Received: 3 February 2020 Revised: 14 April 2020 Accepted: 23 May 2020

DOI: 10.1002/cb.1844

SPECIAL ISSUE ARTICLE

Addressing food waste: How to position upcycled foods to

different generations

Jintao Zhang1 | Hongjun Ye1 | Siddharth Bhatt2 | Haeyoung Jeong3 |

Jonathan Deutsch4 | Hasan Ayaz5 | Rajneesh Suri1

1
Department of Marketing, LeBow College of
Business, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Abstract
Pennsylvania Food waste is a global crisis that paradoxically exists alongside food scarcity. A prom-
2
School of Business Administration,
ising solution to these connected problems of food insecurity and food waste is
Pennsylvania State University at Harrisburg,
Middletown, Pennsylvania upcycled foods. Upcycled foods are made from ingredients that are usable but gener-
3
School of Business, North Carolina Central ally discarded. While upcycled foods can help reduce food waste, little is known
University, Durham, North Carolina
4
about the best market strategy for these foods. This research investigates how con-
Department of Food and Hospitality
Management, Drexel University, Philadelphia, sumers from different generations perceive upcycled foods. Our findings show that
Pennsylvania
Gen Z, Gen Y, and Baby Boomers have higher intentions to purchase upcycled foods
5
School of Biomedical Engineering, Science
and Health Systems, Drexel University,
while Gen X shows lower intentions to purchase because of quality concerns. The
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania present research also explores lifestyle patterns of each generation. Based on life-

Correspondence
style analyses, positioning strategies for upcycled foods are proposed.
Jintao Zhang, Department of Marketing,
LeBow College of Business, Drexel University,
Philadelphia, Pennsylva, USA.
Email: [email protected]

1 | I N T RO DU CT I O N Deutsch, Ayaz, & Suri, 2020; McCarthy, Kapetanaki, & Wang, 2020).
Upcycled foods are made from food ingredients that have nutritious value
The World Trade Organization (WTO) listed food insecurity as one of the and are usable but generally discarded. For instance, carrots are widely
major issues to be solved in sustainable development (WTO, 2020). Food consumed but carrot peels are generally discarded. However, carrot peels
insecurity is an alarming issue around the globe. According to the United can be dried and processed into an upcycled powdered soup that is safe
Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Food Security Report for human consumption. Several companies across the globe have now
(Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2019), the started offering such foods that use such ingredients. For example, a US
issue has been worsening every year. According to this report, over 700 based company named Planetarians has successfully developed a plant-
million people experienced severe food insecurity in 2018. Paradoxically, based protein extracted from used sunflower seeds. The protein is used to
food waste is also a pressing global issue. It is estimated that nearly half create a variety of foods that are safe and have nutritive value. Other
of the food produced worldwide is wasted (Lundqvist, de Fraiture, & examples include companies such as Regrained that uses upcycled grains
Molden, 2008). Such a high rate of food waste coexisting with increasing as an ingredient in food products, such as bars and puffs.
food insecurity is truly a global crisis. A range of natural and man-made Upcycled foods help reduce food waste closer to the source and are,
causes lead to food insecurity. Food waste is one of the many man-made therefore, a superior solution to the problem compared with other solu-
causes of food insecurity. Therefore, researchers have argued that at tions, such as feeding to animals and composting. As per the Food Recov-
least part of the food insecurity problem can be tackled by reducing the ery Hierarchy proposed by the United States Environmental Protection
amount of food wasted (Mourad, 2016; O'Donnell, Deutsch, Yungmann, Agency (EPA), solutions, such as upcycled foods, are closer to the source
Zeitz, & Katz, 2015). of food production and, therefore, are superior in promoting sustainability
Past research has done some investigation on a promising solution to (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2020). In fact, research
reduce food waste—a newly developed variety of foods called upcycled has shown that many consumers are able to see the advantages of
foods (Aschemann-Witzel & Peschel, 2019; Bhatt et al., 2018; Bhatt, Ye, upcycled foods and perceive these foods to be very beneficial to the

J Consumer Behav. 2020;1–9. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/cb © 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd 1
2 ZHANG ET AL.

