International Journal of Public Health Science (IJPHS)

Vol. 12, No. 2, June 2023, pp. 716~725

ISSN: 2252-8806, DOI: 10.11591/ijphs.v12i2.22451  716

Knowledge, attitude and behavior on utilizing suboptimal food

related public health

Waode Dea Astria, Herdis Herdiansyah, Sri Setiawati Tumuyu

Departemen of Environmental Science, School of Environmental Science, Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia

Article Info ABSTRACT

Article history: Offering food products at lower prices approaching the expiration date,
referred to as suboptimal food products, is considered to be able to
Received Sep 1, 2022 encourage purchasing considerations by the public. It is based on knowledge
Revised Feb 18, 2023 of purchasing price-reduced food products by the public and the potential
Accepted Mar 10, 2023 waste in the community focused. The study aimed to contribute to the
evaluation of whether offering suboptimal foods at a lower price will reduce
food waste in the supply chain. This study analyzes public knowledge,
Keywords: attitudes, and behavior toward suboptimal product price offers in retail
stores. The research was conducted in three retail stores in Depok City by
Food waste exploring research questions involving 274 retail store customers who were
Lower prices analyzed based on a questionnaire. The approach used is a quantitative
Retail approach with multiple linear analysis methods using SPSS software. The
Suboptimal foods findings show that public knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors influence
Sustainable suboptimal product price offers in retail stores. This research is expected to
be an effective solution to overcome excess food, which leads to food waste
at the retail level in sustainable food management.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.

Corresponding Author:
Herdis Herdiansyah
School of Environmental Science, Universitas Indonesia
Salemba Raya Kampus UI Salemba Street No.4, Kenari, Senen, Central Jakarta City, Jakarta 10430,
Indonesia
Email: [email protected]

1. INTRODUCTION
To support environmental health and sustainable practices, the consumption and purchase of
suboptimal food products are significant in changing public behavior [1], [2]. People's reluctance to buy or
consume suboptimal food products is one of the reasons for potential food waste that impacts the
environment and natural resources [3], [4]. Suboptimal food products are often associated with products that
deviate from the intended product based on appearance (weight, shape, or size), expiration date (near or past
the best consumption date), or packaging without affecting quality or safety for consumption [5], [6]. In
addition, another contributing factor is the difficulty of stock management in balancing supply and demand.
Excessive demand makes food products pile up and sell less. It causes the product to lose its appearance.
Therefore, traders took the initiative to sell suboptimal products at lower prices [7]. The physical appearance
of food products is the main attraction for the public. Increased public satisfaction is essential to profitability
for the food industry [8], [9].
Retailers are changing customary practices to allow individuals to act against food waste by
purchasing suboptimal food products. In addition, retailers are implementing strategies in the form of food
redistribution to charities and reduction of suboptimal food prices [10]–[12]. People do not want to risk
buying suboptimal foods approaching their expiration date [13]. The public considers that the nutritional

