Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences 117.1

J O U R N A L O F

Looking to the Future

INSIDE THIS ISSUE:

• Understanding Ignorance as it Informs Family and Consumer Sciences’ Future

• Who Am I Without My Partner; I’ve Lost Half My Whole.

• Reducing Household Food Waste for a Sustainable Future

• When Natural Isn’t Sustainable Enough

• The Influence of Culinary Interventions on Eating Habits in a Post-Secondary Educational Environment

Athanas, AAFCS

Sue L T. McGregor

SCHOLARSHIP

Kathleen L. Flachmeier; Maria Carpiac; Jesse Archer; Marine Aghekyan

PRACTICE

Reducing

Jacinta D. Hinson; Karen Alexander

Jennifer Harmon, PhD; Ayesha Siddika, Graduate Student

Elizabeth Smith; Domanique Richards, Dietetic Intern and Graduate Student; Erik Dempsey, Dietetic Graduate Student; Garvita Thareja; Christina Tayler Byrd, Senior Program Coordinator

Editor

ScottS.Hall,PhD,CFLE ProfessorofFamilyStudies Chair,Dept.ofEarlyChildhood, Youth,andFamilyStudies BallStateUniversity Muncie,IN

Associate Editors

Journal Reviewers

For reviewer's affiliations visit ourWeb site at www.aafcs.org

AnnVail

AxtonBetz-Hamilton

BarbaraStewart

CarylJohnson

DetriBrech

DonnaLong

FrancesAndrews

FrancineHultgren

JacquelineHolland

JanaHawley

JenniferMartin,Ph.D.

JodyRoubanis

JoiceA.Jeffries,Ph.D.

JuliaMillerArline

JuliaMillerArline

KimKamin

LeighSouthward

LisaKennon

LornaSaboe-WoundedHead

Marilyn(Marty)MartinRossmann

MiaRussell

PamelaSchulze

Patricia(Trish)Manfredi

RebeccaLovingood

SandraEvenson

SandraEvenson

SharonADeVaney

SharonHoelscherDay

TammyKinley

V.AnnPaulins

VirginiaVincenti

The Journal of Family & Consumer Sciences: (ISSN: 1082-1651) is published four times a year (Winter, Spring, Summer, Fall) by the American Association of Family & Consumer Sciences (AAFCS), 1410 King Street, 2"' Floor, Alexandria, VA 22314. Member subscriptions are included in AAFCS membership dues of $150

Advertising: Contact ToniWiese at 703-706-4606. Advertisement of a product, service, or viewpoint should not be construed as an endorsement by the Association. The opinions expressed by authors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the policies or opinions of the Association, its officers, or its members.

Submissions: See Guidelines for Authors at www.aafcs.org.

Indexing/Abstracting: Family Index Database, Family and Society Studies Worldwide. Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC)

Membership and other inquiries: Main number (703) 706-4600; Fax: (703) 706-4663 email: staff@aafcs.org

Copyright (c) by theAmericanAssociation of Family & Consumer Sciences, 2024 Materials may not be reproduced without written permission. Printed in the United States of America.

Important Information for ReadersJournal ofFamily & Consumer Sciences

JFCSTransitioning to Online Only

JFCS Main Page

AAFCS has joined many others in academic publishing by , View journal themes transitioning JFCS from print to online only. This began • View Submission Guidelines and Deadlines with the I13,3 issue in 2021. We are embracing this , Subscribe toJFCS change as a catalyst for growth and sustainability and to , Advertise disseminate information more rapidly and widely.

JFCS

Online

Access is free toAAFCS members at www.aafcs.org

CarolL.Anderson,PhD,CFCS CollegeofHumanEcology CornellUniversity

CaroleJ.Makela,PhD,CFCS SchoolofEducation CollegeofHealth & HumanSciences ColoradoStateUniversity

KerryRenwick,PhD DepartmentofCurriculumandPedagogy FacultyofEducation UniversityofBritishColumbia

Managing Editor

DebbieJohnson,CFCS

AAFCS Board of Directors 2024-2025

President2024-2025

BarbaraStewart,CFCS

PresidentElect2024-2025 CaraSimmons,CFCS

Treasurer2024-2025

MeniaChester,CFCS,CNWE

Director-at-Large2024-2026

LandonCalderwood,CFCS-HDFS

Director-at-Large2023-2026 MargaretJenkins

Director-at-Large2022-2025 SharonPate

Director-at-Large2024-2025 DeborahHandy,CFCS

Counselor,ImmediatePastPresident 2024-2025

Ex-Officio

DebraK.Andres,CFCS-HDFS

ExecutiveDirector,Ex-Officio KarinAthanas

The Future of FCS

Karin Athanas1

1 Executive Director, American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences

Keywords: Future, Family and Consumer Sciences, Partnerships, Community Connections

Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences

Vol. 117, Issue 1, 2025

Family and Consumer Sciences, FCS (also referred to as home economics, human ecology, human sciences, family sciences, and more!), has played a key role in supporting communities at times of natural disaster, financial pressure, and changing cultural and political climates. For example, during the great depression, home economics agents “educated thousands of impoverished families about ways to maintain proper nutrition and make decent clothing with very little money.” (What Role Did Home Economists Play in the National Emergencies of the Twentieth Century?, n.d.) While FCS faces new challenges, its value and necessity in supporting communities remain the same.