environment (Bhatt et al., 2018). We conducted a pilot study (n = 199) to Research on sustainable products has investigated the effects of age.
assess consumer sentiment with respect to upcycled foods and our find- However, the literature on the role of age in driving consumption of
ings align with those in Bhatt et al. (2018). Seventy-four percent of the sustainable foods is inconclusive. For example, some research finds
participants in the pilot study indicated that upcycled foods can help that older consumers have higher interests in sustainable consump-
reduce food waste and 22% found it to be environmentally sustainable. tion (Gordon-Wilson & Modi, 2015; Han, Hsu, & Lee, 2009). Specifi-
While upcycled foods are a promising solution to the food waste cally, it has been suggested that older consumers are more likely to
problem, little research has been done to understand the right market engage in ecologically conscious consumer behavior (Roberts, 1996;
strategy for these foods. For these foods to command a position as a Straughan & Roberts, 1999), are more likely to shop for environmen-
new category of foods, it is essential to understand consumer perception tally friendly products (Olli, Grendstad, & Wollebaek, 2001; Vining &
of these foods. As with all new products, the first step is to examine the Ebreo, 1990), and are more receptive to environmental messages
right target markets for upcycled foods. While prior research suggests (D'Souza, Taghian, Lamb, & Peretiatko, 2007). However, other studies
some prima facie market potential, no systematic studies have been con- find that younger consumers are more likely to purchase sustainable
ducted to identify the right target markets for upcycled foods. The cur- foods (Anvar & Venter, 2014; Gan, Wee, Ozanne, & Kao, 2008; Singh
rent research seeks to fill this gap and identifies a suitable target market & Verma, 2017). Given such mixed findings about the influence of age
for upcycled foods by focusing on age and then inquiring into lifestyle on consumption of sustainable foods, researchers have called for
variables to profile consumers in various age segments (Cahill, 1997; more research on this issue (Krystallis & Chryssohoidis, 2005; Nie &
Dickson & Ginter, 1987; Kotler, Keller, Ang, Tan, & Leong, 2018; Wedel Zepeda, 2011). In sum, past literature underscores the need to investi-
& Kamakura, 2012). In our study, we first looked at different generations' gate the role of age in driving consumer preferences for sustainable
(grouped by age) purchase intentions for upcycled foods. Next, we foods, such as upcycled foods.
assessed each generation's perceptions of the quality of upcycled foods. While age can be conceptualized as a continuous variable, a large
In addition, we analyzed lifestyle patterns for each generation and cre- stream of research has focused on identifying generational differ-
ated four consumer profiles based on the results. Our findings provide ences. Such an approach enables comparison across generations and
marketers with actionable segments, based on generational differences facilitates interpretation of research findings (Bakewell & Mitch-
that are supplemented with variations in lifestyles. ell, 2003; Lissitsa & Kol, 2016; Noble, Haytko, & Phillips, 2009; Pitta &
Gurau, 2012). Thus, given our aim to uncover the right target markets
for upcycled foods, it is useful to focus on generation as the unit of
2 | C O N CE P T U A L B A CK GR O U N D analysis.

2.1 | Perceptions of upcycled foods

2.3 | Lifestyle
Understanding consumers' perception of upcycled foods is essential in
order to market these foods. While consumer perceptions can be studied Lifestyle is another key factor that shapes consumer behavior. Fur-
in different ways, we focused on two managerially relevant indicators: (a) thermore, different age groups have been found to exhibit different
purchase intentions and (b) perceived quality of upcycled foods. Pur- lifestyles (Gilg, Barr, & Ford, 2005; Hallin, 1995; Olli et al., 2001).
chase intentions provide a stated and direct measure of consumers' will- Thus, an additional analysis of lifestyle variables across generational
ingness to buy. Thus, understanding which generational segments groups adds value to target market identification. While many lifestyle
indicate greater purchase intentions will help determine whether to tar- characteristics have been studied, two characteristics have been of
get these segments. Furthermore, given the unconventional ingredients particular relevance in food research—(a) preference for online gro-
used to make upcycled foods, consumers may be hesitant to buy such cery shopping, and (b) food preparation preference (cooking vs. eating
foods due to concerns about their quality (Barber, Taylor, & Deale, 2010; out). Past research suggests that online grocery shopping is on the rise
Saba & Messina, 2003; Williamson, 2007). Indeed, past research has since consumers see the benefits of convenience from shopping for
shown that perceptions of quality are a strong indicator of consumers' groceries online instead of in-store (Hand, Riley, Harris, Singh, & Ret-
willingness to buy products (Grewal, Krishnan, Baker, & Borin, 1998; tie, 2009; Morganosky & Cude, 2000). Furthermore, research indi-
Grewal, Monroe, & Krishnan, 1998; Lalwani & Forcum, 2016; Lalwani & cates that grocery shopping preferences have an impact on
Shavitt, 2013). Thus, it is important to assess both purchase intentions sustainable food consumption such that online shopping positively
and perceptions of quality of upcycled foods. Together, these two mea- influences shopping for sustainable foods (Bryła, 2018; Yang, Li, &
sures will help us assess consumers' acceptance of upcycled foods. Zhang, 2018). In terms of consumers' food preparation preference, Li,
Zepeda, and Gould (2007) suggest that consumers who enjoy cooking
evaluate sustainable foods more favorably. Moreover, the do-it-your-
2.2 | Age and generation self (DIY) literature suggests that consumers who like to get involved
in the creation of products have higher preferences for sustainable
Age is a widely used basis for segmentation across industries and products. Thus, these two lifestyle characteristics need to be exam-
products (Sudbury & Simcock, 2009; Tepper, 1994; Yoon, 1997). ined while identifying target markets for upcycled foods.
ZHANG ET AL. 3