Journal homepage: http://ijphs.iaescore.com

Int J Public Health Sci ISSN: 2252-8806  717

value and quality of the suboptimal product will affect health. Likewise, with products that have packaging
that is not up to standard, people tend to avoid them [14]. Hence, the right solution is needed to reduce and
prevent continuous food waste by introducing the acceptance of suboptimal products to the public. However,
to be sustainable, this must be supported by a pro-environment community. Concern, commitment,
perception, and high public awareness positively influence suboptimal food acceptance attitudes [15]. Expert
opinion also provides evidence that personal norms are strong predictors of behavioral control so that they
have the same effect as attitudes and behavior [16]. This approach is expected to support the reduction of
suboptimal products at retailers with pro-environmental values.
The rapid increase in urbanization has turned Depok City into one of the metropolitan cities with an
increasing number of visitors. This is evident from the increasing amount of waste. Based on 2018 data
obtained from the [17], the total waste generation of Depok City reaches 5,154.90 m3/day with per capita
waste of 2,272.00 ml/person/day. Meanwhile, the amount of waste carried to the landfill is only 3,000.00
m3/day. Urbanization also encourages the growth of retail store outlets to support the public's daily activities,
proven by 114 retail stores in operation in Depok. However, the increase in retail stores is not offset by
proper waste management, especially food waste. Based on data collected from one of the food retailers in
Margonda, Depok, the composition of organic waste reaches 57% of the total waste [18], with food waste as
one of the contributors. Some food stores in Depok sell items close to the expiration limit but are consumable
at lower prices to the public approaching the store closing time. Suboptimal food acceptance generally
increases as prices drop, and discounts help promote products that sell less well [15], [19].
Although several studies have discussed food waste in developed countries, the discussion of food
waste at retail stores is still little explored, especially in developing countries. This is very important since
retail stores can affect the two sides involved, namely the public and sellers. This study analyzes public
knowledge, attitudes, and behavior toward suboptimal product price offers in retail stores. The problem in
this study is the high amount of food waste from retail stores that come from internal conditions that cannot
be controlled. This triggers the significant costs incurred by the shop to process the waste produced by the
local government. A consumer approach based on knowledge, attitudes, and behavior can certainly be a
consideration for a speedy recovery. Knowledge of suboptimal products can influence consumer attitudes and
behavior in considering price offers, which indirectly impacts reducing food waste in retail stores. Knowing
consumers' knowledge, attitudes, and behavior regarding suboptimal products may help predict the strategies
that the store can plan. Knowledge, attitude, and behavior surveys can also collect information about what a
given population knows, believes, and does about food waste. The study is essential since it potentially
encourages public consideration in buying these food products because disposed of suboptimal food products
represents a significant quantity of food waste. This contributes to understanding the relationship between
public knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors and the price offers set by retailers on suboptimal food products.
It can also contribute as an initiative to reduce food waste through food with reduced prices available in the
market. Therefore, this research can help retailers to obtain recommendations related to food selling and food
product policymaking that can support the selling of food that is not wasted in retail stores because
suboptimal food indirectly plays an essential role in the food supply chain [20].

2. RESEARCH METHOD
This quantitative research employed a questionnaire-based survey method that took place in retail
areas. This method is relevant since it has been applied in previous research. Data collection was carried out
between November 2021–January 2022. Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS 25 software using
multiple linear regression to identify whether free variables (knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors) influenced
bound variables (price offers). Validity and reliability test were carried out beforehand as a pretesting stage
using questionnaire questions with a minimum respondent target of 30 people. The list of statements in the
questionnaire is presented in Table 1.
The retail stores involved in this study include store A (Beji District), store B (Sukmajaya District),
and store C (Tapos District). The selection of store locations was considered suitable to answer the research
questions. The population in this study was the average number of visitors in each food retail store for eight
days. The number of visitors in each retail store was recorded based on observation. The observation was
carried out by looking at visitor data for the previous seven days (based on the store's operational schedule)
in advance. Subsequently, the average visitor number was multiplied by the number of sampling days
(eight days) to determine the population. Population and total samples are presented in Table 2. Samples of
visitors were selected by accidental sampling, in which respondents were selected based on random and
coincidental encounters in retail stores. Target respondents without specific criteria only depend on the
possibility and willingness of visitors to become research samples. The number of minimum samples of
respondents was determined using the Slovin formula as follows:

Knowledge, attitude and behavior on utilizing suboptimal food related public health (Waode Dea Astria)
718  ISSN: 2252-8806

𝑁
𝑛= (1)
1+𝑁𝑒 2

Information:
n = number of samples (minimum)
N = population size
e = error (10%)

Table 1. The list of statements in the questionnaire

Questionnaire Answer
1 2 3 4 5
A. Knowledge
1. Food products that are less than standard/near the expiration date are not harmful to health
2. Food products that are less than standard/close to expiration can still be eaten
3. Food products that are less than standard/close to expiration indicate their declining nutritional quality
4. Products that are less than standard/close to expiration give a taste that is still delicious when eaten
5. The number of food products that are less than standard/near the expiration date that is not sold results in an
increase in food waste in stores
6. The purchase of food products that are less than standard/near the expiration date can help reduce food
waste in retail stores
7. Food products that are less than standard/close to expiration may occur in inappropriate storage areas
(refrigerators/warehouses).
8. Food products that are less than standard/near the expiration date can occur when shipping by car to the store
9. Food products that are less than standard/nearing the expiration date can occur because some foods are
placed in the front position randomly/messily (not sorted according to new or old items) on the display
window/display
10. Products that are less than standard/nearing the expiration date occur due to incorrect product placement
and storage that are not suitable
11. Products that are less than standard/nearing the expiration date are caused by ordering food stocks that are
excessive/in large quantities
B. Attitude
1. I am willing to consume less than standard food products or have slight defects in appearance
2. I am willing to consume food products that are close to expiration
3. I intend to consume less than standard food products/close to expiration
4. I will try to consume food products that are less than standard/close to expiration if available
5. I plan to consume less than standard food/near expiry date if available
6. I consider buying food products that are almost expired even though they are still okay to eat
7. I buy food products that are less than standard/close to expiration because it has become my habit to
consume them
8. I will suggest to my relatives/relatives to buy and consume food products that are less than standard/near the
expiration date
C. Consumer’s Behavior
1. I buy products that are less than standard/close to expiration at a lower price more than once in 1 month
2. I pay attention to the expiration date of every food product sold in the store
3.I pay attention to the quality of a food product in the store
4.I compare the written price with the quality of the food product
5. I prefer the appearance of good food products over those that are not good or have defects in the product
D. Price Offer
1. I buy food products less than standard/near expiration due to lower prices.
2. I am sure that the price offered is still following the product quality is less than standard/nearing the
expiration date
3. The price offered for products that are less than standard/nearing the expiration date is still relatively
affordable
4. I feel that the price offer given to food products that are less than standard/nearing the expiration date helps
me to be able to consume food that was previously sold at a reasonably high price
Description: 1= strongly disagree; 2= disagree; 3= doubtful; 4= agree; 5= strongly agree

