Drivers of Local Food Consumption Among Young Consumers: Integrating Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations

Abstract

Local food (LF) consumption has achieved increasing attention over the last few decades, given its potential to enhance social, economic, and environmental sustainability. Despite its benefits, understanding consumer behaviour towards LF remains underexplored. This study investigates intrinsic and extrinsic motivations for LF consumption among young Italian consumers, applying Self-Determination Theory (SDT). Using structural equation modelling (SEM) on a sample of 931 respondents, this study reveals the significant roles of perceived benefits, knowledge, satisfaction, and food sustainability concern (FSC) in shaping people’s intention to consume LF. Moreover, the findings underscore the importance of food sustainability concerns, as an extrinsic motivation improving the effect of the intrinsic ones, thus fostering a persistent intention to consume local food.

1. Introduction

Hunger and health diseases are currently on the rise, worsened by recent crises associated with military conflicts and pandemics [1]. Addressing these issues requires humanity to enhance the sustainability of diets and drive the transition towards a more sustainable food system ensuring food security and nutrition for both present and future generations [2].

This condition can be fostered by locally produced foods, whose consumption has been increasingly advocated in recent years as a way to enhance social, economic, and environmental sustainability [3,4,5]. Indeed, local food (LF) choices are usually associated with sustainability-related advantages, such as supporting local economy, reduced energy consumption, environmental friendliness, low processing, and scant use of preservative compounds, social capital, and inclusivity improvements [6,7,8,9]. Recognising these benefits has led to a rapid growth in LF demand over time [10], as well as to an increased scientific interest from both scholars and academics.

Past research often focused on LF systems, policies, and distribution, providing substantial evidence about their environmental, economic, and social implications [11].

However, consumer behaviour and preferences related to LF consumption still require further attention, since the motivations behind consumer choices and the factors influencing their purchasing decisions are not fully understood [12]. Notably, a critical examination of the existing literature reveals a lack of comprehensive studies that holistically analyse the factors influencing LF consumption from the consumer’s perspective.

Current research predominantly focuses on isolated aspects, by identifying a number of both intrinsic motivations, including freshness, nutritional value, taste, and healthiness of LF [13,14,15,16], and extrinsic motivations, such as environmental and social sustainability [17], without providing an overall framework combining them to compare their predictive values. Nevertheless, a comprehensive approach considering multiple factors can help to understand the nuanced and multi-faceted nature of consumer motivations while supporting food producers, retailers, and policymakers in designing effective strategies, promoting LF consumption and the overall transition towards a more sustainable food system [18].

Notably, combining extrinsic and intrinsic motivations into an inclusive framework is particularly valuable, as intrinsic motivations should encourage a certain behaviour just due to a sense of obligation, such as satisfying social pressures or invoking the use of LF for health purposes, while extrinsic factors should provide a more stable behavioural basis to explain long-term LF choices [19,20]. Therefore, their mutual consideration is promising to make LF consumption more persistent and predictable.

Based on this evidence, the present study investigates the drivers of consumer’s intention to purchase and consume LF, by focusing on both intrinsic and extrinsic motivations under the umbrella of Self-Determination Theory (SDT) [21], which has had an important impact in modern psychology and marketing research, as it offers a robust framework for comparing the predictive value of different motivations inspiring a certain behaviour. The basic assumption of SDT is that individuals who are willing to reach a certain goal that is not set by themselves but results from a peer pressure or a sense of guilt (e.g., consuming LF, as it is beneficial for personal health) may be more prone to being discouraged after negative experiences or failures and less persistent in reaching the desired outcome [21]. Instead, people engaged in activities that reflect their own interests and values act mostly in a self-determined way and are more likely to achieve their goals [21]. In the case of LF consumption, this leads us to suppose that people could be intrinsically motivated to buy LF because they recognise its qualities and potential benefits for personal health. However, they may be less persistent in their behaviour in case of negative experiences, such as LF not being available or consistent with their own preferences. Meanwhile, their behaviour may be more unchanging if they are extrinsically motivated, recognizing that LF is not only tastier, healthier, and more natural than non-local ones, but also affirms their sustainable-oriented values, as LF supports the sustainability of food production and consumption markets.

In this study, extrinsic motivations are represented by individuals’ concern in food sustainability, i.e., the extent to which a person is engaged with sustainability issues when consuming food [22], while intrinsic motivations are strictly related to LF’s attributes and benefits, personal knowledge, and past experiences. Product-related elements have been commonly recognised as intrinsic motivations positively influencing LF choices [23,24]. Past experiences and knowledge can also be included among intrinsic motivations, since they generate signals that can be recalled to guide a certain behaviour (e.g., intention to buy and consume LF regularly) [25]. Communication sources regarding LF are further considered in this study, since prior research commonly recognised that the more exposed consumers are to information dealing with a certain topic, such as pro-environmental actions [26,27], the more pronounced their engagement with the topic is. Hence, information on LF provided by different sources may be considered among the potential antecedents of consumers’ interest in LF and (consequently) buying intention.

Two research questions operationalise the purpose of this study:

• (RQ1) How do intrinsic and extrinsic motivations affect consumer intention to buy and consume LF?
• (RQ2) Does food sustainability concern (as an extrinsic motivation) mediate the relationship between intrinsic motivations and young consumers’ behavioural intention to purchase and consume LF?

The second research question, in particular, builds on the assumption of the SDT that while intrinsic drivers are important for immediate engagement, extrinsic motivations can play a critical role in ensuring persistence and long-term commitment to LF consumption.

This study applies a structural equation modelling (SEM) approach, investigating the relationships between LF consumption and its potential antecedents, based on a questionnaire survey carried out on 931 young consumers, aged between 18 and 40 years. This population group represents an interesting target market, whose behaviour has been scarcely documented by the literature in the LF domain. Indeed, as LFs are often associated with healthy eating [13,16], past studies increasingly recommended their use by young people to prevent future diseases and to create an overall healthier lifestyle [28]. Moreover, young consumers represent a suitable target market when speaking about sustainability, as they usually express high concern about environmental protection and social responsibility [29,30], so much so that, nowadays, “selling products to young consumers might not be even possible without relying on green strategies, either in the production processes or in marketing them under sustainable principles” [31] (p. 140). Finally, young consumers are usually considered of high interest to marketers, given their buying and decision-making power and their prospective economic role in the society [32]. Thus, exploring young consumers’ perception, attitudes, and behaviour towards LF is a critical matter, which can support companies and retailers to target them and to properly satisfy their needs and overall desire to buy and consume locally.