Two decades ago, FCS faced challenges from academia, policymakers, and others that education in human skills such as cooking, nutrition, home management, hospitality, childcare, and personal finance were no longer necessary. The biased views of others published in papers and studies, suggesting that home economics was no longer needed lead to the removal of these programs from K-12 schools or the splitting of classes amongst other career and technical education areas, declining enrollment in university programs, and an aging workforce. As a result, schools and industries are now facing employee and teacher shortages in a range of areas.

In reality, FCS programs in schools, communities, and companies empower learners, providing them with training in health, nutrition, and wellness, how to track and manage their personal finances, how to build and manage their own businesses, and gives them the confidence to lead. And research conducted by FCS professionals inform programs to enhance product development, design ecofriendly and smart homes, and drive consumer behavior.

As we look at the coming century and the unique challenges affecting communities including increases in extreme weather, growing economic divides, and technological advancements in robotics and artificial intelligence, the implementation of FCS programs to educate and support individuals, families, and communities become essential.

One only needs to examine the advancements in technology to understand the challenges that communities are facing and the essential role that FCS will play. In 2024, Forbes reported that 54% of Americans wrote checks while two-thirds of Gen-Z (i.e., those born between 1990 and 2010) used mobile apps to make payments (7 Cultural Trends For 2024 And Beyond, 2024) While businesses still accept checks, paying by credit card or mobile payment is preferred and as a result, requests to pay by check have become burdensome and time consuming.

Related to the divide between the tech-savvy and notso-savvy, is the proliferation of smartphones. Smartphone use among seniors (those 65 or older), was at 42% in 2017 and in 2021 had reached 61%, showing steady growth, but these numbers fell far below those of individuals 18-49, where 95% use smartphones (Technology Use Among Seniors, n.d.).

It’s predictable to expect the use of artificial intelligence and “smart products” to result in similar divides. FCS professionals will be needed to educate students on the use of these tools and products, while also being a resource to others as they attempt to make the transition and learn to use tools they’ve never encountered before. FCS professionals will also serve as a resource to inform on community, state, and federal policy to ensure access, drive adoption, and communicate safety issues.

FCS professionals will serve as advocates for individuals, families, and communities, working with industry to ensure products are safe, accessible to consumers, and user manuals and labeling are clear and understandable by a broad range of users. These partnerships will help proliferate the adoption of these tools, ensuring that a wide range of communities have access and can benefit from the advantages of these products.

The same is true of the role of FCS in addressing extreme events. FCS professionals have established connections within communities, have built rapport with local leaders and families, and understand the basic needs of individuals. When disaster strikes, their position within communities and education pathways will ensure that they can communicate information quickly, in ways that individuals and families will understand, and in the context of the community that they live in.

While the last two decades have experienced a derision and decline in Family and Consumer Sciences, it’s clear that the knowledge, skills, and abilities of FCS professionals will be in demand and that that demand will only grow over the course of the next two decades. As such, the inclusion of FCS programs in community outreach, in K-12 education, and in higher education should be a priority in economic planning and community, state, and federal budgeting. FCS professionals should be invited and included on expert panels and committees, and funding should be provided to support research conducted by FCS professionals.

Athanas, K. (2025).

References

7 Cultural Trends For 2024 And Beyond. (2024, June). Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kianbakhtiari/ 2024/06/02/7-cultural-trends-for-2024-and-beyond/ Technology Use Among Seniors (n.d.). Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2017/ 05/17/technology-use-among-seniors/

What Role Did Home Economists Play in the National Emergencies of the Twentieth Century? (n.d.). Rare and Manuscript Collections, Cornell University Library. https://rmc.library.cornell.edu/homeEc/cases/ emergencies.html

Stretch and Hold

Barbara L. Stewart1

1 Human Development & Consumer Sciences, University of Houston

Keywords: Flexibility, Professionals, Committment, Stretching, Potential

Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences

Vol. 117, Issue 1, 2025

For a moment, think about rubber bands. They are extremely useful! I keep a few in my kitchen and desk drawers. I bet you do too! However, if a rubber band just sits there, it is absolutely worthless. Rubber bands are only useful when they stretch! We are very much like rubber bands. The more we stretch – the more useful we are!

Post mortally, I expect I will hear or reflect, “Barbara, you did some good things, but you could have done more?” That leaves me thinking: What does it take to push my limits, knowing that most of our choices are not between good and bad, but between good and better? What does it take to stretch my rubber band a bit more?