Table 2. Population and total samples

Retail A Retail B Retail C
Population (individual) 904 1168 1104
Minimum samples (individual) 90 92 92
Total of samples (individual) 274 respondents

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The study involved 274 respondents whose characteristics included gender, age, marital status,
occupation, education, income, and household size. The study respondents were visitors who visited the three
stores mentioned above. The male and female respondents were 32.8% and 67.2% dominated with

Int J Public Health Sci, Vol. 12, No. 2, June 2023: 716-725
Int J Public Health Sci ISSN: 2252-8806  719

productive age (26-35 years). Among the respondents, 62.8% were married, 31.4% was private employee,
60.2% was senior high school or diploma. More than 61.0% of respondents were living in a household size of
family member 3-5 person, and 42.0% were living in the middle class (income 3-5 million IDR/month). Data
on the demography characteristics of respondents are presented in Table 3.

Table 3. Characteristics of demography

Parameter Frequency Percentage
Gender
Male 90 32.8%
Female 184 67.2%
Age (years)
20-25 67 24.5%
26-35 159 58.0%
>35 48 17.5%
Marital status
Single 102 37.2%
Married 172 62.8%
Occupation
Government employee 30 10.9%
Private employee 86 31.4%
Entrepreneur 48 17.5%
Housewife 76 27.7%
Student 34 12.4%
Education
Junior high school 20 7.3%
Senior high school/Diploma 165 60.2%
Graduation 89 32.5%
Income/month
<1 million IDR 16 5.8%
1-3 million IDR 67 24.4%
3-5 million IDR 115 42.0%
>5 million IDR 76 27.7%
Household size
<3 person 43 15.7%
3-5 person 167 61.0%
>5 person 64 23.4%

Before multiple linear regression testing, one of the conditions that must be carried out was to test
the classical assumptions to observe the best results from the data. A classical assumption test generally
consists of normality, multicollinearity, and heteroscedasticity tests. The data normality test can be carried
out using the Kolmogorov Smirnov one sample, namely with the provision that if the significant value is
above 0.05, the data is normally distributed. Meanwhile, if the one sample Kolmogorov Smirnov results
show a significant value below 0.05, then the data is not normally distributed. Based on Table 4, the
normality test was carried out through the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test resulting in Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)
value of 0.200, suggesting that the data of this study were generally distributed since the significance value
was 0.200>0.05. The results of the inner normality test are presented in Table 4.

Table 4. Normality test

One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test
Unstandardized residual
N 274
Mean .0000000
Normal Parametersb
Std. Deviation 2.09627528
Absolute .048
Most extreme
Positive .048
differences
Negative -.045
Test statistic .048
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .200c,d
a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.
c. Lilliefors Significance Correction.
d. This is a lower bound of the true significance.

Knowledge, attitude and behavior on utilizing suboptimal food related public health (Waode Dea Astria)
720  ISSN: 2252-8806