Overall, this study enables a better comprehension of the motivational system encouraging young people to consume LF, on which the related literature is quite scarce, by proposing an integrated framework, considering the influence of both intrinsic and extrinsic factors on behavioural intention towards LF and their mutual relationships. Moreover, it provides companies in the LF sector with valuable information to better adjust their offer to a relevant target (i.e., young consumers) and achieve an enduring preference supporting the current transition towards a more sustainable food system.

2. Literature Background

Local food (LF) can be categorised by three distinct proximity domains: geographical, relational, and value-based [33]. While geographical proximity emphasises short supply chains, minimizing transportation distances, relational proximity focuses on direct producer–consumer relationships, fostering community and trust, and value-based proximity includes shared values like environmental sustainability and local economic support. This definition is particularly helpful, as it highlights the role of LF in strengthening community ties and upholding ethical standards, thus being crucial for analysing its impact on food systems, sustainability, and consumer behaviour [33].

Based on the above proximities, LF can be defined as food that has travelled only short distances or that is marketed directly by the producer. It does not necessarily equate with fresh products alone. It also includes minimally processed items (e.g., olive oil, cheese, eggs), provided they are regionally produced. Conversely, most scholars exclude highly processed or industrial products from the LF category, even if manufactured locally, in order to remain consistent with sustainability-oriented definitions [34,35].

Based on the general idea of where LF is coming from, several factors have been identified as potential antecedents of locally produced foods. These include environmental concerns, where consumers choose LF to reduce their carbon footprint and support sustainable practices [34,35]; the desire for fresher, higher-quality products, as local foods often reach the consumer more quickly after harvest [35]; and the support for local economies, where purchasing LF helps to sustain local farmers and businesses [36]. Health considerations, such as the perception that LF is less likely to contain harmful pesticides or additives, have also been included among the main drivers of LF choices [15].

While these studies provide valuable insights, they tend to compartmentalise factors rather than considering the interrelationships and cumulative effects on consumers, thus limiting the understanding of consumer behaviour regarding LF choices.

An interesting way to address this gap is represented by the Self-Determination Theory (SDT), originally developed by Ryan and Deci [21], suggesting that individuals are more likely to engage in behaviours that fulfil their intrinsic needs. SDT posits that human motivations are simultaneously driven by the need for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. In the context of LF consumption, this means that consumers may be motivated by the desire for autonomy in making food choices that align with their personal values and beliefs, such as environmental sustainability and supporting local economies [37]. The sense of competence achieved by selecting high-quality, healthy, and fresh LFs can further enhance consumer satisfaction and reinforce these purchasing behaviours [35]. Additionally, the need for relatedness is also significant, as purchasing LF often involves direct interactions with producers, thus fostering a sense of community and trust [9,38].

Integrating SDT into the LF consumption domain can offer a robust explanatory framework that accounts for a range of intrinsic motivations, besides the extrinsic ones. This approach enables the comparison of different motivational factors within a single model, thus addressing the fragmentation in the existing literature. Moreover, it supports researchers and companies to better identify the most effective ways to promote LF choices, while aligning with broader sustainability goals.

2.1. Intrinsic Motivations

In this study, the behavioural intention to purchase and consume LF serves as the dependent variable, rooted in the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), which posits that intention is a critical antecedent of actual behaviour [39].

By focusing on intrinsic motivations affecting behavioural intention towards LFs, one significant area of research focuses on their attributes and benefits. Past studies indicate that attributes such as perceived freshness, quality, health benefits, and environmental sustainability are main motivators influencing the preferences and intentions of younger demographics towards LF [35]. For instance, Pelletier et al. [40] underscored that young consumers are increasingly drawn to LF due to its perceived healthfulness and freshness, which align with their preferences for high dietary quality and environmentally responsible food choices. Similarly, Beke et al. [41] observed that high quality, distinctiveness, and excellent taste are primary drivers for purchasing LF, along with the opportunity to acquire unique products that are not found in large retail stores or other outlets. Notably, they emphasised that product attributes hold greater importance compared to price, availability, and purchasing convenience.

These attributes not only enhance the appeal of LF products but also resonate deeply with the values and concerns of younger generations, who prioritise transparency in food production and sustainability [42]. This aligns with broader societal shifts towards more conscientious consumption patterns among young adults, influenced by their environmental consciousness and desire to support local economies [43,44].

In addition to perceived attributes, individual knowledge about LF has been identified as a key determinant of behavioural intention [15]. In the context of SDT, individual knowledge is considered as a part of intrinsic motivations, as acquiring knowledge often fulfils the innate psychological needs of competence, autonomy, and relatedness, which are central to intrinsic motivation [21]. Consumers who are well informed about the benefits of LF are more likely to express stronger intentions to purchase and consume these foods [35]. Indeed, knowledge empowers consumers to make informed decisions consistent with their values and concerns, thereby influencing the intention to support local producers and sustainable food systems. Sirieix et al. [45] emphasised the importance of knowledge, highlighting how consumers need to know about the advantages of LF production and believe in its relevance before they develop an intention to purchase it.

Recent research highlights that well-informed youth regarding the benefits of LF show heightened intentionality towards embracing sustainable dietary behaviours [46,47]. This phenomenon is also supported by behavioural theories, such as Social Cognitive Theory [48], which posits that knowledge acquisition and educational attainment enhance self-regulatory capacities and sustainable behaviour adoption. Beyond mere awareness of personal benefits, knowledge encompasses a broader understanding of the environmental and societal implications of dietary choices [34]. Therefore, informed youth are more inclined to make conscientious dietary decisions aligning with their values of sustainability and supporting local producers. That is, improved knowledge on LF’s benefits and attributes may encourage individuals to consider not only their immediate well-being but also the well-being of future generations and the ecosystems they inhabit.