3 | METHOD foods among the four generations. Second, we examined the relation-
ship between purchase intentions and perceptions of quality of
Five hundred and fifty-one (Mean Age = 41.67 years, 59.9% females) upcycled foods. Third, we assessed lifestyle differences among the
U.S. consumers from an online panel participated in an online survey. four generations.
Participants first read a description of upcycled foods (“Upcycled
foods are foods that are created using byproducts from the manufac-
ture of other products. These byproducts are then turned into some- 4.1 | Purchase intentions and perceptions of
thing new. For example, spent grain from beer brewing can be dried quality
and made into granola bars rather than being discarded; carrot peels
can be dried and added to a powdered soup mix,” Bhatt et al. [2018]). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed a significant difference among
After reading the description, participants indicated their intentions to the four generations on their intentions to purchase upcycled foods (F
purchase upcycled foods on a three-item scale (the likelihood I would (3, 547) = 4.27, p < .01). Baby Boomers indicated the highest inten-
buy upcycled foods is; the probability that I would consider buying tions to purchase upcycled foods and Gen X showed the lowest inten-
upcycled food is; my willingness to buy upcycled foods is; tions to purchase upcycled foods. Similarly, there was a significant
1 = “extremely low,” 9 = “extremely high”; α = 0.98; Grewal, Krishnan, difference among the generations on their perceptions of quality of
et al. [1998]). Next, participants indicated their perceptions of the upcycled foods (F(3, 547) = 4.24, p < .01). Among the four genera-
quality of upcycled foods on a two-item scale (I feel that the described tions, the perceptions of the quality of upcycled foods were highest
upcycled foods appears to be of good quality; the quality of such for Baby Boomers and were lowest for Gen X (see Table 2).
upcycled foods is likely to be good; 1 = “strongly disagree,” Regressing perceptions of quality on intentions to purchase
9 = “strongly agree”; α = 0.90; Dodds, Monroe, and Grewal [1991]). upcycled foods revealed that perceptions of quality predicted inten-
Next, participants responded to questions regarding their lifestyles: tions to purchase upcycled foods (β = 0.94, p < .001, R2 = 0.682).
frequency of online grocery shopping (“how many times per week do These results indicate that higher perceptions of quality increase
you shop groceries online?”; 1 = “never,” 9 = “more than 7 times”), fre- intentions to purchase upcycled foods.
quency of eating out (“how often do you eat outside?”; 1 = “extremely
infrequently,” 9 = “extremely frequently”), and frequency of cooking
at home (“how often do you cook for yourself?”, 1 = “extremely infre- 4.2 | Lifestyles
quently,” 9 = “extremely frequently”). The scale items are given in
Table 1. The first lifestlyle variable we measured was preference for online
grocery shopping. Respondents' preference for online grocery
shopping was measured by how many times they shop for weekly
4 | RESULTS groceries online. The generations differ significantly on their fre-
quency of online grocery shopping (F(3, 547) = 9.72, p < .001). The
In order to analyze differences between generations, participants' younger generations (Gen Z and Gen Y) shop groceries online more
responses on age were used to create four categories (Kasasa, 2019): frequently than the older generations (Gen X and Baby Boomers).
Gen Z (Born 1995–2015), Gen Y (Born 1980–1994), Gen X (Born These results indicate that younger consumers show a higher pref-
1965–1979), and Baby Boomers (Born 1944–1964). First, we com- erence for shopping for groceries online compared with older
pared purchase intentions and perceptions of quality of upcycled consumers.

TABLE 1 Scale items

Variables Items Sources

Purchase intention 1 The likelihood I would buy upcycled food is Grewal, Krishnan, et al. (1998); Grewal,
2 The probability that I would consider buying upcycled food is Monroe, & Krishnan, (1998)
3 My willingness to buy upcycled foods is
(1 = extremely low, 9 = extremely high)
Perceptions of quality 1 I feel that the described upcycled foods appears to be of good quality Dodds et al. (1991)
2 The quality of such upcycled foods is likely to be good
(1 = strongly disagree, 9 = strongly agree)
Lifestyles How many times per week do you shop groceries online? New
(1 = never, 9 = more than 7 times)
How often do you eat out?
(1 = extremely infrequently, 9 = extremely frequently)
How often do you cook for yourself?
(1 = extremely infrequently, 9 = extremely frequently)
4 ZHANG ET AL.

The second lifestyle variable, food preparation preference, was 4.4 | Gen Z
measured by (a) the number of times a consumer cooked for oneself
each week, and (b) the number of times a consumer ate out each Gen Z are consumers who were born between 1995 and 2015. As
week. ANOVA revealed significant differences among the four gener- one of the youngest group of consumers, this generation has been
ations on both the frequency of cooking (F(3, 593) = 4.17, p < .01) and profiled as a group that is innovative, strongly influenced by social
the frequency of eating out (F(3, 547) = 12.08, p < .001; see Table 3). media, impatient, and active in online shopping (Gutfreund, 2016;
Priporas, Stylos, & Fotiadis, 2017; Su, Tsai, Chen, & Lv, 2019;
Weinswig, 2016). Our results show that Gen Z showed higher evalua-
4.3 | Consumer profiles tion for upcycled foods (purchase intentions and perceptions of qual-
ity). In terms of lifestyle, Gen Z had the highest tendency to shop
The generational analysis helped uncover the differences in con- online groceries and to eat out. Past research has shown that the pref-
sumers' perceptions of upcycled foods. In addition, the two lifestyle erence for shopping online for groceries is positively related with their
characteristics of interest were found to be different among the four preference for sustainable foods (Bryła, 2018; Yang et al., 2018). In
generations. Based on these results, we created four consumer pro- our sample, Gen Z participants had a low tendency to cook for them-
files that can be viewed as actionable segments for upcycled foods selves. Consequently, prepared meals made from upcycled ingredients
(see Figure 1). may be of greater interest to consumers in Gen Z.

TABLE 2 Purchase intentions and

Purchase intentions Perceptions of quality
perceptions of quality of upcycled foods
95% CI 95% CI

Mean Lower Higher Mean Lower Higher

Gen Z 6.49 5.71 7.27 6.51 5.91 7.11
Gen Y 6.57 6.28 6.86 6.43 6.16 6.69
Gen X 5.86 5.49 6.23 5.79 5.47 6.10
Baby boomers 6.85 6.31 7.39 6.85 6.37 7.31
Group difference
Gen Z vs. Gen Y −0.08 −0.93 0.78 0.08 −0.60 0.76
Gen Z vs. Gen X 0.63 −0.26 1.52 0.72 0.02 1.42
Gen Z vs. Baby boomers −0.36 −1.33 0.62 −0.34 −0.85 0.72
Gen Y vs. Gen X 0.71 0.24 1.18 0.64 0.22 1.05
Gen Y vs. Baby boomers −0.28 −0.90 0.35 −0.42 −0.70 0.41
Gen X vs. Baby boomers −1.01 −1.65 −0.32 −0.34 −1.36 −0.20