The multicollinearity test aims to test whether the regression model finds a correlation between the
independent variables. The effect of this multicollinearity is to cause high variables in the sample. It means
that the standard error is significant, as a result, when the coefficients are tested, the t-count will have a
smaller value than the t-table. This shows that there is no linear relationship between the independent
variables affected by the dependent variable. To find whether or not multicollinearity exists in the regression
model, it can be seen from the tolerance value and the variance inflation factor (VIF) value. Tolerance
measures the variability of the selected independent variables, which other independent variables cannot
explain. So a low tolerance value is the same as a high VIF value (VIF=1/tolerance) and indicates high
collinearity. The commonly used cut-off value is a tolerance value of 0.10 or the same as a VIF value above
10. From Table 5, it can be seen that the tolerance value is higher than 0.10 in all variables. Likewise, the
VIF value is below 10 in all variables, suggesting that this study found no multicollinearity.
This test aims to test whether there is variance discomfort in a regression model from one residual
observation to another. If the variants are different, it is called heteroscedasticity. One way to determine
whether there is heteroscedasticity in a multiple linear regression model is to look at the scatterplot graph or
the predicted value of the dependent variable, namely SRESID (studentized residuals) is a standardized
residual value, with a residual error ZPRED (standardized residual) is a standardized residual value. If there
is no specific pattern and it does not spread above and below zero on the y-axis, then there is no
heteroscedasticity. A good model does not have heteroscedasticity. Figure 1 demonstrates that specific
patterns and plot points are evenly spread. Hence, it can be concluded that there was no heteroscedasticity in
this study.

Table 5. Multicollinearity test

Coefficients
Collinearity statistics
Model
Tolerance VIF
Knowledge .420 2.381
1 Attitude .476 2.100
Behavior .592 1.688
a. Dependent Variable: Price offer

Figure 1. Heteroscedasticity test

The multiple linear regression test equations resulted in an equation:

Y =-0.386+0.235X1+0.114X2+0.130X3+e. The constant -0.386 suggests that if there is no change or zero
value in the variables X1 (knowledge), X2 (attitude), and X3 (behavior), the variable Y (price offer) will

Int J Public Health Sci, Vol. 12, No. 2, June 2023: 716-725
Int J Public Health Sci ISSN: 2252-8806  721

have a value of -0.386. The coefficient of 0.235 of the variable X1 (knowledge) suggests that any increase in
the knowledge variable will affect the price offered by 0.235 assuming other variables are constant. The
coefficient of 0.114 of the X2 (attitude) suggests that any increase in the attitude variable will affect the price
offered by 0.114 assuming other variables are constant. Lastly, the coefficient of 0.130 of the variable X3
(behavior) suggests that any increase in the behavior variable will affect the price offered by 0.130 assuming
other variables are constant. The results of the multiple linear regression test equations are presented in Table 6.

Table 6. Multiple linear regression test equations

Coefficients
Unstandardized coefficients Standardized coefficients
Model T Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) -.386 .621 -.622 .535
Knowledge .235 .027 .521 8.695 .000
1
Attitude .114 .035 .182 3.231 .001
Behavior .130 .043 .154 3.054 .002
a. Dependent variable: price offer

The coefficient of determination R square essentially measures how far the model can explain the
dependent variables. The coefficient of determination is zero and one. The small value of R square means
that the ability of the independent variables to explain the variation in the dependent variable is minimal. A
value close to one means that the independent variables provide almost all the information needed to predict
the interpretation of the dependent variable. Based on Table 7, the analysis of the coefficient of determination
(R-square) resulted in a value of 0.593 (59.3%). This shows that 59.3% of the influence on the bound
variables (price offers) originates from the free variables (knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors), while other
variables outside the study influenced 40.7%.

Table 7. Coefficient of determination

Model summary
Model R R-square Adjusted R-square Std. Error of the estimate
a
1 .770 .593 .588 2.10789
a. Predictors: (constant), behavior, attitude, knowledge

The F test shows whether all the independent variables included in the model have a simultaneous
effect on the dependent variable. The F test is carried out by comparing the calculated F value with the F
table and seeing a significance value of 0.05. F table was obtained from the results of 5% probability and
df1=3, df2=274-2=272 with 2.638. Based on Table 8, the F test (simultaneous significance) resulted in an F
count of 131.120 and a significance value (p-value) of 0.000. Following the interpretation of F count >F table
(131.120>2.638) and the significance value of 0.000<0.05, Ho was therefore rejected, and Ha was accepted.
Consequently, variables X1 (knowledge), X2 (attitude), and X3 (behavior) simultaneously had a significant
effect on variable Y (price offer).