Satisfaction derived from previous experiences with LF consumption emerged as a further determinant of behavioural intention among young consumers. It represents an additional component of intrinsic motivations, supported by the SDT framework, since satisfaction derived from consuming LF often stems from fulfilling intrinsic needs, such as a sense of community, personal well-being, and environmental stewardship. For instance, Zepeda and Deal [15] found that consumers of LF experience significant satisfaction from the perceived quality and health benefits of local products, which are seen as fresher and more trustworthy. This satisfaction aligns with the intrinsic need for competence in making healthy choices, autonomy in making independent choices that reflect personal values, and relatedness in feeling connected to the community and supporting local farmers. Prior research found that positive past experiences, encompassing satisfaction with taste, freshness, and overall quality of LFs, decisively augment the likelihood of continued engagement with them [49,50] probably because food choices naturally involve an emotional attachment. For instance, in the context of organic food among Generation Z, Bhutto et al. [51] demonstrated that customer satisfaction with previous experiences strongly influences their intention to repurchase, emphasising the importance of ensuring high-quality LF to foster repeated purchases. These findings suggest that satisfaction from past consumption experiences acts as a reinforcing mechanism, strengthening consumers’ commitment to LF and encouraging them to continue supporting local producers.

2.2. Extrinsic Motivations

As for the extrinsic motivations driving the consumers’ intention to buy and consume locally, high attention has been devoted to the individual concern to sustainability encompassing a broad spectrum of issues, ranging from environmental impacts (e.g., carbon footprint, biodiversity conservation) to social and economic dimensions (e.g., fair trade, local economic development) [52]. The consumers’ awareness and consideration of sustainability aspects in their food choices (i.e., food sustainability concern) can create a powerful motivation for consuming LF. Prior studies by Sunding [53] and Thilmany et al. [54] claimed that premium prices were more likely to be paid by consumers who were motivated to buy alternatively produced foods (e.g., organic food, local food) for altruistic reasons. Specifically, Hughner et al. [55] found that consumers are willing to pay up to 30% more for organic products because they believe they help to preserve biodiversity and soil health. This willingness to pay a premium is driven by the desire to support farming practices that are less detrimental to the environment. Similarly, food sustainability concerns have been linked to a greater likelihood of purchasing LFs, as consumers seek to support agricultural practices that are environmentally friendly and socially responsible [56]. For instance, consumers who are concerned about food sustainability may prefer local products because they support local farmers [57], reduce food miles and overall carbon footprint [54], and often involve less packaging [58].

2.3. External Factors: Communication Sources

Communication sources play a crucial role in shaping consumer behaviours according to various behavioural theories, such as the Theory of Planned Behaviour, emphasising the influence of external factors, including communication channels, in determining attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control, which collectively determine behavioural intentions [39].

Communication channels like social media, traditional media, and interpersonal interactions exert substantial influence over how consumers perceive and intend to engage with LF purchases. A study by Jung et al. [8] found that promotional events, posters, emails, samples of LFs, and especially social media can be used as effective ways to increase awareness of LF among college students. Similarly, in the case of interpersonal communication, Bianchi and Mortimer [18] highlighted how recommendations from friends and family significantly enhance consumers’ perceived value and trust in LF products.

Understanding the impact of communication sources can help marketers, policymakers, and researchers to effectively promote behaviours, such as LF consumption, by strategically leveraging communication strategies able to improve young consumers’ engagement with LF, as a way for developing a more sustainable food system in the long term. Hence, information cues have been considered in this study to investigate their predictive power when compared to other intrinsic and extrinsic motivations.

2.4. The Mediating Role of Extrinsic Motivations

Thus far, the research based on the SDT often suggests that extrinsic motivations are more important than intrinsic ones in orienting long-term and stable self-determined choices. Indeed, while intrinsic motivations are undoubtedly important for immediate engagement and satisfaction, the internalisation of extrinsic motivations can play a pivotal role in ensuring sustained behavioural change [21]. This process is particularly evident in the context of LF choices. Zepeda and Leviten-Reid [57] found that consumers who began buying LF to support local farmers continued doing so as they internalised the value of their contributions to the community. A similar pattern has been observed with environmental motivations. A study by Brown and Miller [36] demonstrated that consumers who were initially driven by environmental concerns to buy LF often continued this behaviour as they recognised the broader ecological benefits. These consumers initially supported local agriculture to reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with long-distance food transportation. As they learned more about the environmental impact and the importance of sustainable practices, these extrinsic motivations became internalised, leading to a lasting preference for such foods. Another example is the participation in Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) programmes. Initially, many consumers can join CSA programmes to support local agriculture and receive fresh products. Over time, as they experience the benefits of direct farmer support and community building, these extrinsic motivations become internalised, resulting in a stable, long-term commitment to CSA programmes [59].

More recently, Annunziata et al. [22] (p. 92), by combining organic and LF consumption with consumers’ adherence to the Mediterranean diet, considered them “to be part of an overall orientation to sustainability, rather than being just seen as a healthier and more sustainable diet”.

These findings illustrate how extrinsic motivations can evolve into intrinsic values, producing sustained consumer behaviour. On these bases, one can suppose that FSC mediates the relationship between BI and other intrinsic motivations, since BI could proportionally increase when consumers are concerned with food sustainability problems, regardless of their personal knowledge, satisfaction, and perception of LF attributes and benefits.

2.5. Hypotheses Development

Drawing on previous literature, this study proposes the following hypotheses in relation to LF consumption by the young consumers:

H1. 

Perceived attributes and benefits of LF positively influence young consumers’ behavioural intention.

H2. 

Individual knowledge about LF positively influences young consumers’ behavioural intention.

H3. 

Satisfaction from past consumption of LF positively influences young consumers’ behavioural intention.

H4. 

Food sustainability concern positively influences young consumers’ behavioural intention towards LF.

H5. 

Communication sources positively influence young consumers’ behavioural intention towards LF.

H6. 

FSC mediates the positive relationships between intrinsic motivations (i.e., LF attributes and benefits, knowledge on LF, and satisfaction) and behavioural intention.

The term “positive influence” is used in this work to indicate a statistically significant, positive relationship between the independent variables (intrinsic, extrinsic, and external motivations) and the dependent variable (behavioural intention). The adjective “positive” reflects the evidence consistently reported in the literature, which has shown that these motivations tend to foster stronger intentions towards LF consumption.