TABLE 3 Consumer lifestyle results

Online grocery shopping Eating outside Cooking for yourself

95% CI 95% CI 95% CI

Mean Lower Higher Mean Lower Higher Mean Lower Higher

Gen Z 2.86 2.13 3.59 4.61 3.84 5.39 7.28 6.71 7.85
Gen Y 2.69 2.41 2.97 4.37 4.07 4.67 7.13 6.89 7.37
Gen X 2.09 1.84 2.34 3.26 3.01 3.51 7.61 7.40 7.82
Baby boomers 1.39 1.24 1.54 3.41 2.92 3.90 7.81 7.39 8.23
Group difference
Gen Z vs. Gen Y 0.17 −0.63 0.97 0.24 −0.60 1.09 0.15 −0.49 0.78
Gen Z vs. Gen X 0.77 −0.02 1.56 1.35 0.52 2.18 −0.33 −0.96 0.29
Gen Z vs. Baby boomers 1.47 0.71 2.24 1.20 0.27 2.12 −0.53 −1.25 0.19
Gen Y vs. Gen X 0.60 0.22 0.98 1.11 0.71 1.50 −0.48 −0.80 −0.16
Gen Y vs. Gaby boomers 1.30 0.98 1.63 0.96 0.37 1.54 −0.68 −1.16 −0.19
Gen X vs. Baby boomers 0.70 0.41 1.00 −0.15 −0.71 0.41 −0.20 −0.67 0.28
ZHANG ET AL. 5

4.5 | Gen Y 4.6 | Gen X

Gen Y, also known as Millennials, are consumers who were born between Gen X are consumers who were born between 1965 and 1979.
1980 and 1994. Gen Y is a generation that has witnessed drastic changes Gen X consumers are a group that is cost conscious, hard to per-
in technology and communications during their teenage years (Mor- suade, and confident in taking actions (Bathmanathan, Rajadurai, &
ton, 2002). Past research has shown that Gen Y is active in the digital Sohail, 2018; Lissitsa & Kol, 2016; Pitta & Gurau, 2012). Our
space, values trust, displays high consumer involvement, and is expected results indicate that Gen X has strong opinions on upcycled
to have an increasing impact in the market (Bilgihan, 2016; Regine, 2011; foods—they indicated the lowest purchase intentions for upcycled
Stevens, Lathrop, & Bradish, 2005; Sullivan & Heitmeyer, 2008). Our foods and the lowest perceptions of quality of upcycled foods.
results indicate that Gen Y showed high evaluation for upcycled foods Such results are consistent with the past literature that finds that
(purchase intention and perceptions of quality). In terms of lifestyle, Gen Gen X is skeptical. In terms of lifestyle, consumers in Gen X were
Y had a significantly higher tendency to shop online for groceries com- least likely to eat outside. Rather, consumers in this generation
pared with Gen X and Baby Boomers. In addition, Gen Y consumers were were more likely to cook for themselves. They were less likely to
more likely to eat outside than those in the older generations (Gen X and shop online for groceries. These results suggest that when market-
Baby Boomers). Moreover, Gen Y consumers were the least likely to ing upcycled foods to Gen X, practitioners need to focus on
cook for themselves. In essence, Gen Y shares the lifestyle characteristics improving product quality and providing assurance about the qual-
of Gen Z. Given these similarities, Gen Y can be considered a target that ity of upcycled foods. Therefore, when targeting Gen X, conven-
is similar to Gen Z. Therefore, upcycled foods that are already prepared tional channels, such as brick-and-mortar grocery stores and stores
and need to be replenished often may be appropriate for both Gen Z and with higher reputation, would be more suitable (Agnihotri, 2015;
Gen Y. Anderson & Narus, 1990; Chaudhuri & Ligas, 2009).

FIGURE 1 Consumer profiles [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