As individuals and as a profession, we chug and churn along in our busy lives. Wisely, we pause occasionally to assess where we are headed and how we are doing. My father taught me I could do anything if I tried hard enough. He was overly optimistic on my behalf, but to some extent I believed him. Now I find that since nobody told me I can’t do it all, somedays that is exactly how I feel – like I am trying to do it all! Perhaps this sounds familiar to you. In later life my dad regretted that he had not taught me I didn’t have to do it all at the same time.

Yet, what does it take to do a little more each day? Relatedly, should we do a little more each day? The best answer is probably “yes” and “no.” “Yes” when we can, and sometimes, “NO!” Just as we need to know when to stretch, we also need to know when to hold or relax. Sometimes we need time to regroup, re-energize.

As children it seems we grew up in spurts. We may need to do that as adults also. Personal crisis, health, change, and other bumps on life’s road may cause us to “hold” for a bit. Then, when we are ready to stretch, what does it take? It takes first commitment and then time.

First commitment, once we decide to invest, we must invest fully – a semi-stretched rubber band may not get the job done! Few of us buy a product and do not want the most for our money. We don’t buy a table and say, “just give me three legs.” Second, stretching takes time, even in small snatches. What can you do in five minutes to stretch your limits: read a page or an article, make a phone call, outline a plan, or start a conversation? What could you do with a series of five minutes over a week, month, or year? A life well lived is created by stretching, even when in five-minute bursts!

Let’s return to our rubber bands. Consider the potential energy of each rubber band. It is capacity waiting to be put into action. We are just like that! Nobody said professional or personal life would be easy. Yet, this is our challenge and our incredible opportunity, to stretch ourselves to develop our potential as individuals and as a professional association.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CCBY-4.0). View this license’s legal deed at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 and legal code at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode for more information.

Facets of Polarization

Scott S. Hall1

1 Early Childhood, Youth, and Family Studies, Ball State University

Keywords: Polarization, Politics, Helping Families and Communities, Tension, Stress, Listening

Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences

Vol. 117, Issue 1, 2025

I’ve long been concerned about partisan, polarizing politics trickling into family relationships and causing irreparable harm. I’ve even included sentiments in other Point of View articles about ideological friction and seeking to depolarize public rhetoric. I make it a point in my courses, when even the slightest bit relevant, to try to engender some openness toward diverse perspectives and humanity toward people with differing opinions on the content—usually related to families. One challenge I have observed in various settings is that many view diverse perspectives, especially when related to voting choices, as much more than opinion.

I believe there is a fine line to be drawn. On one side of the line is a tendency to be dismissive if not hostile toward someone on the “other team” (e.g., political party or perspective). Having overly simplified conceptualizations of who those other people are contributes to the tendency. We might be tempted to believe that if one votes this way, or espouses a certain belief, that one fits neatly into a box of folks who are fully driven and defined by one idiosyncratic view on a topic. In reality, people are extremely complex and can see eye to eye on one issue and be on different pages for another—to mix metaphors. People who vote for the same candidate often seem to have very different reasons for doing so, some of which are more ideologically driven, some more practical, and others perhaps to show loyalty to a group. In short, a tendency to caricaturize those we disagree with, especially in a vilifying manner, likely causes unnecessary friction in relationships that might be avoided by taking more time to honestly reflect, genuinely listen, and focus on the humanity of the person standing across from us—seeking elements of commonality that are more fundamental to who we are.

On the other side of this line are situations in which a person feels personally rejected because of the perspective or vote of another. Such scenarios often have to do with

sexual and gender identities. Depicting this tension as simply a difference of opinion seems dismissive at best. How can someone who is supposed to love you support a group or leader who is seemingly working to hurt you in some way? This is a more challenging circumstance. This will require more work, or more sacrifice. Each person will have to decide what they can and should tolerate and what kind of relationship to continue (if at all). Can it simply be a matter of avoiding the topic, or must a perspective be fully embraced? Is there room for compromise? The answers are probably very situational. I would hope, however, that the other side of the line (oversimplifying and vilifying “opposition”) does not get mistaken for this side of the line (perceived rejection of identity). That would be a shame.

I do not believe there are only two facets to these dynamics with only one fine line—for example, some find it difficult to coexist with family members who hold views perceived to be racist, sexist, homophobic, or otherwise bigoted, even when those views aren’t directly relevant to the identities of the family members. They struggle with how much to tolerate or call out acquaintances, friends, and loved ones, and whether such decisions enable harm toward others. My point here is that perhaps the various facets of partisan polarization should be considered somewhat distinctly (not to say that some don’t already do that). Professional and personal approaches toward helping families and communities live their daily lives amid such tensions should articulate the boundaries and caveats related to their targeted efforts. We might all need to carefully listen so to avoid conflating the intentions of those seeking to cultivate peace, where possible. What does your experience say about these ideas?

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CCBY-4.0). View this license’s legal deed at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 and legal code at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode for more information.

FREE Professional Development Hours Online!