Figure 1 depicts the investigated framework with relative hypotheses.

3. Materials and Methods

Data for this study were collected from March to September 2023 by means of an online self-administered questionnaire on a sample population aged 18–40 years. Italy has been selected as the research setting for two reasons. First, LFs from Italy represent a salient expression of authenticity and local culture and have acquired an increasing appeal and popularity in the last decade [24,50], resulting in the highest number of LFs labelled with geographical indications in Europe [50]. Second, prior research confirmed that in Italy, as in many developed countries [12], people are highly involved in sustainable food consumption and related food choices, including buying and consuming locally [22].

The questionnaire was developed and pre-tested with a small number of respondents (15) to ensure its clarity and comprehensibility. After being slightly modified, the final instrument consisted of three sections investigating (i) the overall respondents’ food consumption and purchasing habits; (ii) their perception, knowledge, and attitudes towards LF; and (iii) their level of food sustainability concern. An additional section investigated the socio-demographic characteristics of the sample.

The questionnaire included a preliminary screening question ascertaining the respondents’ consumption of LF (i.e., When given the chance, how frequently would you consume local foods?), based on a five-point Likert scale. We considered only people consuming LF “occasionally/sometimes”, “almost every time” or “every time”, by excluding “almost never” and “never” responses. This ensured that respondents were familiar with LFs properties and that their preference towards them was consistent. Accordingly, the original number of 1080 collected questionnaires was reduced to 931 valid questionnaires for the analysis.

An a priori power analysis using GPower 3.1 confirmed the adequacy of the sample size, indicating that at least 394 participants were needed to achieve a statistical power of 0.95 (f² = 0.10; α = 0.05), given the investigated model [59]. Although the sample was not statistically representative of the entire Italian population, the large number of respondents ensured a wide coverage and balanced distribution of the target population. The sample, indeed, is well distributed in terms of gender and includes a highly educated population, living with their families, workers, and with omnivore dietary habits. Notably, the subdivision into Northern and Central–Southern Italy was introduced solely as a socio-demographic control variable, and not to define “local” vs. “non-local” consumption. Respondents in each area were asked to evaluate LF with reference to their own territory of residence.

Table 1. Sample profile (No. 931).

	No.	%
Gender
Female	528	57.71
Male	403	43.29
Origin
Northern Italy	499	53.60
Central-Southern Italy	432	46.40
Yearly income
under €14.999	300	32.22
€15.000–29.999	410	44.04
€30.000–59.999	182	19.55
€60.000–99.999	31	3.33
over €100.000	8	0.86
Education
Secondary school	12	1.29
High school	236	25.35
Bachelor	262	28.14
Master/Ph.D.	421	45.22
Familiar status
Live alone	99	10.63
Live with parents/siblings	339	36.41
Live with husband/wife/children	423	45.44
Live with friends/others	70	7.52
Occupation
Self employed	120	12.89
Permanent full-time worker	245	26.32
Temporary full-time worker	128	13.75
Part-time worker	88	9.45
Student	272	29.21
Unemployed	78	8.38
Diet
Vegetarian	119	17.78
Vegan	50	5.37
Omnivore	727	78.09
Other (flexitarian, ketogenic, reducetarian, …)	35	3.76

provides a general overview of the sample profile.

3.1. Measures

The questionnaire items were derived from existing literature to ensure the highest content validity of the scales. Specifically, behavioural intention (BI) is the dependent variable, while perceived attributes and benefits of LF (BEN), knowledge (KNOW), satisfaction (SAT), and food sustainability concern (FSC) are the independent ones. FSC is also investigated as the mediator, to specifically address RQ2 (i.e., Does food sustainability concern (as an extrinsic motivation) mediate the relationship between intrinsic motivations and young consumers’ behavioural intention to purchase and consume LF?).

Items for measuring perceived attributes and benefits of local foods were adapted from Schönhart et al. [60], analysing the most frequent expected effects of typical local food systems on potential stakeholders. Additional items were included according to Roininen et al. [61], exploring the consumers’ perception of LF, and the recent Barilla Food Centre’s [62] report on global trends, which particularly underlines the opportunity to protect the environment, local culture, and traditions among the main factors influencing the attention towards LF consumption.

Items concerning knowledge, satisfaction, and behavioural intention towards LF have been drawn from Lee et al.’s [63] study, based on prior research of Shepherd and Towler [64] for knowledge, Oliver [65] for satisfaction, and Zeithaml et al. [66] for behavioural intention.

Communication sources have been extracted from the IFIC Survey [67] on Food and health, investigating the main trusted sources guiding food choices under a healthy perspective.

Finally, items for food sustainability concerns were taken, with few adaptations, from Annunziata et al. [22], analysing the organic and LF consumption of Italian families. All items were measured on a 7-point Likert scale of agreement (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree).

Before starting the survey, respondents were explicitly instructed to consider food items as “local” when produced in their region or adjacent ones, in line with Eriksen [33] and Feldmann and Hamm [35], thus differentiating them from non-local or imported products.

Appendix A provides full description of the variables with related references.

3.2. Data Processing

The data analysis followed a multi-step procedure, combining descriptive statistics with multivariate techniques. The former was useful to provide a preliminary overview of the respondents’ profile and food habits, based on frequencies, mean values, and standard deviations. Multivariate techniques were applied to investigate the hypothesised relationships among variables. Specifically, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA), based on the maximum likelihood estimation, was performed to identify the key factors associated with those antecedents of behavioural intention that are based on a relevant number of items, i.e., LF benefits (BEN), food sustainability concern (FSC), and communication sources (COMM). The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity supported the appropriateness of such an analysis [68]. A Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was conducted to assess the reliability and validity of the model and to investigate the multiple relationships among variables. Before running the multivariate analysis, the inter-items correlation of each construct was observed [69]. It was not higher than 0.50, thus avoiding collinearity problems. Finally structural equation modelling (SEM) was applied to assess the hypothesised relationships among variables.

Data analysis was conducted through R 3.5.0 statistical software package.

