Consumer Typologies in Household Food Waste: Evidence from Urban and Rural Households in Greece ^†

Abstract

This study aims to develop a consumer typology based on attitudes and behaviors related to Household Food Waste in both urban and rural households in Greece, where data are limited. A structured questionnaire was administered to 279 residents of the Municipality of Eordaia through face-to-face interviews using stratified random sampling. A two-step cluster analysis identified four distinct consumer types: “Ecologically Conscious” (31%), “Empirical” (20%), “Modern” (28%), and “Socio-Ecologically Conscious” (21%). These clusters represent various levels of environmental awareness, consumer habits, and the influence of rural background on food-related practices. Findings highlight that rural background significantly impacts consumer behavior regarding Household Food Waste. This typology provides a valuable framework for designing targeted interventions and policy measures to reduce Household Food Waste. Future recommendations emphasize integrating educational food waste programs into primary schools, alongside institutional and policy support to ensure their effective implementation.

1. Introduction

Food wastage is a multidimensional global issue with significant social, economic, and environmental impacts [1]. The largest share of this waste is generated at the household level [2]. Consumers are considered the main contributors to Household Food Waste (HFW) worldwide [3]. In order to prevent and/or reduce this amount of food waste, it is essential to explore and analyze consumers based on their specific characteristics and behaviors [4].

This study aims to categorize consumers into types regarding their HFW attitudes [5] in order to provide a clear understanding and to identify specific characteristics that shape HFW in urban and rural households in Greece, where there are limited data. Numerous studies have been conducted around the world on consumers’ typology on HFW.

More recent and related studies classify household members—consumers—into different types. Previous research has identified various consumer typologies regarding food waste across different countries. In the United States, they were distinguished four groups: ‘Conscientious Conservers’, ‘Harried Profligates’, ‘Unrepentant Drink Wasters’, and ‘Guilty Carb Wasters’, including differences in behaviors and awareness and waste levels [6]. A study in Adelaide, Australia, identified three types based on waste and recycling: ‘Warriors’, ‘Strugglers’, and ‘Slackers’ [7]. In rural Campania, Italy, three groups were revealed: ‘Unaware consumers’, ‘Conscious but Passive’, and ‘Conscious and Active’ [8]. In Greece, where research on consumer typologies in HFW is still developing, recent findings indicate four categories: ‘Conscious Consumers’, ‘Indifferent Consumers’, ‘Moderately Conscious Consumers’, and ‘Careless Consumers’ [9].

The complexity of the food waste phenomenon, particularly at the household level, highlights the need to further broaden consumer typologies. In this study, four distinct consumer clusters were identified through a two-step cluster analysis. This segmentation is crucial for designing targeted interventions that shape perceptions and attitudes, thereby enhancing the effectiveness of food waste reduction and prevention strategies.

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Data Collection

Data were collected through a specially designed questionnaire [10] whereby a total of 279 individuals from the Municipality of Eordaia (25 rural communities and 1 urban community), located in Western Macedonia, Greece, participated in the research [11]. The participants were selected according to stratified random sampling and each answered the questionnaire face-to-face [12], ensuring high response rates and minimizing response biases [13].

2.2. Data Analysis

Two-step cluster analysis was performed [14], allowing for the segmentation of respondents based on their knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes regarding food waste issues. This method was chosen for its ability to handle both categorical and continuous data while identifying naturally occurring consumer segments [15]. The respondents’ classification was based on their responses to eight key questionnaire items selected through a randomized iterative process, with multiple applications of the clustering technique conducted to ensure reliability and convergence of results [16]. Additionally, descriptive statistical analyses were performed to supplement the clustering results [17].

3. Results

The respondents were distributed into four clusters, with the first consisting of 86 respondents, the second of 55, the third of 76, and the fourth of 57 (

Table 1. Consumer Typology and Characteristics.

Cluster	N	% of Sample	Typology and Characteristics
1	86	31.4%	Ecological Conscious: High environmental awareness, minimal food waste [9].
2	55	20.1%	Empirical: Rely on personal experience; moderate awareness and behaviors [5].
3	76	27.7%	Modern: Price-sensitive, time-constrained; higher urban food waste [20].
4	57	20.8%	Socio-Ecological Conscious: Value-driven, ethically and environmentally motivated [21].

). The total number of clusters was determined using the Log-likelihood distance measure [18] and the Schwarz’s Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) [19], which guided IBM SPSS Statistics 23 in forming four clusters with satisfactory distribution quality [18]. Further, the level of significance of the variables was found to be satisfactory (importance: 0.12–1.00) [17,18].

Each cluster corresponds to a different percentage of the initial sample, and the responses recorded substantiate the assignment of its characteristic name (typology). The first cluster includes the “Ecologically Conscious” consumers–respondents, who are the most environmentally conscious among the four. The second cluster comprises the “Empirical” consumers who rely more on personal experiences rather than knowledge and perceptions. The third cluster comprises the “Modern” consumers, who show the greatest interest in prices and new products, while having limited time for grocery shopping and cooking. The fourth cluster includes the “Socio-Ecologically Conscious” consumers, whose needs are value-driven and oriented toward fulfillment through ethical and environmental considerations.

4. Discussion

Τhe typology accounted for participants’ rural background (low to high), acknowledging the transmission of rural nutritional and consumptive values and food-related practices within their current household behaviors. The transition to urban centers entails multifaceted changes, including the erosion of traditional lifestyles, shifts in social structures, and emerging economic pressures [9,21,22]. In rural households, there is generally greater awareness of the value of food, which often translates into lower levels of waste through practices such as reusing leftovers and preserving surplus food. In contrast, urban households are more influenced by convenience and the fast-paced nature of city life, leading to higher food waste levels, particularly due to behaviors such as over-purchasing, improper food storage, and a preference for ready-made meals, which are more common in urban environments [20].

Overall, consumers’ typology provides valuable insights into how various characteristics, such as rural background, socio-economic status, and environmental awareness, impact HFW production, reduction, or prevention.

5. Conclusions

In this study, we suggested a consumers’ typology based on their HFW behavior, identifying four distinct types closely associated with the participants’ rural background. Consumption and dietary habits, behaviors, feelings, and knowledge and perceptions regarding various socio-ecological issues related to food waste shape the primary types of them. The findings provide practical insights for policymakers, businesses, and consumer awareness campaigns aiming to reduce HFW. Educational programs targeting primary school students are recommended as a primary intervention. However, political, economic, and social support for such campaigns and initiatives is currently insufficient, limiting their integration into the school curriculum and the promotion of long-term sustainable consumer behaviors [5,23]. Finally, the study’s limitations include reliance on self-reported data and its focus on a single municipality in Greece, which limits the generalizability of the findings.