Impact of environmental training, awareness, and green values on sustainable food waste management – Nature

Report on the Impact of Environmental Training on Sustainable Food Waste Management

Executive Summary

This report analyzes the critical role of Environmental Training (ET) in promoting Sustainable Food Waste Management Behavior (SFWMB) within the fast-food industry, directly addressing key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Food waste poses a significant threat to achieving SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) and SDG 13 (Climate Action). This research, based on a survey of 286 fast-food employees, establishes a clear link between ET and improved SFWMB. Key findings indicate that the effectiveness of ET is significantly mediated by Environmental Awareness (EA), suggesting that training enhances cognitive understanding, which in turn drives pro-environmental actions. Furthermore, employees’ Green Values (GV) moderate this relationship, amplifying the positive impact of training. An Importance-Performance Map Analysis reveals that while ET is highly important for achieving SFWMB, its current implementation is underperforming. These findings underscore the urgent need for businesses to invest in robust ET programs to reduce their environmental footprint, enhance their corporate reputation, and make tangible contributions to the global sustainability agenda.

1.0 Introduction: Food Waste and the Urgency of Sustainable Development Goals

The global food industry, particularly the fast-food sector, is a major contributor to environmental degradation, directly impacting several SDGs. The generation of food waste is a primary concern, undermining progress towards:

• SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production): Specifically, Target 12.3, which aims to halve per capita global food waste by 2030.
• SDG 13 (Climate Action): Improper food waste disposal leads to methane emissions, a potent greenhouse gas.
• SDG 2 (Zero Hunger): Wasted food represents a significant loss of resources, including water, land, and energy, that could be used to ensure food security.
• SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities): Inefficient waste management strains urban infrastructure and contributes to pollution.

Despite the clear alignment of food waste reduction with global sustainability targets, there is a significant knowledge gap regarding effective corporate strategies. This report addresses this gap by investigating how ET can be leveraged as a strategic tool to foster SFWMB among employees in the fast-food sector, thereby aligning business practices with critical SDG targets.

2.0 Research Framework and Key Relationships

2.1 Theoretical Foundations for SDG-Aligned Behavior

This analysis is grounded in the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) to understand how employee behavior can be shifted towards sustainability.

1. Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB): ET influences attitudes, norms, and perceived control over waste management, directly encouraging behaviors that support SDG 12.
2. Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM): ET acts as a persuasive communication tool that encourages deep cognitive processing (the central route), leading to lasting changes in environmental awareness and behavior. This aligns with SDG 4 (Quality Education), particularly Target 4.7, which promotes education for sustainable development.

2.2 Hypothesized Linkages

The study examined the following critical relationships:

• Environmental Training and SFWMB: A direct, positive relationship where ET equips employees with the knowledge and skills to reduce food waste, contributing to SDG 12.3.
• The Mediating Role of Environmental Awareness: ET enhances employees’ understanding of environmental issues (EA), which in turn promotes SFWMB. This highlights the mechanism through which education translates into action for SDG 13.
• The Moderating Role of Green Values: The positive impact of ET on SFWMB is stronger among employees who hold strong personal commitments to sustainability (GV). This emphasizes the importance of a corporate culture that supports the values underpinning the SDGs.

3.0 Methodology

The research employed a two-wave, time-lagged survey design to collect data from 286 employees and their supervisors within Pakistan’s fast-food industry. This sector was selected due to its significant food waste generation and its importance to the national economy, making it a critical area for implementing practices aligned with the SDGs. Data analysis was conducted using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) to test the hypothesized relationships between ET, EA, GV, and SFWMB.

4.0 Key Findings

4.1 Impact of Environmental Training

The analysis confirmed a significant positive relationship between ET and SFWMB. This finding provides empirical evidence that corporate training is an effective strategy for advancing SDG 12 by directly influencing employee actions related to waste reduction.

4.2 The Role of Environmental Awareness and Green Values

The study’s results demonstrated that:

• Environmental Awareness is a Key Mediator: ET significantly improves EA, which in turn has a strong positive effect on SFWMB. This confirms that training is most effective when it fosters a genuine understanding of environmental impacts, a core principle of education for sustainable development (SDG 4.7).
• Green Values Amplify Training Effectiveness: The relationship between ET and SFWMB was significantly stronger for employees with high Green Values. This indicates that organizations can maximize their contribution to the SDGs by fostering a culture of sustainability that complements formal training initiatives.

4.3 Importance-Performance Map Analysis (IPMA)

The IPMA revealed a critical gap: while ET was identified as the most important factor for driving SFWMB, its performance was rated as low. This suggests that current training efforts in the sector are insufficient and represent a major missed opportunity for businesses to align with SDG 12 and SDG 13.

5.0 Discussion and Implications for Achieving the SDGs

The findings of this report offer a clear pathway for businesses in the food sector to contribute to the Sustainable Development Goals. The synergistic relationship between ET, EA, and GV provides a comprehensive framework for transforming organizational behavior.

• Advancing SDG 12: By implementing effective ET, companies can institutionalize responsible consumption and production patterns, directly contributing to the global goal of reducing food waste.
• Supporting SDG 13: Enhanced SFWMB reduces methane emissions from landfills, representing a tangible corporate contribution to climate action.
• Promoting SDG 8 and SDG 4: Investing in ET builds “green skills” among employees, promoting decent work and economic growth that is environmentally sustainable. It also operationalizes the principle of lifelong learning for sustainable development.