Table 8. F test
ANOVA
Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 1747.778 3 582.593 131.120 .000b
Residual 1199.663 270 4.443
Total 2947.441 273
a. Dependent variable: price offer
b. Predictors: (constant), behavior, attitude, knowledge

The T test used a significance level of 0.05 (5%). T table of 1.969 was obtained through a
probability of 5% and df=274-2=272. Based on Table 9, the T-test (partial significance) indicated that in
variable X1 (knowledge) against variable Y (price offer), a T count of 8.695 was obtained with a significance
value (p-value) of 0.000. Since T count >T-table (8.695>1.969) and the significance value (p-value) of
0.000<0.05, Ho was rejected, and Ha was accepted. Therefore, variable X1 (knowledge) partially
significantly affects variable Y (price offer). In variable X2 (attitude) against variable Y (price offer), a T
count of 3.231 was obtained with a significance value (p-value) of 0.000. Since T count >T table
(3.231>1.969) and the significance value (p-value) of 0.001<0.05, Ho was rejected, and Ha was accepted.
Therefore, variable X2 (attitude) partially affects variable Y (price offer). Lastly, in variable X3 (behavior)

Knowledge, attitude and behavior on utilizing suboptimal food related public health (Waode Dea Astria)
722  ISSN: 2252-8806

against variable Y (price offer), a T count of 3.054 was obtained with a significance value (p-value) of 0.000.
Since T count >T table (3.054>1.969) and the significance value (p-value) of 0.002<0.05, Ho was rejected,
and Ha was accepted. Therefore, variable X3 (behavior) partially affects variable Y (price offer).

Table 9. T-test
Coefficients
Unstandardized coefficients Standardized coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta T Sig.
1 (Constant) -.386 .621 -.622 .535
Knowledge .235 .027 .521 8.695 .000
Attitude .114 .035 .182 3.231 .001
Behavior .130 .043 .154 3.054 .002
a. Dependent variable: price offer

In reducing food waste, the retail stores presented price offers on products approaching the
expiration limit and those with less than perfect physical appearance. Consumers assess the risk of
suboptimal product hazard by looking for label information criteria related to its safety. Suboptimal products
are more risky, consumers tend to decide longer to accept the product. If the shelf life of food decreases,
consumer perceptions of food quality and safety will also decrease. Knowledge and attitudes can increase
behavioral control of awareness and importance of the dangers of disposing of food waste [21], [22]. Each of
the three stores studied made a price offer by displaying cheaper price tags to attract the attention of visitors
and the public. The strategy is the easiest and quickest to implement, although it may trigger financial losses
and create a bad image for the stores [23]. Its support this research, which states that price offers are
sometimes needed to encourage suboptimal food acceptance by society [24]. This also mentions that price
offers to encourage people to purchase suboptimal products. Therefore, retailers adjust the prices of
suboptimal food products to attract public attention [15]. Consumers perceive that if the retail store motive
behind this strategy is positive, consumers will show a better attitude towards retail stores. It highlighted
those public choices, price offers, and wasteful behaviors on suboptimal products are influenced by
demographic characteristics, personality, and public perceptions. There is a different public reaction to the
practice of price bidding [25]. Price offers at retailers can cause positive and negative reactions based on the
internal influence of individuals (knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors).
This research is dominated by female, productive age (26-35 years) and have income between
3-5 million IDR/month. The analysis shows that there is a significant and positive influence between public
knowledge, attitudes, behavior, and price offer. This shows that the higher the public knowledge, attitudes,
and behavior, the more it will lead to the public interest in the price offers presented by retail stores. Thus, it
can be concluded that public knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors impact reducing food waste in stores. This
strategy also increases knowledge about the problems that affect the environment from food waste, especially
expired food which is immediately disposed of without prior processing, even though it is still edible. This is
also to increase consumer interest through their personal norms to pay more attention to suboptimal foods.
[26]. Although consumers make purchasing decisions by considering all offerings as a whole, price-related
offers have the strongest influence, especially in developing countries. Therefore, offerings have a very
important role in conveying and informing consumers about suboptimal product characteristics, in the
process of product acceptance and making purchasing decisions [27], [28]. Purchasing less than optimal food
will not cause harm, including product safety, but also the quality of money. Uncertain knowledge and
attitudes can encourage or inhibit purchasing behavior towards suboptimal food even though the store has
tried to lower prices [29]. The store must strengthen the condition of the internal storage that is still worth
selling to get a positive attitude from consumers so that consumers can get feedback and knowledge to buy
essential foods that are less than optimal. Stores are prohibited from hiding anything when consumers choose
suboptimal foods and must display them to consumers practically and realistically. It was suspected that the
public has experienced or is beginning to understand that the practice of offering prices can accelerate the
flow of sales of suboptimal products. In addition, considering Indonesia is a developing country, this allows
suboptimal food products afforded by people with lower incomes. This proves that sustainability can be
achieved through price offers in retail stores. Therefore, a price management strategy by retail stores is highly
recommended, especially about optimally reducing and preventing food waste [30]. In line with the inverted
pyramid in the food waste hierarchy, the top priority is a reduction from the source, although the price offers
given to the public cannot eliminate the potential for food waste. In addition, a price offer strategy can
change people's decisions in purchasing food based on their personalities. People tend to observe the physical
characteristics of products based on the price offered. Price offers on suboptimal products are considered to
be able to attract attention and give signals to the public. However, several studies disagree with the idea and