4. Results

4.1. Descriptive Statistics and Factor Analysis

Food habits of young respondents are characterised as follows: More than 89% of the sample buy food products from one to three times a week, and the average expenditure is between 30 and 100€, revealing their intention to minimise time and shopping efforts by reducing the weekly shopping in one or few expeditions. Respondents typically shop in their city of residence (mean: 3.25), preferring supermarkets (mean: 3.06) and local convenience stores (mean: 2.12), mainly due to their balance between convenience and product variety. Store selection is primarily driven by the search for convenience, encompassing economic factors (such as good prices and promotions), location (including store proximity, parking facilities, and hours of operation), product assortment (size and variety), and the high quality of fresh foods.

Respondents reported having a good knowledge of LFs (mean: 4.33) and expressed high satisfaction with their past consumption experiences (mean: 5.17). Additionally, they indicated a strong intention to purchase and consume these foods in the future (mean: 5.62).

Then, they were asked to identify which LF they had purchased in the past two weeks, selecting from up to nine different food categories. The highest mean values were observed for fruit and vegetables (mean: 4.58), olive oil (mean: 4.55), and eggs (mean: 4.39), aligning with the food categories most frequently bought directly from producers [70].

Overall, respondents declared to be highly willing to pay for buying a food that is both locally produced and environmentally sustainable (mean: 5.51).

The exploratory factor analysis produced significant results for the investigated constructs (i.e., BEN, FSC and COMM), revealing that economic and environmental protection are the most representative benefits associated with LF, followed by safety and health-related ones. With respect to FSC, mean values higher than 0.5 reveal that respondents are usually highly concerned with sustainability issues related to food choices. However, results from the EFA revealed that environmental dimensions are prominent, followed by social and economic issues related to food sustainability and package-related ones. Finally, specialised and mass communication conveyed through daily press, TV, and social networks, emerged as the most prominent communications sources informing people about LF, followed by scientific studies and product or process certifications. Informal communication appears to be the less relevant information source (

Table 2. Results from the EFA (cut-off value: >0.4) ¹.

Local Food Benefits (BEN)
	Economic and Environmental Benefits	Safety and Health-Related Benefits	Culture and Heritage-Related Benefits	Personal Well-Being Benefits
LF1				0.911
LF2				0.601
LF3	0.752
LF4	0.866
LF5		0.892
LF6		0.978
LF7			0.649
LF8	0.729
LF9	0.746
LF10			0.648
LF11			0.920
Proportional variance	0.220	0.176	0.163	0.113
Cumulative Variance	0.220	0.396	0.558	0.671
Preliminary Tests: (1) KMO: 0.8663701; (2) Bartlett Test of Sphericity: 6722.174 (df = 66; p < 2.22 × 10−16); (3) Test of the hypothesis that four factors are sufficient: Chi-square = 142.37 (df = 17; p < 7.54 × 10−22).
Food Sustainability Concern (FSC)
		Environmental-related concerns	Social and economic-related concerns	Product-related concerns
FSC1				0.624
FSC2				1.046
FSC3		0.562
FSC4		0.783
FSC5		0.535
FSC6		0.900
FSC7		0.989
FSC8			0.601
FSC9			1.041
FSC10			0.520
Proportional variance		0.324	0.180	0.162
Cumulative Variance		0.324	0.504	0.666
Preliminary Tests: (1) KMO: 0.9228606; (2) Bartlett Test of Sphericity: Chi-square = 6729.746 (df = 45; p < 2.22 × 10−16); (3) Test of the hypothesis that three factors are sufficient: Chi-square = 156.39 (df = 18; p < 4.23 × 10−24).
Communication Sources (COMM)
	Specialised and mass communication	Scientific studies	Product-process certification	Informal sources
C1				1.015
C2				0.832
C3			1.048
C4			0.789
C5		0.894
C6		1.038
C7	0.630
C8	0.967
C9	0.894
C10	0.616
C11	0.438
Proportional variance	0.247	0.193	0.160	0.157
Cumulative Variance	0.247	0.440	0.600	0.757
Preliminary Tests: (1) KMO: 0.8137238; (2) Bartlett Test of Sphericity: Chi square = 7882.73 (df = 66; p < 2.22 × 10−16); (3) Test of the hypothesis that four factors are sufficient: Chi-square = 189.08 (df = 17; p < 4.43 × 10−31).

¹ The items ‘Local food increases community power and personal relationships’ and ‘Suggestions from healthcare and nutritionists’ have been removed from the original lists of LF benefits and communication cues, respectively, as their loadings were under the cutoff value.

).

4.2. Factors Affecting Behavioural Intention Towards LF: The SEM Analysis

Before analysing the multiple relationships among variables, the SEM method was used to assess the reliability, unidimensionality, and validity of the investigated model, based on the factor solutions that emerged from the EFA. Each construct’s reliability was evaluated by calculating Alpha values and Composite Reliability (CR). The ranges of both indices indicate an appropriate level of internal consistency [71,72]. All factor loadings exceeded the lower limit of 0.4, and inter-construct correlations generally fell between 0.20 and 0.70, suggesting that items measure the same underlying characteristic while maintaining unique variance [71]. Both convergent and discriminant validity were confirmed, as the average variance extracted (AVE) for each construct exceeded the threshold value of 0.50 and the square of its inter-construct correlation [72], thereby supporting the overall validity of the model (

Table 3. The measurement model.