Calling middle level and high school science, agriculture, FCS, and health educators who teach in the U.S. and/or in DoDEA and U.S. territory schools, who are interested in FREE online professional development training from FDA. This program consists of four separate classes – one for each of the following curriculum topics:

Science and Our Food Supply: Exploring Food Agriculture and Biotechnology

Science and Our Food Supply: Examining Dietary Supplements

Science and Our Food Supply: Using the Nutrition Facts Label to Make Healthy Food Choices

Science and Our Food Supply: Investigating Food Safety from Farm to Table

Choose training in all four curriculum topics or just those that are relevant to the classes you teach. Complete the FREE online training program to earn one CEU per course upon completion. Approximate time investment is 10 hours.

This FREE PD program is supported and directed by the FDA and administered by Graduate School USA.

To learn more about the curriculum and register for courses please visit www.teachfoodscience.org.

McGregor, S. L. T. (2025). Understanding Ignorance as It Informs Family and Consumers Sciences’ Future. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 117(1).

Understanding Ignorance as It Informs Family and Consumers Sciences’ Future

Sue L. T. McGregor, PhD1a 1 Education, Mount Saint Vincent University

Keywords: ignorance, agnotology, typologies of ignorance, family and consumer sciences, home economics

Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences

Vol. 117, Issue 1, 2025

Reputable scholars are developing typologies of ignorance for different reasons including philosophizing about ignorance as well as understanding ignorance within professions, the scientific endeavour, and women’s health (discussed herein). These four agnotological typologies (i.e., the study of ignorance) proved useful for revealing and understanding various aspects of our own and others’ veils of ignorance about family and consumer sciences (FCS) and home economics. This suggests that other typologies and future theories of ignorance may be helpful as well. Unchallenged ignorance will continue to compromise a century-old profession’s potential to strengthen individuals and families for their own good and that of humanity. Thus, FCS and home economics theorists, researchers, and practitioners are strongly encouraged to engage the comprehensive, complex, and politicized notion of ignorance as it informs our future viability and perceived legitimacy.

Introduction

Renwick (2017) argued that “just because the profession believes in its value does not necessarily make this belief evident to others Keeping home economics visible is an important aspect of our work” (pp. 170–171). To that end, she maintained that the discipline and profession must respect the role of ignorance (lacking knowledge or awareness) because many “forms of ignorance … have been used to work against home economics” (p. 167). Although not using the ignorance concept, McGregor (2022) concurred in her recent piece about the profession’s history of fighting a war of attrition instead of a war of ideas about home economics1 ideological and paradigmatic ideas stemming from people’s ignorance of the discipline and profession (whether innate or engineered).

This is a position paper about understanding ignorance as it informs the future of the family and consumer sciences (FCS) and home economics profession. In position papers, the author asserts a personal statement about an issue and then uses a well-reasoned argument to convince others of the idea’s merit and that it is worth pursuing. Authors integrate their opinions and reasoned arguments with background information (i.e., data, a literature review, or both)

(McGregor, 2018b; McLean, 2011) This position paper combined the author’s thoughts with a literature review. Ignorance is defined and distinguished from related constructs, and then four typologies of ignorance are presented. The attendant discussion illustrates that FCS practitioners and home economists can use these typologies to expand their understanding of the role of ignorance as it informs the profession’s future viability and perceived legitimacy. Renwick (2017) was convinced that this knowledge enhances our “possibilities to redress the prescribed ignorance [that undermines the profession] and situate … home economics as both viable and important ways of knowing” (p. 164).

Ignorance Defined

Ignorance is Latin ignorare, ‘not know’ and ignorantia, ‘want of knowledge’ (Harper, 2024) In simple terms, when someone is ignorant, they lack information and want knowledge about or awareness of something. But “The Standard View” of ignorance (Nottelmann, 2016, p. 34) (i.e., lack of knowledge) is being challenged by the “New View [whereby] ignorance is lack of or absence of true belief” (Nottelmann, 2016, p. 12) (to be discussed) (see also Le Morvan & Peels, 2016). Furthermore, people often conflate

IPHE (International Professional Home Economist) (IFHE) Professor Emerita, Mount Saint Vincent University, Faculty of Education McGregor Consulting Group (Principal Consultant and Owner)

The ideas herein are relevant for family and consumer sciences (FCS), home economics, human ecology, home sciences, human sciences, household sciences, home ecology, family studies, and consumer sciences.

ignorance with other things, which must be acknowledged and addressed.

Conflated Terms

First, people often equate ignorance (lack of knowledge) with stupidity (French stupide), which actually means lacking common sense and intelligence (i.e., the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills) instead of lacking knowledge (Anderson, 2014; Harper, 2024). Second, when people doubt something, they think (believe) it may be false (i.e., thus they assign a truth-value). But with ignorance, they cannot assign truth-values because they know nothing of it (Hoek et al., 2004; Smithson, 2010).