Int J Public Health Sci, Vol. 12, No. 2, June 2023: 716-725
Int J Public Health Sci ISSN: 2252-8806  723

argue that reducing product prices does not entirely affect people's behavior. This is based on many
considerations, such as psychological factors and the norms of each individual. One of the differing opinions
is food products with low prices tend to have a bad opinion in society. The product is considered to have no
selling value and has experienced a significant nutritional decline [31], [32]. It makes people reluctant to
glance let alone buy it. This suggests that the effect of price reduction does not guarantee that it will
significantly influence public behavior. Therefore, it is crucial that during the price offer program, retail
stores include guarantees of safety and quality of suboptimal food products to convince the public.
Studies that explain the relationship and descriptions between public knowledge, attitudes, and
behavior toward price offers are minimal. Previous studies tend to highlight the relationship between the
three factors (knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors) and the intensity of purchase intentions. This study
attempts to present the perspective that stores can use their resources (the public) to control food waste
reduction. This cannot be continuously implemented without the stores' control. It is feared that the food
waste only shifts from stores to homes, creating additional household waste. Although the knowledge,
attitude, and behavior model can overcome this gap to understand how knowledge relates to attitudes clearly,
and practices towards suboptimal product price offer in retail stores. The limitation of knowledge, attitude,
and behavior is that the attitude analysis in the knowledge, attitude and behavior model does not relate it to
other related factors, such as beliefs and emotions, both positive and negative. Recommendations for further
research need to consider additional factors by using all aspects of knowledge, attitudes, and behavior toward
price offers to determine the extent of knowledge, attitudes, and behavior aspects of the entire population.
Moreover, attitudes and behaviors less specific to price offers should be developed through group discussions
and in-depth interviews as a multidimensional measure.

4. CONCLUSION
This research was conducted to determine the influence of public knowledge, attitudes, and behavior
on price offers. This study collected data from 274 store visitors from store A (Beji District), store B
(Sukmajaya District), and store C (Tapos District) with different backgrounds using a questionnaire (Likert
scale). The results significantly influence public knowledge, attitudes, and behavior toward price offers. This
study significantly impacts stores because of consumer behavior toward suboptimal products. This finding
proves that the price offers approach can increase consumer behavior to buy less than optimal food and can
be an effective marketing strategy and tool in the short term to help reduce food waste. However, it depends
on the availability of consumers to receive it. Therefore, it is important to increase public confidence in
suboptimal food products that are safe for consumption. It is also an assumption that retail stores can build a
positive image with feedback that benefits consumers. Future research is expected to examine the
respondents' demographic details to determine whether these variables influence or contribute to price offer.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research was funded by Interrnal Grant, School of Environmental Science, Universitas
Indonesia 2022, with contract number PKS-0012/UN2.F13.D1/PPM.00.04/2022. We would like to convey
our gratitude and sincere thanks to Cluster Interaction, Community Engagement, and Social Environment,
School of Environmental Science, Universitas Indonesia (https://social.sil.ui.ac.id/), who has helped in the
process of technical editing and reviewing articles.

