Sarah Buelow, Helen Lewis and Kees Sonneveld
The purpose of this paper is to examine the extent to which consumers in Melbourne understand recycling information on packaging labels and their resulting recycling behaviour.
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to examine the extent to which consumers in Melbourne understand recycling information on packaging labels and their resulting recycling behaviour.
Design/methodology/approach
Mixed research methods were used in the study (qualitative and quantitative approaches) in the form of randomly distributed surveys and structured face‐to‐face interviews. Both methods were administered with consumers from three demographically different areas in the metropolitan Melbourne (Australia) region. The software program SPSS was used to analyze some of the results.
Findings
The research shows that despite good intentions, consumers' understanding of packaging materials and labelling for common products, and therefore resulting sorting behaviour, is often very poor. The confusion surrounding current labelling and recycling schemes can be attributed to incorrect labelling and system complexity combined with a lack of consumer understanding and care.
Practical implications
Correct sorting of recyclable and non‐recyclable packaging means materials finish in the correct waste stream and recyclable materials have the opportunity to be reprocessed and eventually reused, saving raw materials as well as reducing other environmental impacts. If consumers do not correctly sort materials, recyclable packaging will go to landfill and non‐recyclable materials will contaminate the recycling stream.
Social implications
The results of the research, when completed, could be used to design more effective labelling schemes for packaging to inform consumers about its recyclability. The social benefits potentially include increased diversion of recyclable materials from the waste stream and reduced costs of both recycling and waste disposal.
Originality/value
There has been very little research undertaken on the role and adequacy of labelling in driving consumer‐recycling behaviour, and therefore this paper fills that gap. The results in the paper may be used to further enhance environmental package labelling through policy development or commercial applications.
Lauren Hunter, Sarah Gerritsen and Victoria Egli
This literature scoping review aims to investigate if, how and why eating behaviours change after a crisis event such as a natural disaster, financial crisis or pandemic in…
Abstract
Purpose
This literature scoping review aims to investigate if, how and why eating behaviours change after a crisis event such as a natural disaster, financial crisis or pandemic in high-income countries.
Design/methodology/approach
The COVID-19 pandemic and resulting “lockdowns” and social distancing measures have changed access to food, the types of food consumed and usual eating behaviours. Early research on the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic is compared with existing literature on other high-impact crises in high-income countries around the world, such as Hurricane Katrina and the Global Financial Crisis. A search of four electronic databases in August 2020 of literature from 2000 to 2020 yielded 50 relevant publications that were included in the qualitative thematic analysis.
Findings
The analysis found that crisis events made accessing food more difficult and led to increased food insecurity. Home cooking, sharing food and eating together (within households during the pandemic) all increased during and after a crisis. Resources often reduced and needed to be pooled. Crises had a multi-directional impact on dietary patterns, and the motivators for dietary pattern change differ between populations and crises.
Originality/value
In conclusion, eating behaviours impacted by crises because of the disruption of food systems, increased food insecurity and changes in daily routines. Community networks were a strong protective factor against adverse outcomes from food insecurity.