6 ZHANG ET AL.

4.7 | Baby boomers market for upcycled foods. However, Gen X consumers may differ
from the other generations in their evaluations of upcycled foods.
Baby Boomers, the oldest among the four generations, are consumers Consumers in Gen X reported the lowest perceived quality of
who were born between 1944 and 1964. Past research suggests that upcycled foods and, therefore, the lowest purchase intentions. This
Baby Boomers are health conscious, have higher accumulated wealth, may be because Gen X consumers are more difficult to persuade
show higher social awareness, and are less likely to shop impulsively (Pitta & Gur
au, 2012). Furthermore, we found that as the perceived
(Cleaver, Green, & Muller, 2000; LeRouge, Van Slyke, Seale, & quality of upcycled foods decreased, the intentions to purchase
Wright, 2014; Valkeneers & Vanhoomissen, 2012). Our results show upcycled foods also decreased. These results are in line with past
that Baby Boomers evaluated upcycled foods more favorably (high research that shows that concerns about product quality generally
purchase intentions and high perceptions of quality). In terms of life- result in lower willingness to buy the product (Grewal, Krishnan,
style, Baby Boomers preferred to cook for themselves rather than eat- et al., 1998). In other words, to increase consumers' willingness to
ing outside. In addition, Baby Boomers showed the lowest tendency buy upcycled foods, especially for Gen X, it is necessary to assure
to shop online for groceries. These results suggest that Baby Boomers consumers about the quality and benefits of upcycled foods. A
may prefer upcycled foods as ingredients instead of prepared meals. positive perception of quality can be created by crafting messages
Furthermore, offering upcycled foods in traditional channels, such as that highlight the quality of these foods. Past literature suggests
stores, are advisable when targeting this generation. that when consumers are uncertain about the quality of the prod-
ucts, they use intrinsic and extrinsic cues around the product
(Bredahl, 2004; Grewal, Roggeveen, & Nordfält, 2014; Miyazaki,
5 | G E N E R A L D I S C U S SI O N Grewal, & Goodstein, 2005; Olson & Jacoby, 1972; Rao & Mon-
roe, 1988). Such cues are often peripheral cues, such as packaging,
According to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization brand, logos, and so forth. In the context of food products, certifi-
(FAO), the number of people experiencing food insecurity is on the cation can be a pivotal cue. Certifications related to both ingredi-
rise (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2019). ents and processes of manufacturing these foods can go a long
Past research suggests many natural and man-made causes for food way in convincing consumers about their quality (Ghodeswar, 2008;
insecurity. Clearly, food waste is one reason that contributes to the Janssen & Hamm, 2012). Certifications improve consumer confi-
problem of food insecurity. It is estimated that nearly half of the food dence in general and are especially helpful in promoting new cate-
produced worldwide is wasted (Lundqvist et al., 2008). While the gories of foods (Banterle, Cereda, & Fritz, 2013). In addition to
exact amount of food waste can be debated, these estimates help certifications, other cues that consumers often rely on can be lev-
visualize how big the problem is. The magnitude of the food waste eraged by marketers of upcycled foods. For example, research
problem bears testimony to the fact that food chains are far from demonstrates that consumers' acceptance of upcycled foods can
being sustainable. Many solutions have been offered to make food be shaped by pricing these foods lower than similar conventional
chains more sustainable. A promising solution to food waste is a new foods and/or by appropriately communicating the value of con-
category of foods termed upcycled foods (Aschemann-Witzel & suming upcycled foods (Bhatt et al., 2020).
Peschel, 2019; Bhatt et al., 2018; Bhatt et al., 2020; McCarthy While Baby Boomers, Gen Y, and Gen Z perceived upcycled foods
et al., 2020). While these foods have many benefits for the environ- favorably, the lifestyle differences between these generations may
ment, little is known about how to market these foods. Launching predispose them to evaluate different types of upcycled foods differ-
new products, such as upcycled foods, require understanding of vari- ently. For example, Baby Boomers are most likely to cook for them-
ous consumer segments. Identifying responsive consumer segments is selves rather than eat outside and are, therefore, more likely to buy
critical in marketing upcycled foods. To our knowledge, no research upcycled ingredients (e.g., upcycled protein powder, upcycled flour,
has examined market segmentation for upcycled foods. Our study fills upcycled seasonings, etc.). On the other hand, Gen Y and Gen Z con-
this gap by examining a widely used segmentation approach based on sumers are more likely to prefer premade upcycled meals or snacks (e.
age. Past research on market segmentation has extensively investi- g., upcycled bars, upcycled canned soups, upcycled noodles, upcycled
gated the variable of age (Dholakia & Uusitalo, 2002; Sudbury & chips, etc.). Similarly, offering upcycled foods through online channels
Simcock, 2009; Tepper, 1994). Market research has also focused on will be necessary to target Gen Y and Gen Z consumers. However, in
generations (based on age) as a basis for segmentation (Bakewell & order to appeal to Gen X and Baby Boomers, it will be necessary to
Mitchell, 2003; Morgan & Levy, 2002; Schewe, Meredith, & distribute upcycled foods through traditional channels. The findings
Noble, 2000). This stream of research has found considerable differ- from our research not only help identify the most responsive genera-
ences in attitudes and behaviors of consumers in different genera- tional segments but also provide insights into why it is necessary to
tions. Thus, we focused on examining differences in perceptions of inquire further into the lifestyle characteristics. Focusing only on gen-
upcycled foods among different generations. erational differences does not reveal why different generations per-
Our results show that three out of four generational cohorts ceive upcycled foods differently. Furthermore, looking at lifestyle
(Baby Boomers, Gen Y, and Gen Z) indicated high intentions to pur- differences helps understand—(a) right product development strate-
chase upcycled foods. These results suggest that there is a sizeable gies and (b) appropriate distribution strategies. Given that upcycled
ZHANG ET AL. 7