Third, while ignorance is a lack of knowledge, uncertainty is a “lack of knowledge clarity. [It is] a byproduct of imperfect, limited or missing information” (Birkenholtz & Simon, 2022, p. 156) Fourth, ignorance and ignore are different. Ignorance implies that people want to know. Ignore implies that they do not want to know. Respectively, they may (a) be unaware of alternative views or their usefulness for addressing a problem (ignorance) or (b) intentionally turn away from ideas (ignore things) and dismiss the problem (Smithson, 2010)

Innate versus Engineered Ignorance

Everyone is ignorant just in different ways and of different things (Abbott, 2010). Also, “the causes of ignorance are multiple and diverse” (Proctor, 2008, p. 2) Thus, a multipronged approach to ignorance is more productive than The Standard View (Abbott, 2010; Nottelmann, 2016), which assumes people lack information and knowledge. Ignorance is more than passively being born or innately not knowing something, which can be addressed by gaining knowledge or skills (like learning to walk, talk, or read). Ignorance can also be actively produced. It can be allowed, constructed, cultivated, maintained, sustained, and disseminated (Proctor, 1995, 2008; Proctor & Schiebinger, 2008; Tuana, 2004)

Powerful examples of the latter include the (a) tobacco industry’s manufacturing of doubt about the cancerous hazards of smoking; (b) oil industry’s manipulations regarding hydrocarbon emissions and climate change; and (c) proliferation of secrets in trade, academia (peer review), journalism (protect sources), and the military (Fforde, 2020; Proctor, 1995, 2008). Keeping people in the dark, mistrustful, silent, uncertain, and doubtful keeps them ignorant (Tuana, 2004)

The automatic follow-up question is “Who is privileged and disadvantaged by such knowledge/ignorance” (Tuana, 2004, p. 196). This question matters because the politics of ignorance is just as significant as the politics of knowledge. Who is disadvantaged from ignorance? Who benefits? Respectively, ignorance can lead to exploitation, blind spots, harm, preconceptions, misconceptions, and negative viewing of human affairs (Tuana, 2004) But ignorance can also be beneficial for some people. It can preserve privilege, traditional values, and stereotypes to someone’s advantage (Abbott, 2010)

In these instances, ignorance is chosen on purpose; it is not always unwanted (Seese, 2014; Smithson, 2010). Some people have “vested interests in ignorance and uncertainty … and reasons for not knowing and not wanting to know [and not wanting others to know]. People get things done with ignorance [which] is not always a disadvantage for the ‘ignoramus.’… Knowledge is power, but so is ignorance” (Smithson, 2010, p. 84).) Ignorance can be leveraged (a) “to increase ambiguity, cause controversy and/or delay action [and (b) as] political cover and/or to exculpate certain parties” (Smithson, 2010, p. 157). It can also be leveraged (c) to “promote a particular political agenda [to] advance desired and often profitable management outcomes” (Birkenholtz & Simon, 2022, p. 158)

Self-Ignorance versus Others’ Ignorance

People themselves can be ignorant, or they can also face others’ ignorance of them or their situation and context (Nottelmann, 2016; Smithson, 2010) Regarding the former, self-ignorance can be innate or chosen on purpose. Indeed, Sesse (2014) suggested that some people may choose to ignore things (i.e., remain ignorant on purpose) because it serves one of several needs. Ignorance then becomes a warped sense of inner power. He identified six types of ignorance with attendant consequences.

To elaborate, some facts reveal ugly truths that people cannot face. (a) By ignoring these facts, they can avoid acting against injustice, insecurity, inequalities, and such. (b) Ignoring connections between people helps avoid dealing with uncomfortable or unfamiliar emotions and scenarios. Unfortunately, this type of chosen ignorance compromises a key source of life-sustaining energy. (c) Ignoring history means people can avoid dealing with past failures. But in the process, they lose context, lessons learned, and the ability to know where they are headed (Seese, 2014)

(d)Ignoring warning signs means they can avoid facing what is happening to them. To illustrate, remaining ignorant of health, climate, monetary, relationship, and other imminent problems places people at risk, but they erroneously view ignorance as bliss as they avoid being accountable or responsible. (e) Remaining ignorant of their potential means they can avoid dealing with an uncertain future. This type of ignorance is selfish and shortsighted. (f)Ignoring the consequences of their actions may be reckless, but it removes layers and layers of complex, moral decision making and personal accountability. As Sesse concluded, “the purpose of ignorance is not so blissful after all” (2014, last paragraph).

People may also be dealing with others’ ignorance of them. Renwick (2017) and McGregor (2022) acknowledged this when they discussed how FCS and home economics have been undermined (removed or reduced) due to misconceptions, stereotypes, biases, and discrimination fed by ignorance of whom we are and what we are intended to achieve. Renwick referred to “the wholesale writing out of Home Economics from the official curriculum” (2017, p.164) because of various forms of ignorance of the profession. McGregor (2022) provided powerful scenarios of others’ ideological and paradigmatic ignorance about the

profession leading to the “dismissal of (unworthy of consideration), disregard for (lack of attention), and disrespect for (lack of esteem and recognition) home economics” (p. 40).