Construct/ Items	Loading	St. Err.	z-Value	p-Value	α	CR	AVE	R2
Behavioural Intention (BI)
BI1	0.618	0.021	29.549	0.000	0.952	0.952	0.869	0.873
BI2	0.619	0.023	27.429	0.000
BI3	0.609	0.021	29.228	0.000
Local Food Benefits (BEN)
Economic and environmental benefits (BEN1)
LF3	1.178	0.048	24.681	0.000	0.863	0.863	0.613	0.612
LF4	1.264	0.045	28.145	0.000
LF8	1.362	0.051	26.922	0.000
LF9	1.365	0.047	29.110	0.000
Safety and health-related benefits (BEN2)
LF5	1.678	0.046	36.106	0.000	0.937	0.937	0.881	0.882
LF6	1.721	0.046	27.232	0.000
Culture and heritage-related benefits (BEN3)
LF7	1.205	0.063	18.984	0.000	0.802	0.803	0.580	0.585
LF10	1.577	0.054	29.130	0.000
LF11	1.621	0.059	27.268	0.000
Personal well-being benefits (BEN4)
LF1	1.323	0.049	26.822	0.000	0.811	0.813	0.685	0.684
LF2	1.457	0.050	29.294	0.000
Knowledge on Local Food (KNOW)
K1	1.372	0.043	31.745	0.000	0.858	0.859	0.671	0.678
K2	1.278	0.047	27.179	0.000
K3	1.268	0.045	28.111	0.000
Satisfaction (SAT)
S1	1.239	0.036	34.249	0.000	0.926	0.927	0.809	0.809
S2	1.287	0.039	33.378	0.000
S3	1.353	0.036	37.435	0.000
Food Sustainability Concern (FSC)
Environmental-related concern (FSC1)
FSC3	1.106	0.041	27.003	0.000	0.908	0.908	0.665	0.666
FSC4	1.048	0.038	27.596	0.000
FSC5	1.247	0.040	31.498	0.000
FSC6	1.217	0.042	28.787	0.000
FSC7	1.234	0.036	34.240	0.000
Social and economic-related concerns (FSC2)
FSC8	1.343	0.043	31.102	0.000	0.876	0.878	0.706	0.706
FSC9	1.398	0.044	31.996	0.000
FSC10	1.290	0.045	28.902	0.000
Product-related concerns (FSC3)
FSC1	1.376	0.048	28.844	0.000	0.808	0.811	0.682	0.681
FSC2	1.232	0.047	26.261	0.000
Communication Sources (COMM)
Specialised and mass communication (COMM1)
C7	1.499	0.056	26.746	0.000	0.852	0.856	0.546	0.542
C8	1.535	0.047	32.662	0.000
C9	1.302	0.048	26.971	0.000
C10	1.237	0.056	19.453	0.000
C11	2.247	0.061	20.289	0.000
Scientific studies (COMM2)
C5	1.543	0.041	37.779	0.000	0.939	0.939	0.886	0.886
C6	1.505	0.042	35.415	0.000
Product-process certification (COMM3)
C3	1.452	0.041	35.662	0.000	0.919	0.919	0.850	0.851
C4	1.444	0.042	34.593	0.000
Informal sources (COMM4)
C1	1.580	0.054	29.465	0.000	0.929	0.929	0.868	0.875
C2	1.652	0.049	33.849	0.000
Model Fit:
Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = 0.937 (Bentler, 1990 [73]: >0.90); Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI) = 0.925 ([74]: >0.90); Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = 0.055 p-value = 0.0000 ([75]: <0.60); Standardised Root Mean Square Error Residual (SRMSR) = 0.041 ([75]: <0.10).

and

Table 4. Construct correlation and discriminant validity.

	BI	BEN1	BEN2	BEN3	BEN4	KNOW	SAT	FSC1	FSC2	FSC3	COMM1	COMM2	COMM3
BI	0.932
BEN1	0.602	0.783
BEN2	0.414	0.566	0.939
BEN3	0.473	0.619	0.636	0.762
BEN4	0.484	0.618	0.751	0.599	0.828
KNOW	0.669	0.483	0.392	0.500	0.431	0.819
SAT	0.857	0.572	0.461	0.544	0.547	0.715	0.899
FSC1	0.469	0.561	0.336	0.345	0.304	0.395	0.412	0.815
FSC2	0.360	0.488	0.204	0.255	0.224	0.337	0.333	0.873	0.840
FSC3	0.413	0.491	0.174	0.188	0.215	0.281	0.344	0.760	0.672	0.826
COMM1	0.246	0.337	0.247	0.328	0.211	0216	0.283	0.317	0.313	0.239	0.739
COMM2	0.389	0.557	0.275	0.265	0.296	0.282	0.367	0.504	0.495	0.434	0.511	0.941
COMM3	0.487	0.626	0.395	0.402	0.415	0.380	0.490	0.559	0.461	0.473	0.433	0.681	0.922
COMM4	0.295	0.326	0.226	0.212	0.287	0.110	0.264	0.237	0.171	0.257	0.353	0.395	0.422

).

Besides assessing the model validity, a multiple regression analysis allowed us to verify whether and how the intrinsic and extrinsic motivations and communication sources impact on behavioural intention, based on the results of a previous factor analysis.

The findings revealed statistically significant relationships between BI and the following variables: economic and environmental benefits (BEN1: β = 0.356 ***), KNOW (β = 0.234), SAT (β = 1.502 ***), environmental-related concern (FSC1: β = 0.381), and informal sources (COMM4: β = 0.132). This provided a response to our RQ1, investigating the way intrinsic and extrinsic motivations, as well as communications sources, influence the consumer intention to buy and consume LF. Specifically, H1, H4, and H5 have been partially confirmed, while H2 and H3 have been fully confirmed (

Table 5. The structural model.

Hypothesis Path	Coefficient	St. Err.	z-Value 1	p-Value	Hypotheses Acceptance (Yes/No/ Partially)
H1: BEN → BI					Partially
BEN1 → BI	0.356 ***	0.089	4.017	0.000
BEN2 → BI	−0.041	0.079	0.517	0.605
BEN3 → BI	−0.132	0.076	−1.745	0.081
BEN4 → BI	−0.074	0.088	−0.842	0.400
H2: KNOW → BI	0.234 **	0.070	3.370	0.001	Yes
H3: SAT → BI	1.502 ***	0.101	14.908	0.000	Yes
H4: FSC → BI					Partially
FSC1 → BI	0.381 *	0.148	2.571	0.010
FSC2 → BI	−0.298	0.121	−2.463	0.114
FSC3 → BI	0.080	0.084	0.960	0.337
H5: COMM → BI					Partially
COMM1 → BI	−0.089	0.053	−1.671	0.095
COMM2 → BI	0.047	0.068	0.683	0.494
COMM3 → BI	−0.081	0.071	−1.137	0.255
COMM4 → BI	0.132 **	0.048	2.775	0.006

¹ *** = p-value < 0.001, ** = p-value < 0.01, * = p-value < 0.05.

).