foods are a new category of products that are still in development, Banterle, A., Cereda, E., & Fritz, M. (2013). Labelling and sustainability in
such insights are valuable to practitioners in this industry. food supply networks. British Food Journal, 115, 769–783.
Barber, N., Taylor, D. C., & Deale, C. S. (2010). Wine tourism, environmen-
While the current study provides important managerial implica-
tal concerns, and purchase intention. Journal of Travel & Tourism Mar-
tions, certain limitations must be noted. First, there are several ways keting, 27(2), 146–165.
to approach segmentation and targeting. This research focused on age Bathmanathan, V., Rajadurai, J., & Sohail, M. S. (2018). Generational con-
as the primary basis, given its widespread use across industries (Sud- sumer patterns: A document analysis method. Global Business and
Management Research, 10(3), 958–970.
bury & Simcock, 2009; Tepper, 1994; Yoon, 1997). Inter-generational
Bhatt, S., Lee, J., Deutsch, J., Ayaz, H., Fulton, B., & Suri, R. (2018). From
differences provide a meaningful way to segment the market and food waste to value-added surplus products (VASP): Consumer accep-
choose target markets. However, there are other demographic vari- tance of a novel food product category. Journal of Consumer Behaviour,
ables (e.g., gender, income, education, etc.) that need to be examined. 17(1), 57–63.
Bhatt, S., Ye, H., Deutsch, J., Ayaz, H., & Suri, R. (2020). Consumers' Will-
Furthermore, the heterogeneity attributable to sub-groups within
ingness to Pay for Upcycled Foods. (Working Paper).
each generation may also be important to examine (Reisenwitz & Bilgihan, A. (2016). Gen Y customer loyalty in online shopping: An inte-
Iyer, 2007). It is also important to acknowledge that Gen Y consumers grated model of trust, user experience and branding. Computers in
will enter the next life stage which may contribute to changes in their Human Behavior, 61, 103–113.
Bredahl, L. (2004). Cue utilisation and quality perception with regard to
preferences and behaviors (Andreasen, 1984; Mathur, Moschis, &
branded beef. Food Quality and Preference, 15(1), 65–75.
Lee, 2003, 2008). Thus, future research should consider not only the
Bryła, P. (2018). Organic food online shopping in Poland. British Food Jour-
current life stage but also imminent life stage changes. Future nal, 120, 1015–1027.
research should also consider the possibility that differences among Cahill, D. J. (1997). Target marketing and segmentation: Valid and useful
the generations observed in our sample of U.S participants may vary tools for marketing. Management Decision, 35, 10–13.
Chaudhuri, A., & Ligas, M. (2009). Consequences of value in retail markets.
in other cultures. Differences in values, beliefs, social structures, and
Journal of Retailing, 85(3), 406–419.
technological exposure among many other variables may influence Cleaver, M., Green, B. C., & Muller, T. E. (2000). Using consumer behavior
the attitudes and behaviors of consumers in other cultures. Further- research to understand the baby boomer tourist. Journal of Hospitality
more, there could be other lifestyle variables (e.g., athletic orientation, and Tourism Research, 24(2), 274–287.
D'Souza, C., Taghian, M., Lamb, P., & Peretiatko, R. (2007). Green
diet preferences, etc.) that also impact attitudes toward upcycled
decisions: Demographics and consumer understanding of environ-
foods. Therefore, future research can look into a diverse set of vari- mental labels. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31(4),
ables and their interactions that impact consumers' acceptance of 371–376.
upcycled foods. Dholakia, R. R., & Uusitalo, O. (2002). Switching to electronic stores: Con-
sumer characteristics and the perception of shopping benefits. Interna-
tional Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 30, 459–469.
ORCID Dickson, P. R., & Ginter, J. L. (1987). Market segmentation, product differ-
Jintao Zhang https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0250-4566 entiation, and marketing strategy. Journal of Marketing, 51(2), 1–10.
Hongjun Ye https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6243-3237 Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., & Grewal, D. (1991). Effects of price, brand,
and store information on buyers' product evaluations. Journal of Mar-
Siddharth Bhatt https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5585-4407
keting Research, 28(3), 307–319.
Haeyoung Jeong https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9302-7007 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2019). The
Jonathan Deutsch https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0504-3598 State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World. Retrieved from
Hasan Ayaz https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5514-2741 http://www.fao.org/state-of-food-security-nutrition/en/
Gan, C., Wee, H. Y., Ozanne, L., & Kao, T. (2008). Consumers' purchasing
Rajneesh Suri https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8513-5219
behavior towards green products in New Zealand. Innovative Market-
ing, 4(1), 93–102.
RE FE R ENC E S Ghodeswar, B. M. (2008). Building brand identity in competitive markets:
Agnihotri, A. (2015). Can brick-and-mortar retailers successfully become A conceptual model. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 17,
multichannel retailers? Journal of Marketing Channels, 22(1), 62–73. 4–12.
Anderson, J. C., & Narus, J. A. (1990). A model of distributor firm and man- Gilg, A., Barr, S., & Ford, N. (2005). Green consumption or sustainable life-
ufacturer firm working partnerships. Journal of Marketing, 54(1), styles? Identifying the sustainable consumer. Futures, 37(6), 481–504.
42–58. Gordon-Wilson, S., & Modi, P. (2015). Personality and older consumers'
Andreasen, A. R. (1984). Life status changes and changes in consumer green behaviour in the UK. Futures, 71, 1–10.
preferences and satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(3), Grewal, D., Krishnan, R., Baker, J., & Borin, N. A. (1998). The effect of store
784–794. name, brand name and price discounts on consumers' evaluations and
Anvar, M., & Venter, M. (2014). Attitudes and purchase behaviour of green purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing, 74(3), 331–352.
products among generation y consumers in South Africa. Mediterra- Grewal, D., Monroe, K. B., & Krishnan, R. (1998). The effects of price-com-
nean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(21), 183. parison advertising on buyers' perceptions of acquisition value, trans-
Aschemann-Witzel, J., & Peschel, A. O. (2019). How circular will you eat? action value, and behavioral intentions. Journal of Marketing, 62(2),
The sustainability challenge in food and consumer reaction to either 46–59.
waste-to-value or yet underused novel ingredients in food. Food Qual- Grewal, D., Roggeveen, A., & Nordfält, J. (2014). Pricing in the modern
ity and Preference, 77, 15–20. world: The role of price-related and non-price related cues. Journal of
Bakewell, C., & Mitchell, V. W. (2003). Generation Y female consumer Product and Brand Management, 23(6), 397–400.
decision-making styles. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Gutfreund, J. (2016). Move over, millennials: Generation Z is changing the
Management, 31, 95–106. consumer landscape. Journal of Brand Strategy, 5(3), 245–249.
8 ZHANG ET AL.