Citing Apple (2003), the author of The State and Politics of Knowledge, Renwick (2017) believed that home economists and FCS practitioners should address the state and politics of ignorance as it informs the discipline and profession’s future viability and perceived legitimacy. It can be very difficult to stave off and confront ignorance to improve one’s advantage. But Renwick believed this more achievable if home economists became aware of conceptualizations of and theories about ignorance.

Typologies of Ignorance Applied to FCS and Home Economics

Compared to theories about epistemology (i.e., how we know), the ignorance phenomenon, or “‘how or why we don’t know,’ … is remarkably undertheorized” (Proctor & Schiebinger, 2008, p. vii; see also Fforde, 2020). Fortunately, dictionary definitions are being supplanted with typologies and taxonomies of ignorance if not actual theories (Haider & Rödl, 2023). A typology “breaks down an overarching concept into component dimensions and types” (Collier et al., 2012, p. 223) The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is a popular example. It catalogues 16 personality types based on four dimensions (Myers & Myers, 1980)

Typologies do not always accurately and completely capture a phenomenon, however, and may even oversimplify it, but they are useful for helping researchers and practitioners “organize their thinking as [they engage] the question ‘What is this?’” (McGregor, 2018b, p. 54). Abbott (2010) said, “ignorance is an enduring project [but there is a] rarity [of scholarship on the study of] ignorance” (p. 171). Nearly 15 years later, this has flipped. “There are not only countless typologies of ignorance in different fields of research, but also just as many criteria on which they are based, since they are also closely linked to disciplinary conditions and empirical interests, theoretical assumptions and methodological possibilities” (Haider & Rödl, 2023, p. 2)

Gross and McGoey’s (2022) recent update on the status of the study of resistance identified enduring topics: remaking the philosophy of ignorance; the pragmatics of ignorance; forbidden knowledge; knowledge resistance; ignorance as a resource and a strength; ignorance as it ties in with uncertainty and doubt; ignorance in science, industry, organizations, and social movements; and willful ignorance. The four typologies profiled herein (see Table 1) were selected because they (a) reflect many of these enduring topics; (b) are considered seminal, vanguard, or awardwinning contributions to ignorance studies; and (c) were judged useful for demonstrating how home economists and FCS can gain insights into how ignorance affects the discipline and profession.

The typologies in Table 1 are presented chronologically starting with Proctor’s (1995, 2008) seminal work, which others often acknowledge as a source of inspiration for their work. Robert Proctor created the academic field that studies ignorance and called it agnotology As each typology is dis-

cussed, it is applied to better understand ignorance within and about FCS and home economics.

Proctor’s Typology of Ignorance

This section expands on Renwick’s (2017) use of Proctor’s (2008) typology to examine ignorance within and about home economics. While collaborating with a linguist in 2005, Proctor coined the neologism agnotology, which is Greek agnōsis, ‘not knowing’ and logia, ‘study of’ (Palmer, 2005) Agnotology is, thus, the study of ignorance (i.e., why we do not know what we do not know). It is located within the field of epistemology (i.e., the study of how we know) (Proctor & Schiebinger, 2008). Agnotology is now recognized as a legitimate field of study (Fforde, 2020; Gross & McGoey, 2022; Peels & Blaauw, 2016) Proctor (2008) proposed four types of ignorance: native state, selective choice, strategic ploy, and virtuous. Most of his examples dealt with scientific research and scientific investigations.

Ignorance as a Native State

Proctor (2008) used the term native state ignorance for instances “where knowledge has not yet penetrated Ignorance is … knowledge in its infancy” (p. 4). In this instance, native is associated with a place of birth (Anderson, 2014) Proctor viewed ignorance as “a kind of infantile absence … a dearth or cavity that is rectified (filled) by growth or birth” (2008, p. 5). Also called “‘originary’ state” ignorance (p. 4), it is valued because it becomes a resource (i.e., it can be drawn on to accomplish something). With originary meaning the origin of something, originary state ignorance becomes the origin of knowledge. Elliott (2012) described it as a starting point.

To elaborate, this type of ignorance is “a kind of rejuvenating force, since it is only by asking the right questions by knowing wherein fruitful (that is, eradicable) ignorance lies that we can ever come to knowledge. [It is] a spur or challenge or prompt [needed to] fuel our knowledge engines” (Proctor, 2008, p. 5) This kind of ignorance is not “a negative state [but instead motivates] us to want to know more or differently” (Renwick, 2017, p. 167) Proctor (2008) said native state ignorance is crucial for fuelling scientific investigations and discoveries. Referencing Proctor’s work, Birkenholtz and Simon (2022) concurred that ignorance can “serve as a basis for new information, ideas and solutions” (p. 158).