The coefficient of determination (R²) values, assessing the variance in the endogenous variable explained by the exogenous ones and the overall model predictivity [68], were between 0.58 and 0.88, suggesting an adequate model’s explanatory power (Table 3).

Thereafter, to assess the second research question (RQ2) of this study, a second run of SEM was performed, by analysing the mediating role of FSC.

By following Hair et al. [68], mediation occurs when (i) the dependent variable (i.e., BI) and the investigated mediator (i.e., FSC) are significantly related to the independent ones (i.e., BEN, KNOW, SAT) and (ii) the indirect effects between the dependent and independent variables (after having introduced the mediating variable) are significant. Accordingly, the mediation analysis was restricted to environmental-related concerns (FSC1) as a mediator for the relationships between behavioural intention (BI) and economic and environmental benefits (BEN1), knowledge (KNOW), and satisfaction (SAT).

Table 6. Analysis of indirect effects and mediator effect assessment ¹.

Hypothesis Path	Coefficient	St. Err.	z-Value	p-Value
Path estimations without mediator
BEN1 > FSC1	0.810 ***	0.069	11.745	0.000
KNOW > FSC1	0.214 **	0.070	3.051	0.002
SAT > FSC1	−0.079	0.074	−1.069	0.285
Indirect effects
Indirect effect1: BEN1 > FSC > BI	0.131 **	0.050	2.601	0.009
Total1	0.524 ***	0.109	4.790	0.000
Indirect effect2: KNOW > FSC > BI	0.035 *	0.017	1.975	0.048
Total2	0.279 ***	0.072	3.887	0.000

¹ VAF = indirect effect/total effect × 100. VAF < 0.20: no mediation; 0.20 < VAF < 0.80: partial mediation; VAF > 0.80: full mediation [68]. *** = p-value < 0.001, ** = p-value < 0.01, * = p-value < 0.05.

shows the results. FSC1 was positively related to BEN1, KNOW, and SAT, satisfying the first criterion of Hair et al. [68]. On the other hand, the indirect effects were significant only for BEN1 and KNOW. Therefore, the mediating role of FSC1 on the relationship between SAT and BI was excluded. Assessing the mediation intensity by the Variance Accounted For (VAF) index [68], it emerged that mediation by FSC1 can be confirmed for both the relationship between BI and BEN1 (25%) and the relationship between BI and KNOW. That is, the perception of LFs benefits improves the intention to consume them especially when individuals are concerned with environmental-related issues and are knowledgeable about them. Hence, sustainability concern is critical for improving the overall influence of LF benefits and knowledge on consumers’ buying intentions.

5. Discussion and Implications

The findings allow us to explicitly address the two research questions formulated at the beginning of the study. With regard to RQ1 (“How do intrinsic and extrinsic motivations affect consumer intention to buy and consume LF?”), the findings confirm that intrinsic motivations, especially economic and environmental benefits (H1), are significant drivers of behavioural intention. Consumers recognise that LF production and consumption assure better respect for the territory of origin, the biodiversity, the animal welfare, and the overall environment, and this represents a good reason for buying and consuming LF. Both knowledge (H2) and satisfaction (H3) are positively related to behavioural intention, revealing that the more consumers are aware about LFs’ quality and benefits, the more they are willing to buy and consume them. Similarly, satisfactory past experiences with LF consumption act as a predictor of future behavioural intention. Extrinsic motivations, specifically food sustainability concern, also showed a significant positive effect (H4), thereby reinforcing the importance of sustainability-oriented values in driving young consumers’ food choices.

Concerning RQ2 (“Can the influence of intrinsic motivations on behavioural intention towards LF be considered conditional on the presence of extrinsic motivations?”), the mediation analysis revealed that food sustainability concern mediates the relationship between behavioural intention and both perceived benefits and knowledge (H6). This indicates that intrinsic motivations are more effective when coupled with extrinsic ones, highlighting the critical role of sustainability concern in fostering more stable and persistent LF consumption intentions.

Several implications can be drawn from the findings of this study.

From a theoretical perspective, the results contribute significantly to the existing literature on LF consumption by offering a comprehensive framework that integrates both intrinsic and extrinsic motivations for LF consumption, an approach that has been previously underexplored. Past research, indeed, predominantly focused on isolated aspects, such as environmental benefits, economic impacts, and health advantages. For instance, studies by Feldmann and Hamm [35] and Pearson et al. [76] emphasised the environmental benefits of reduced food miles and the economic support of local producers. Other scholars emphasised the importance of intrinsic motivations that are strictly related to LF properties, including freshness, nutritional value, taste, and healthiness [13,14,15,16]. Significant attention was also put on psychological and cultural factors, such as health consciousness and ethical considerations [77]. While these studies provided valuable insights, they tend to compartmentalise factors rather than considering their interrelationships and cumulative effects, thus limiting the understanding of their influence on consumer choices. In this respect, our work responds to recent calls in the literature (e.g., [33,35]) for a more integrated approach that does not merely isolate single determinants but explains how different motivations jointly influence consumer behaviour, thus moving beyond the somewhat fragmented perspective offered in earlier contributions.

By applying Self-Determination Theory (SDT), this study elucidates how different motivational factors, of both intrinsic and extrinsic nature, interact to influence young consumers’ intentions to purchase and consume LF. This holistic approach provides a more nuanced understanding of consumer patterns, as it considers the complex interplay between several motivational dimensions [12,19]. Compared to prior studies mainly addressing environmental or economic concerns in isolation [35,76], the SDT framework sheds light on how intrinsic aspects, such as taste or healthiness [13,14,15,16], may be strengthened when supported by extrinsic drivers like sustainability concern, thereby providing a dynamic and theoretically grounded explanation of LF consumption.

Furthermore, this research underscores the mediating role of food sustainability concern (FSC) in enhancing the predictive power of intrinsic motivations on behavioural intentions. By demonstrating that FSC can partially mediate the relationship between perceived LF benefits and behavioural intention, the findings highlight the importance of sustainability considerations in driving consistent and long-term LF consumption. This result corroborates the basic assumption of Self-Determination Theory, suggesting that extrinsic motivations can reinforce and stabilise intrinsic motivations over time [21]. Notably, it is particularly relevant, as it aligns with broader sustainability goals and adds depth to our understanding of how extrinsic factors can reinforce intrinsic motivations [22]. This insight also complements the arguments of scholars who stressed the importance of ethical and cultural aspects [77], by showing that sustainability concern does not merely coexist with intrinsic motivations but actively strengthens their effect, thereby bridging different strands of the literature into a more unified perspective.