REFERENCES
[1] J. Aschemann-Witzel, J. H. Jensen, M. H. Jensen, and V. Kulikovskaja, “Consumer behaviour towards price-reduced suboptimal
foods in the supermarket and the relation to food waste in households,” Appetite, vol. 116, pp. 246–258, Sep. 2017, doi:
10.1016/j.appet.2017.05.013.
[2] A. Gracia and M. I. Gómez, “Food sustainability and waste reduction in Spain: Consumer preferences for local, suboptimal,
and/or unwashed fresh food products,” Sustainability (Switzerland), vol. 12, no. 10, p. 4148, 2020, doi: 10.3390/su12104148.
[3] J. Aschemann-Witzel, I. de Hooge, P. Amani, T. Bech-Larsen, and M. Oostindjer, “Consumer-Related Food Waste: Causes and
Potential for Action,” Sustainability, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 6457–6477, May 2015, doi: 10.3390/su7066457.
[4] J. C. Buzby and J. Hyman, “Total and Per Capita Value of Food Loss in the United States,” Food Policy, vol. 37, no. 5, pp. 561–
570, 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.06.002.
[5] T. Hartmann, B. Jahnke, and U. Hamm, “Making ugly food beautiful: Consumer barriers to purchase and marketing options for
Suboptimal Food at retail level – A systematic review,” Food Quality and Preference, vol. 90, p. 104179, 2021, doi:
10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104179.
[6] C. Chairy, C. Raharja, J. Syahrivar, and M. Ekananda, “Waste not: selling near-expired bread in Indonesia” International Review
on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 391–407, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s12208-020-00253-4.
[7] S. Mullick, N. Raassens, H. Haans, and E. J. Nijssen, “Reducing food waste through digital platforms: A quantification of cross-
side network effects,” Industrial Marketing Management, vol. 93, pp. 533–544, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.09.021.
[8] S. R. Jaeger, L. Antúnez, G. Ares, J. W. Johnston, M. Hall, and F. R. Harker, “Consumers’ visual attention to fruit defects and disorders: A
case study with apple images,” Postharvest Biology and Technology, vol. 116, pp. 36–44, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2015.12.015.

Knowledge, attitude and behavior on utilizing suboptimal food related public health (Waode Dea Astria)
724  ISSN: 2252-8806

[9] I. do C. Stangherlin and M. D. de Barcellos, “Drivers and barriers to food waste reduction,” British Food Journal, vol. 120, no.
10, pp. 2364–2387, 2018, doi: 10.1108/BFJ-12-2017-0726.
[10] C. Cicatiello, L. Secondi, and L. Principato, “Investigating Consumers’ Perception of Discounted Suboptimal Products at Retail
Stores,” Resources, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 1–10, 2019, doi: 10.3390/resources8030129.
[11] J. Aschemann-Witzel et al., “The Who, Where and Why of Choosing Suboptimal Foods: Consequences for Tackling Food Waste
in Store,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 236, pp. 1–10, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.07.071.
[12] W. S. Huang, H. Y. Kuo, S. Y. Tung, and H. S. Chen, “Assessing consumer preferences for suboptimal food: Application of a
choice experiment in citrus fruit retail,” Foods, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2021, doi: 10.3390/foods10010015.
[13] I. do C. Stangherlin, M. D. de Barcellos, and K. Basso, “The Impact of Social Norms on Suboptimal Food Consumption: A
Solution for Food Waste,” Journal of International Food and Agribusiness Marketing, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 30–53, 2020, doi:
10.1080/08974438.2018.1533511.
[14] I. K. Horos and T. Ruppenthal, “Avoidance of Food Waste from a Grocery Retail Store Owner’s Perspective,” Sustainability, vol.
13, no. 2, p. 550, 2021, doi: 10.3390/su13020550.
[15] I. E. de Hooge, M. Oostindjer, J. Aschemann-Witzel, A. Normann, S. M. Loose, and V. L. Almli, “This apple is too ugly for me!:
Consumer preferences for suboptimal food products in the supermarket and at home,” Food Quality and Preference, vol. 56, pp.
80–92, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.09.012.
[16] R. M. Niemiec, V. Champine, J. J. Vaske, and A. Mertens, “Does the Impact of Norms Vary by Type of Norm and Type of
Conservation Behavior? A Meta-Analysis,” Society and Natural Resources, vol. 33, no. 8, pp. 1024–1040, 2020, doi:
10.1080/08941920.2020.1729912.
[17] Central Bureau of Statistics, West Java Province in Figures 2020 (in Indonesia: Provinsi Jawa Barat Dalam Angka 2020).
Bandung: Central Bureau of Statistics of West Java Province, 2020.
[18] M. I. Firmanti, A. K. Ilmiya, and D. Kurniatami, “Implementation of Food Recovery on Each Type of Food Retails in Depok,”
SSRN Electronic Journal, no. January 2018, pp. 0–6, 2018, doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3214759.
[19] J. R. Helmert, C. Symmank, S. Pannasch, and H. Rohm, “Have an eye on the buckled cucumber: An eye tracking study on
visually suboptimal foods,” Food Quality and Preference, vol. 60, pp. 40–47, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2017.03.009.
[20] J. Aschemann-Witzel, A. Giménez, and G. Ares, “Suboptimal food, careless store? Consumer’s associations with stores selling
foods with imperfections to counter food waste in the context of an emerging retail market,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol.
262, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121252.
[21] T. Y. Ou, G. Y. Lin, C. Y. Liu, and W. L. Tsai, “Constructing a sustainable and dynamic promotion model for fresh foods based
on a digital transformation framework,” Sustainability (Switzerland), vol. 13, no. 19, pp. 1–19, 2021, doi: 10.3390/su131910687.
[22] M. R. Limon and C. B. J. Villarino, “Knowledge, attitudes and practices on household food waste: Bases for formulation of a recycling
system,” Global Journal of Environmental Science and Management, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 323–340, 2020, doi: 10.22034/gjesm.2020.03.04.
[23] J. Aschemann-Witzel, A. Giménez, and G. Ares, “Convenience or Price Orientation? Consumer Characteristics Influencing Food
Waste Behaviour in the Context of An Emerging Country and the Impact on Future Sustainability of the Global Food Sector,”
Global Environmental Change, vol. 49, pp. 85–94, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.02.002.
[24] J. Aschemann-Witzel, A. Giménez, and G. Ares, “Consumer in-store choice of suboptimal food to avoid food waste: The role of
food category, communication and perception of quality dimensions,” Food Quality and Preference, 2018.
[25] G. Tsalis, “What’s the deal? Consumer price involvement and the intention to purchase suboptimal foods. A cross-national
study,” Food Quality and Preference, vol. 79, p. 103747, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2019.103747.
[26] B. B. Jensen and K. G. Grunert, “Price knowledge during grocery shopping: What we learn and what we forget,” Journal of
Retailing, vol. 90, no. 3, pp. 332–346, 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.jretai.2014.01.001.
[27] I. A. Castro, A. Majmundar, C. B. Williams, and B. Baquero, “Customer purchase intentions and choice in food retail
environments: A scoping review,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 15, no. 11, pp. 1–19,
2018, doi: 10.3390/ijerph15112493.
[28] N. Khandpur et al., “Supermarkets in cyberspace: a conceptual framework to capture the influence of online food retail
environments on consumer behavior,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 17, no. 22, pp. 1–
15, 2020, doi: 10.3390/ijerph17228639.
[29] S. Cao, S. Gong, and L. Bai, “Situational variables that affect consumers’ suboptimal food purchasing behavior in China,” British
Food Journal, no. 71573103, 2022, doi: 10.1108/BFJ-09-2021-1074.
[30] C. A. Ceryes, C. C. Antonacci, S. A. Harvey, M. L. Spiker, A. Bickers, and R. A. Neff, “‘Maybe it’s still good?’ A qualitative
study of factors influencing food waste and application of the E.P.A. Food recovery hierarchy in U.S. supermarkets,” Appetite,
vol. 161, p. 105111, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2021.105111.
[31] J. Aschemann-Witzel et al., “Consumer associations about other buyers of suboptimal food – and what it means for food waste
avoidance actions,” Food Quality and Preference, vol. 80, p. 103808, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2019.103808.
[32] C. Symmank, S. Zahn, and H. Rohm, “Visually suboptimal bananas: How ripeness affects consumer expectation and perception,”
Appetite, vol. 120, pp. 472–481, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2017.10.002.

BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS

Waode Dea Astria is a student at School of Environmental Science, University

of Indonesia. She was born in Jakarta on Juli 16, 1996. She completed her diploma degree in
Chemical Analyst and bachelor degree in Chemical Engineering. She works as a Quality Staff
Officer at Food Industry. She can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Int J Public Health Sci, Vol. 12, No. 2, June 2023: 716-725
Int J Public Health Sci ISSN: 2252-8806  725

Herdis Herdiansyah is currently active as a lecturer at the School of

Environmental Science, University of Indonesia. He completed his bachelor and master
degree in Philosophy Studies, and doctoral degree in Environmental Science. He has
published many articles in national, and international journals indexed by scopus. He leads the
research cluster of interaction, community engagement and social environment. He interests
in community engagement, human interaction, social conflict, environment, social science,
and system thinking. He can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Sri Setiawati Tumuyu is currently active as a lecturer at the School of

Environmental Science, University of Indonesia. She is holding the position of Head of the
Research Center for Science and Technology. She completed her bachelor degree in Farming,
master degree in Population and Human Resources and doctoral degree in Management of
Natural Resources and Environment. She has published many articles in national, and
international journals indexed by scopus. She does research in ecology, innovation and
technology management, food and energy. She can be contacted at email:
[email protected].

Knowledge, attitude and behavior on utilizing suboptimal food related public health (Waode Dea Astria)