In her discussion of native state ignorance, Renwick (2017) recommended that home economists view their awareness of others’ ignorance about the discipline and profession as “liberatory moments” (p. 167). This contrasts with alienating moments that can make them feel isolated and without support. Liberatory moments create a space where people can embrace difficult and painful insights and appreciate that liberation from ignorance has transformative potential. Liberatory situations (i.e., confronting and unveiling ignorance) can be the origins of home economists finding a new political consciousness and altering their discourse and counter messages about the profession (Van Allen, 2000), which McGregor (2022) recommended.

Table 1. Four Typologies of Ignorance

(2008) (created agnotology in 2005)

Science and Scientific Inquiry

Women’s Health

Within Professions Epistemological and Philosophical native state ignorance (resource to stimulate knowing; origins of knowledge)

selective choice ignorance (ignores something by default)

strategic ploy ignorance (intentionally engineered)

virtuous ignorance (it’s better not to know)

knowing what we do not know, but not caring to know amateur ignorance factual ignorance

we do not know what we do not know expert ignorance practical or procedural ignorance (know-how, how-to)

they do not want us to know professional ignorance: - nonspeciality - core literature - in-speciality

they do not know, and they do not want to know; willful ignorance

loving ignorance (a positive attitude toward what cannot be shared thus cannot be known)

Ignorance as Selective Choice

Proctor (2008) maintained that most forms of inquiry are selective By choosing to look at one thing, we automatically ignore or not pay attention to something else (ignorance by default). “Ignorance is [thus] a product of inattention…. ‘A way of seeing is always a way of not seeing a focus on object A involves the neglect of object B’” (p. 7). The ignorance resulting from selective choices is very political in nature. “It has a political geography, prompting us to ask: Who knows not? And why not? Where is there ignorance and why?” (p. 6). Tuana (2006) agreed, asserting that ignorance is a complex, situated, and politicized phenomenon. She said, “understanding the various manifestations of ignorance and how they intersect with power requires attention to the permutations of ignorance in its different contexts” (p. 3).

With selective choice ignorance, people decide more than what to study (i.e., what to pay attention to). They also make choices about (and by association ignore) what questions to ask; which theories, research methodologies, and research methods to use; and what language and discourse to use when reporting results/findings and describing phenomena (Elliott, 2012) “Insofar as these choices draw attention to some features of the phenomena rather than others, they perpetuate selective research, understanding, [practice], and policy making” (Elliott, 2012, p. 296)

Proctor (2008) characterized selective choice ignorance as a “passive construct [and insightfully called it] ignorance of the lost realm” (p. 6) by which he meant if something is passed over (ignored) due to inquiry choices, it may never receive attention. People would remain ignorant (i.e., have no knowledge) of any lost or missed knowledge. Renwick (2017) said that curriculum decisions to pay attention to subjects other than home economics exemplify selective choice ignorance. Eventually, people will not even know

objectual ignorance (unacquainted with objects or entities)

erotetic ignorance (ignorance of answers to questions)

that home economics was an option. Ignorance by default, however, is different from intentionally excluding home economics via strategic ploy ignorance.

Ignorance as Strategic Ploy

People can actively produce ignorance as a deliberate part of their strategy (Proctor, 2008). This is called intentionally engineered ignorance “in the form of strategies to deceive” (p. 8). People actively “work to organize doubt or uncertainty or misinformation to help maintain (your) ignorance” (p. 8). This works to their advantage. A key example is the tobacco industry’s manufacturing of doubt about whether smoking their product causes cancer. Rather than a passive construct (as is selective choice ignorance), strategic ploy ignorance is an active construct undertaken intentionally. People actively create ignorance and then work to maintain it to their advantage (Proctor, 2008)

In FCS and home economics, parties embracing nonfamily friendly ideologies and paradigms are given licence to intentionally remain strategically ignorant of home economics and its societal contributions (McGregor, 2022; Renwick, 2017) The “Neoliberal focus on small governments, globalisation and free markets raises the notion that we don’t need nor want home economics with its focus on family” (Renwick, 2017, p. 167). This idea is nonsensical given that people daily traverse the public and private spheres with both needing the other for survival. Yet strategic ploy ignorance prevails in home economics (McGregor, 2022; Renwick, 2017)

Worse, Elliott (2013) suggested that selective choice ignorance can sometimes combine with strategic ploy ignorance like when intentionally studying the beneficial or neutral effects of something while avoiding research that might yield negative information. This plays out in home economics as well where the public sphere (e.g., economy, labour market, and government institutions) depends on

Proctor

Tuana (2006)

Abbot (2010) Nottelmann (2016)

the private sphere acting as consumers yet avoids accepting families as a key democratic social institution with the same currency as themselves (McGregor, 2022; Renwick, 2017). In this case, selective choice ignorance serves strategic ploy ignorance.

