotation indicators developed include four major dimensions, including “sustainable agriculture and production” (6 items), “healthy diet and culture” (6 items), “” (8 items), “green environmental protection and consumption” (5 items), “food social responsibility and ethics” (8 items), etc. 24 headings in four major dimensions.

The final “sustainable food literacy” constructed through two Fuzzy Delphis includes four major dimensions and 20 headings, including “sustainable agriculture and production” (5 items), “healthy diet and culture” (5 items), “green environmental protection and consumption” (5 items), “food social responsibility and ethics” (5 items), etc. This study will develop teaching course units based on the connotation of this dimension in the second year of research, and then conduct educational intervention experiments to determine the effectiveness of the course content.

According to the research results, situational teaching and innovative teaching activities have a great impact on students. After the sustainable food literacy course teaching, students’ sustainable food works have made significant progress in every aspect (professional skills, local diverse ingredients, selection of leftovers, and environmentally friendly utensils), and such teaching activities also enhance students’ sustainable professional abilities and attitudes. In summary, the sustainable food literacy teaching activities developed in this study can improve students’ sustainable food literacy (leftover food utilization function) and positively affect students’ learning willingness, creative motivation and interest, and other attitudes and behaviors.

In the past, cooking courses were incorporated into higher hospitality education. Catering cooking courses are no longer the traditional teaching method of master-apprentice teaching, but a student-centered learning method, and strengthen the cultivation of students’ creative ability. In order to stimulate students’ learning motivation and creativity, the arrangement of catering cooking teaching activities can be as diversified as possible, such as inviting celebrities to speak, watching movies, playing games, and visiting schools.

In order to allow students to experience and stimulate their creativity in sustainable food works, this study designed innovative course content and supported and rewarded students’ novel thinking, unique perspectives and creative connections, and actively established a situational teaching classroom environment where students are willing to take risks and feel safe. The situational classroom in the study provides students with diversified kitchen equipment and resources, so that students have sufficient practice resources and environment. From the results of this study, it can be seen that if teachers want to engage in creative teaching, in addition to having the ability to compile and design courses, they must be familiar with innovative teaching strategies and integrate them into the curriculum. At the same time, teachers should have classroom management skills and reflect on the appropriateness of their teaching materials and teaching objectives at any time to meet the development of students’ progress.

This study constructed a framework of sustainable food literacy tailored to Taiwan’s vocational food education context, identifying four key dimensions: sustainable agriculture and production, healthy diet and culture, green environmental protection and consumption, and food social responsibility and ethics. Through expert consensus using the Fuzzy Delphi method, 20 validated indicators were developed. The subsequent 10-week curriculum, based on these dimensions, was shown to significantly improve students’ sustainable food literacy across knowledge, attitudes, and practical skills, as evidenced by statistical analysis of pre- and post-test data and student-created food works.

These findings have important implications for the design of food education in vocational and hospitality programs. They suggest that embedding sustainability principles into culinary training—using experiential and situational teaching strategies—can effectively foster competencies aligned with global sustainability goals. The study also supports the use of interdisciplinary, problem-based learning environments to strengthen students’ ethical awareness and creative problem-solving abilities in food-related contexts.

Nonetheless, this study has several limitations. The quasi-experimental design without random assignment, limited sample size, and relatively short intervention period constrain the generalizability of the findings. Additionally, all participants were from the same institution, which may limit external validity. Future research should consider longitudinal studies across diverse educational settings and test the adaptability of the curriculum in different cultural or national contexts. Expanding evaluation tools beyond self-reported measures and integrating stakeholder feedback (e.g., from industry or policy sectors) could also enrich understanding of sustainable food literacy development.