This holistic perspective not only contributes to academic knowledge but also aids policymakers and marketers in promoting LF more effectively.

Firstly, emphasising the economic and environmental benefits of LF can effectively resonate with young consumers’ values and enhance their intention to purchase and consume these foods. Marketing strategies should therefore highlight how LF supports local economies, reduces carbon footprints, and promotes biodiversity [6,35]. For instance, companies can create campaigns that feature local farmers and their sustainable practices, showcasing the direct impact of consumer purchases on the community. This approach may counteract the perception that LF is more expensive, by reframing it as a long-term investment in community welfare and sustainability. An example could be a video series on social media that follows the journey of LF from farm to table, highlighting the environmental benefits and local economic support.

Moreover, enhancing consumer knowledge about LF can significantly boost their purchasing intentions. Companies can achieve this through educational campaigns that inform consumers about the health benefits, freshness, and superior quality of LF. Utilising various communication channels, including social media, blogs, and in-store promotions, can help disseminate this information effectively [15]. For example, grocery stores could host cooking demonstrations and tasting events featuring local chefs who prepare dishes using LF, coupled with informative sessions about the nutritional benefits and origins of the ingredients used. Such initiatives not only raise awareness but also reduce the information asymmetry that often discourages less informed consumers. In addition, considering the impact of informal and personal communication on consumers’ intention to consume LF, companies can create community-based programmes that facilitate informal communication and knowledge sharing about LF. For example, firms can organise neighbourhood potluck events where participants bring dishes made with LF, providing opportunities for people to share recipes, cooking tips, and personal experiences with LF. These gatherings can strengthen community bonds and enhance collective knowledge about the benefits of LF. Another approach is to engage local influencers and community leaders who can act as ambassadors for LF. These individuals can share their positive experiences and knowledge about LF through social media, local events, and community meetings, thereby leveraging their influence to reach a broader audience. For instance, a well-respected local chef could host a series of cooking classes or workshops focusing on LF, which could be promoted through both online platforms and local community centres. Compared to mass advertising, these micro-level initiatives may prove more effective in establishing trust and credibility among younger consumers. Lastly, educational institutions can play a pivotal role in enhancing informal communication about LF. Schools and universities can integrate LF topics into their curricula and organise educational field trips to local farms. These activities can increase students’ knowledge and interest in LF, which they are likely to share with their families and peers, thus spreading awareness and appreciation for LF within their communities. Embedding LF into educational programmes also helps to normalise sustainable choices at an early age, making them more likely to persist over time.

Other implications derive from the critical role of satisfaction in shaping future behaviours, suggesting that ensuring high-quality products and positive consumer experiences should be a priority for LF producers and retailers. Providing consistent product quality, fostering direct interactions between consumers and producers, and offering taste tests or sample promotions can be critical to enhance consumer satisfaction and loyalty [49]. For example, farmers’ markets could implement a “Meet the Farmer” day, where consumers can directly interact with the producers, learn about their farming practices, and sample their produce. This can build trust and satisfaction, encouraging repeat purchases. From a managerial perspective, investing in transparency and authenticity is as crucial as investing in price competitiveness, since these aspects directly translate into consumer loyalty.

Finally, the finding that extrinsic motivations, i.e., food sustainability concern (FSC), act as a mediator for intrinsic motivations, while supporting the basic foundations of the SDT framework, implies that business efforts to foster intrinsic motivations can be more effective when coupled with strategies that enhance extrinsic motivations (e.g., promoting the environmental and social benefits of LF consumption). For instance, marketing campaigns can simultaneously highlight the superior taste and freshness of LF while also underscoring how purchasing LF supports local farmers and reduces environmental impact. This dual approach can lead to more persistent and consistent consumer behaviour, as individuals who initially choose LF for intrinsic reasons (e.g., health and taste) may develop a stronger, more stable commitment when they also recognise the broader extrinsic benefits. Therefore, businesses should design comprehensive marketing strategies that integrate both intrinsic and extrinsic appeals. For example, loyalty programmes that reward customers for purchasing LF can further reinforce these motivations. Such programmes could offer points not only for buying LF but also for participating in sustainability-related activities, such as attending workshops on reducing food waste or supporting local environmental initiatives. Managers should view these loyalty programmes not merely as sales incentives, but as platforms to cultivate communities of practice around sustainability.

6. Conclusions

This study advances the understanding of local food (LF) consumption among young consumers by integrating both intrinsic and extrinsic motivations within a comprehensive framework, guided by Self-Determination Theory (SDT). The findings highlight the significant roles of perceived LF benefits, consumer knowledge, satisfaction, and food sustainability concern (FSC) in shaping behavioural intentions. Furthermore, the mediating effect of FSC underscores the importance of combining intrinsic and extrinsic motivations to foster sustained consumer behaviour.

However, this study is not without limitations. Firstly, the research relies on self-reported data, which may be subject to social desirability bias and inaccuracies in recall. Future research could address this limitation by incorporating observational or experimental methodologies to validate self-reported behaviours. Secondly, the study focuses on young consumers in Italy, which may limit the generalisability of the findings to other age groups and cultural contexts. Future studies should employ probabilistic sampling techniques to enhance representativeness and explore LF consumption patterns across diverse demographics and geographic regions, thus improving the applicability of the results. Specifically, although regional comparative analyses were not the primary aim of this study, we acknowledge their potential value for future research. Moreover, while the study integrates various motivational factors, it does not extensively explore the potential interactions between these factors and other psychological constructs, such as attitudes and subjective norms. Future research could examine these interactions to provide a more holistic understanding of the determinants of LF consumption. Lastly, this study does not consider external factors such as availability and accessibility of LF, which could significantly influence consumption behaviour. Investigating how these external factors interact with intrinsic and extrinsic motivations could offer more comprehensive insights for promoting LF consumption.