6.0 Recommendations for Action

Based on the findings, the following actions are recommended for managers and policymakers:

1. Invest in Targeted Environmental Training: Develop and implement comprehensive ET programs focused on practical skills for waste reduction, recycling, and sustainable resource management.
2. Cultivate a Culture of Sustainability: Reinforce training by embedding Green Values into the corporate mission, performance metrics, and daily operations to ensure that sustainable behavior is encouraged and rewarded.
3. Bridge the Importance-Performance Gap: Acknowledge the high importance of ET and allocate sufficient resources to improve the quality and reach of training initiatives, thereby maximizing their impact on SFWMB and SDG attainment.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article on sustainable food waste management in the fast-food industry connects to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by addressing environmental degradation, consumption patterns, climate change, and the role of education and business practices.

• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production: This is the most central SDG addressed. The article’s primary focus is on “food waste and its environmental impact” and promoting “sustainable food waste management behavior (SFWMB).” It directly tackles the need to manage resources efficiently and reduce waste generation within the food sector.
• SDG 13: Climate Action: The article explicitly links improper food waste management to climate change. It states that it “contributes to greenhouse gas emissions” and “contributes to climate change by creating methane gas, a potent greenhouse gas.” By investigating methods to improve waste management, the article addresses a key driver of climate change.
• SDG 4: Quality Education: The core intervention proposed and studied in the article is “environmental training (ET)” for employees. The research posits that ET “fosters EA [environmental awareness] by improving cognitive abilities and information, leading to the adoption of ecologically friendly behaviors.” This aligns with the goal of providing education for sustainable development.
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth: The study examines how businesses, specifically “fast-food restaurant employees and their supervisors,” can adopt more sustainable practices. It suggests that “investments in ET can help businesses improve their reputation, reduce their environmental footprint, and contribute to a more sustainable future,” thereby promoting sustainable economic practices and improving resource efficiency.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the issues discussed, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. Under SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production):
   • Target 12.3: By 2030, halve per capita global food waste at the retail and consumer levels and reduce food losses along production and supply chains, including post-harvest losses. The article’s entire premise is centered on reducing “food waste” in the “fast-food industry,” which is a key part of the retail and consumer level.
   • Target 12.5: By 2030, substantially reduce waste generation through prevention, reduction, recycling and reuse. The study’s focus on “sustainable food waste management behavior (SFWMB)” and “waste reduction” directly supports this target by exploring behavioral interventions to minimize waste.
   • Target 12.8: By 2030, ensure that people everywhere have the relevant information and awareness for sustainable development and lifestyles in harmony with nature. The research highlights the critical role of “environmental awareness (EA)” and “environmental training (ET)” in changing behavior, which is the core of this target.
2. Under SDG 13 (Climate Action):
   • Target 13.3: Improve education, awareness-raising and human and institutional capacity on climate change mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early warning. The article’s investigation into how “environmental training” can mitigate the environmental impacts of food waste, such as the emission of “methane gas, a potent greenhouse gas,” directly relates to building institutional and human capacity for climate change mitigation.
3. Under SDG 4 (Quality Education):
   • Target 4.7: By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development. The study emphasizes that “training equips employees with the requisite knowledge and skills to enhance overall sustainability efforts.” The focus on “environmental training” as a tool to foster sustainable behaviors in a professional setting is a direct application of this target.
4. Under SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth):
   • Target 8.4: Improve progressively, through 2030, global resource efficiency in consumption and production and endeavour to decouple economic growth from environmental degradation. The article advocates for businesses to invest in training to “improve their waste management practices” and “reduce their environmental footprint,” which is a direct effort to improve resource efficiency and move towards more sustainable business models.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article, being a research study, implies several indicators through its methodology and the variables it measures:

• Indicator for Target 12.3 (Halve food waste): The study measures “Sustainable Food Waste Management Behavior” using a scale that includes items like “How much food (in general) is thrown away by this employee in your work-related contexts… in a regular week?” This question directly implies a quantitative indicator for measuring the amount of food waste generated at the employee level, which can be aggregated to track progress on waste reduction.
• Indicator for Target 12.5 (Reduce waste generation): The primary outcome variable, “Sustainable Food Waste Management Behavior (SFWMB),” serves as a behavioral indicator. Progress can be measured by assessing the adoption rate and consistency of these behaviors (e.g., waste reduction, recycling) among employees.
• Indicators for Targets 12.8 and 4.7 (Awareness and Education for Sustainable Development): The study uses specific scales to measure key concepts that serve as direct indicators:
  • Environmental Training (ET): Measured with items like “Employees in this organization receive adequate environmental training.” The provision, adequacy, and frequency of such training programs can be used as an indicator.
  • Environmental Awareness (EA): Measured with items like “I am aware that food waste is terrible for the environment” and “I recognize the need for a food waste control mechanism.” Surveying levels of awareness among employees serves as a clear indicator of progress.
• Indicator for Target 13.3 (Climate change education): The implementation of “Environmental Training (ET)” that specifically covers the link between food waste and greenhouse gas emissions is an indicator. The study’s finding that ET fosters EA about environmental impacts demonstrates a way to measure the effectiveness of this education.
• Indicator for Target 8.4 (Resource efficiency): The adoption of “ecologically friendly behaviors” and “sustainable practices” within the business operations, as promoted by the training, is an implied indicator. Businesses could track metrics related to waste reduction, resource consumption (water, land), and overall environmental footprint to measure progress.

4. Summary Table of Findings

Source: nature.com