Hallin, P. O. (1995). Environmental concern and environmental behavior in O'Donnell, T. H., Deutsch, J., Yungmann, C., Zeitz, A., & Katz, S. H. (2015).
Foley, a small town in Minnesota. Environment and Behavior, 27(4), New sustainable market opportunities for surplus food: A food sys-
558–578. tem-sensitive methodology (FSSM). Food and Nutrition Sciences, 6(10),
Han, H., Hsu, L.-T. J., & Lee, J.-S. (2009). Empirical investigation of the 883–892.
roles of attitudes toward green behaviors, overall image, gender, and Olli, E., Grendstad, G., & Wollebaek, D. (2001). Correlates of environmen-
age in hotel customers' eco-friendly decision-making process. Interna- tal behaviors: Bringing back social context. Environment and Behavior,
tional Journal of Hospitality Management, 28(4), 519–528. 33(2), 181–208.
Hand, C., Riley, F. D. O., Harris, P., Singh, J., & Rettie, R. (2009). Online gro- Olson, J. C., & Jacoby, J. (1972). Cue utilization in the quality perception
cery shopping: The influence of situational factors. European Journal of process. ACR Special Volumes. https://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/
Marketing, 43, 1205–1219. 11997/volumes/sv02/SV-02
Janssen, M., & Hamm, U. (2012). Product labelling in the market for Pitta, D., & Gurau, C. (2012). A life-stage analysis of consumer loyalty pro-
organic food: Consumer preferences and willingness-to-pay for differ- file: Comparing generation X and Millennial consumers. Journal of Con-
ent organic certification logos. Food Quality and Preference, 25(1), sumer Marketing, 29, 103–113.
9–22. Priporas, C.-V., Stylos, N., & Fotiadis, A. K. (2017). Generation Z con-
Kasasa. (2019). Boomers, Gen X, Gen Y, and Gen Z Explained. Retrieved sumers' expectations of interactions in smart retailing: A future
from https://www.kasasa.com/articles/generations/gen-x-gen-y- agenda. Computers in Human Behavior, 77, 374–381.
gen-z Rao, A. R., & Monroe, K. B. (1988). The moderating effect of prior knowl-
Kotler, P., Keller, K. L., Ang, S. H., Tan, C.-T., & Leong, S. M. (2018). Market- edge on cue utilization in product evaluations. Journal of Consumer
ing management: An Asian perspective. Pearson. Research, 15(2), 253–264.
Krystallis, A., & Chryssohoidis, G. (2005). Consumers' willingness to pay Regine, K. M. (2011). Generation Y consumer choice for organic foods.
for organic food. British Food Journal, 107, 320–343. Journal of Global Business Management, 7(1), 1.
Lalwani, A. K., & Forcum, L. (2016). Does a dollar get you a dollar's worth Reisenwitz, T., & Iyer, R. (2007). A comparison of younger and older baby
of merchandise? The impact of power distance belief on price-quality boomers: Investigating the viability of cohort segmentation. Journal of
judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(2), 317–333. Consumer Marketing, 24, 202–213.
Lalwani, A. K., & Shavitt, S. (2013). You get what you pay for? Self-con- Roberts, J. A. (1996). And implications for advertising. Journal of Business
strual influences price-quality judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 36, 217–231.
Research, 40(2), 255–267. Saba, A., & Messina, F. (2003). Attitudes towards organic foods and
LeRouge, C., Van Slyke, C., Seale, D., & Wright, K. (2014). Baby boomers' risk/benefit perception associated with pesticides. Food Quality and
adoption of consumer health technologies: Survey on readiness and Preference, 14(8), 637–645.
barriers. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 16(9), e200. Schewe, C. D., Meredith, G. E., & Noble, S. M. (2000). Defining moments:
Li, J., Zepeda, L., & Gould, B. W. (2007). The demand for organic food in Segmenting by cohorts. Marketing Management, 9(3), 48–53.
the US: An empirical assessment. Journal of Food Distribution Research, Singh, A., & Verma, P. (2017). Factors influencing Indian consumers' actual
38, 54–69. buying behaviour towards organic food products. Journal of Cleaner
Lissitsa, S., & Kol, O. (2016). Generation X vs. generation Y–A decade of Production, 167, 473–483.
online shopping. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 31, Stevens, J., Lathrop, A., & Bradish, C. (2005). Tracking generation Y: A con-
304–312. temporary sport consumer profile. Journal of Sport Management, 19(3),
Lundqvist, J., de Fraiture, C., & Molden, D. (2008). Saving water: From field 254–277.
to fork: Curbing losses and wastage in the food chain. Stockholm Straughan, R. D., & Roberts, J. A. (1999). Environmental segmentation
International Water Institute Stockholm. alternatives: A look at green consumer behavior in the new millen-
Mathur, A., Moschis, G. P., & Lee, E. (2003). Life events and brand prefer- nium. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 16(6), 558–575. https://doi.org/
ence changes. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 3(2), 129–141. 10.1108/07363769910297506
Mathur, A., Moschis, G. P., & Lee, E. (2008). A longitudinal study of the Su, C.-H. J., Tsai, C.-H. K., Chen, M.-H., & Lv, W. Q. (2019). US sustainable
effects of life status changes on changes in consumer preferences. food market generation z consumer segments. Sustainability, 11(13),
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(2), 234–246. 3607.
McCarthy, B., Kapetanaki, A. B., & Wang, P. (2020). Completing the food Sudbury, L., & Simcock, P. (2009). A multivariate segmentation model of
waste management loop: Is there market potential for value-added senior consumers. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 26, 251–262.
surplus products (VASP)? Journal of Cleaner Production, 256, 120435. Sullivan, P., & Heitmeyer, J. (2008). Looking at gen Y shopping prefer-
Miyazaki, A. D., Grewal, D., & Goodstein, R. C. (2005). The effect of multi- ences and intentions: Exploring the role of experience and apparel
ple extrinsic cues on quality perceptions: A matter of consistency. involvement. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 32(3),
Journal of Consumer Research, 32(1), 146–153. 285–295.
Morgan, C. M., & Levy, D. J. (2002). Marketing to the mindset of boomers Tepper, K. (1994). The role of labeling processes in elderly consumers'
and their elders. responses to age segmentation cues. Journal of Consumer Research, 20
Morganosky, M. A., & Cude, B. J. (2000). Consumer response to online (4), 503–519.
grocery shopping. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Manage- United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2020). Sustainable Man-
ment, 28, 17–26. agement of Food. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-
Morton, L. P. (2002). Targeting generation Y. Public Relations Quarterly, 47 management-food
(2), 46. Valkeneers, G., & Vanhoomissen, T. (2012). Generations living their own
Mourad, M. (2016). Recycling, recovering and preventing “food waste”: life: The differences in lifestyle and consumer behaviour between
Competing solutions for food systems sustainability in the United busters and baby boomers. Journal of Customer Behaviour, 11(1),
States and France. Journal of Cleaner Production, 126, 461–477. 53–68.
Nie, C., & Zepeda, L. (2011). Lifestyle segmentation of US food shoppers Vining, J., & Ebreo, A. (1990). What makes a recycler? A comparison of
to examine organic and local food consumption. Appetite, 57(1), recyclers and nonrecyclers. Environment and Behavior, 22(1), 55–73.
28–37. Wedel, M., & Kamakura, W. A. (2012). Market segmentation: Conceptual
Noble, S. M., Haytko, D. L., & Phillips, J. (2009). What drives college-age and methodological foundations (Vol. 8). Springer Science & Business
generation Y consumers. Journal of Business Research, 62(6), 617–628. Media.
ZHANG ET AL. 9

Weinswig, D. (2016). Gen Z: Get ready for the most self-conscious,

demanding consumer segment. Fung Global Retail & Technology, Jonathan Deutsch joined Drexel from Kingsborough Community
Retrieved from https://www.fbicgroup.com/sites/default/files/Gen% College-CUNY, where he served as professor and founding direc-
20Z%20Report%202016%20by%20Fung%20Global%20Retail%20Tech tor of the culinary arts program as well as deputy chair of the
%20August%2029,%202016.pdf.
department of tourism and hospitality. He previously worked at
Williamson, C. (2007). Is organic food better for our health? Nutrition Bulle-
tin, 32(2), 104–108. CUNY Graduate Center as Professor of Public Health and
World Trade Organization. (2020). The WTO and the Sustainable Devel- founding director of the food studies concentration. Deutsch's
opment Goals. Retrieved from https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_ research interests include social and cultural aspects of food, rec-
e/coher_e/sdgs_e/sdgs_e.htm ipe and product development, and culinary education. He
Yang, S., Li, L., & Zhang, J. (2018). Understanding consumers' sustainable
received his doctorate in food studies and food management from
consumption intention at China's double-11 online shopping festival:
An extended theory of planned behavior model. Sustainability, 10(6), New York University.
1801.
Yoon, C. (1997). Age differences in consumers' processing strategies: An Hasan Ayaz, PhD, is an Associate Professor at Drexel University,
investigation of moderating influences. Journal of Consumer Research, School of Biomedical Engineering, Science and Health Systems,
24(3), 329–342. Philadelphia, PA and in the Department of Psychology at the
Drexel University College of Arts and Sciences, a core member of
the Cognitive Neuroengineering and Quantitative Experimental
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHI ES
Research Collaborative and with affiliations at the University of
Pennsylvania and the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. Dr.
Jintao Zhang is a PhD student at the LeBow College of Business
Ayaz's research involves understanding the neural mechanisms
at Drexel University. His work focuses on understanding con-
related to human perceptual, cognitive, and motor functioning
sumers' perception of numbers and time along with their con-
with a focus on real-world contexts, utilizing mobile neuroimaging,
sumption journey and welfare. His recent research focuses on
and deploying neuroengineering approaches for neuroergonomics
consumers' perception of Upcycled Foods.
applications.
Hongjun Ye is a PhD Candidate at the LeBow College of Business
Rajneesh Suri is the Interim Sr. Vice Provost for Academic Indus-
at Drexel University. Her work examines the effects of price and
try Partnerships, the Vice Dean for Research & Strategic Partner-
other marketing communications on consumer decision making.
ships and a Professor of Marketing at the LeBow College of
Her recent research focuses on consumers evaluation of Upcycled
Business at Drexel University. Raj has authored several research
Foods.
publications, presentations, and book chapters. His research has
Siddharth Bhatt is an Assistant Professor of Marketing at Penn- been presented before various international associations in Asia,
sylvania State University at Harrisburg. His research interests lie Europe, and North America and his teaching and research have
in the areas of pricing, retailing, and food marketing. received national awards. Raj's work focuses on how consumers
form value using price and brand drivers. His work examines con-
Haeyoung Jeong is an Assistant Professor of Marketing at the
sumer experiences, and the effects of price and other marketing
School of Business at North Carolina Central University. She holds
communications on consumer decision making.
a PhD in Marketing from Drexel University, and an MS and a BA
in Management Science from the Korea Advanced Institute of Sci-
ence and Technology. Her research interests include digital and
social media marketing, visual perception, behavioral pricing, and
How to cite this article: Zhang J, Ye H, Bhatt S, et al.
food marketing. Her work has been published in the Journal of
Addressing food waste: How to position upcycled foods to
Advertising, Psychology & Marketing, and Journal of Business and
different generations. J Consumer Behav. 2020;1–9. https://
Industrial Marketing, among others.
doi.org/10.1002/cb.1844