Virtuous Ignorance

Finally, virtuous ignorance is a form of strategic ploy ignorance (i.e., intentionally engineered). Sometimes there are “things ‘we’ don’t want to know and many more we’d rather have others not know about us” (Proctor, 2008, p. 20) Sometimes it is better that people do not know certain things they should be kept in the dark for their own good (Harper, 2024) Virtuous ignorance is thus “moral caution sanctioned ignorance” (Proctor, 2008, p. 20) that prevents people from being exposed to dangerous knowledge or helps them resist if exposed (see also Kourany & Carrier, 2020).

In short, “there are things we do not want to know so we resist [or are prevented from] knowing or [we] use moral caution” (Renwick, 2017, p. 168) Indeed, sometimes it is morally right to engage in “organized duplicity” (Proctor, 2008, p. 24) because once released, it can be difficult to “put the knowledge Genie back in the bottle” (p. 24). Juries are kept ignorant to minimize bias. Because people are entitled to privacy, police must have warrants to invade that privacy. Revealed information and knowledge can reduce police ignorance (Proctor, 2008)

Virtuous ignorance assumes that certain types of knowledge can be a combination of too dangerous, biased, undesirable, or restrictive. Thus, the adage “less is more” tends to apply as does “don’t let this knowledge fall into the wrong hands.” In these cases, virtuous ignorance is warranted. Think of knowledge gained by improper or unethical means or of something like the atomic bomb technology. People would be better off ignorant of this knowledge it is virtuous ignorance, which is “actively constructed, or at least allowed to exist and respected” (Kourany & Carrier, 2020, p. 9) It is sanctioned ignorance.

Renwick (2017) commented on how some home economists and consumers are willing to remain ignorant of how aspects of their food, clothing, textiles, transportation, and shelter are produced. They cannot face the moral dilemmas. They do not want to know, so they resist relevant information. They assume the government or someone else is dealing with this moral conundrum. Unfortunately, they become complicit in the negative consequences (e.g., child labour, and loss of biodiversity) of their actively constructed virtuous ignorance that they created to shield themselves from the vagaries of the modern marketplace. To confront this type of ignorance, FCS and home economics practitioners must ensure that home economics is taught, and that morally laden topics are part of the official curriculum.

Tuana’s Typology of Ignorance

Nancy Tuana is a Penn State DuPont/Class of 1949 Professor of Philosophy renowned for her work on epistemologies

of ignorance. Tuana (2006) identified six types of ignorance based mainly on privilege, oppression, exclusion, injustice, and inequities in the realm of women’s health. She was inspired by Proctor’s argument that we must “study the social construction of ignorance. The persistence of controversy is often not a natural consequence of imperfect knowledge but a political consequence of conflicting interests and structural apathies. Controversy can be engineered: ignorance and uncertainty can be manufactured, maintained, and disseminated” (Proctor, 1995, p. 8)

Tuana (2006) called her approach a taxonomy, but it is really a typology. She catalogued six types of ignorance with the intention of “shedding light on the nature of their production [to better] understand how to identify, critique, and transform ignorance” (p. 3). She admitted that “while I do not claim that my taxonomy lists all possible forms of ignorance, it provides a helpful framework for beginning the work of developing epistemologies of ignorance” (p. 16), which Proctor and Schiebinger (2008) characterized as “remarkably undertheorized” (p. vii).

In short, Tuana (2006) identified (a) knowing that we do not know, but not caring to know; (b) we do not even know that we do not know; (c) they do not want us to know; (d) they do not know, and they do not want to know (i.e., willful, cultivated ignorance; e.g., about racism); (e) ignorance produced by the construction of epistemically disadvantaged identities (i.e., particular groups are deemed untrustworthy [e.g., rape and incest victims, holocaust survivors, or criminals]); and (f) loving ignorance (i.e., a positive attitude of accepting what cannot be shared thus cannot be known).

The first five types of ignorance are “focused on those things that we could know but for various reasons ignored” (Tuana, 2006, p. 15). Loving ignorance instead “involves the realization that although much experience can be shared there will always be experiences that cannot” (p. 16); hence, they cannot be known, and ignorance manifests. But people accept and respect this particular type of not knowing.

The most damning type is others’ cultivation of willful ignorance about home economics. People often have no idea what they do not know about home economics, and they have no desire to learn otherwise. They depend on stereotypes, biases, unfounded assumptions, paradigmatic blinders, and so on. Hand in hand is Tuana’s (2006) “we do not even know that we do not know” type of ignorance. Home economists’ ideological naivety means they cannot fathom why others summarily dismiss us. Their reasoning makes no sense to us (Renwick, 2017)

McGregor (2022) tendered useful advice for countering willful ignorance. She was convinced that home economists (by whatever name) must become ideologically savvy, so they can recognize when willful ignorance manifests and counter it with effective messaging to better ensure that our curricula are not excluded, and the discipline and profession are not dismissed.

Abbott’s Typology of Ignorance

Exposing and confronting ignorance can contribute to future proofing professions and organizations (Abbott,

1988, 2010) Andrew Abbott won the 1991 American Sociological Association (ASA) Sorokin Award for this typology of ignorance within professions. He proposed that amateur, professional, and expert ignorance (three types) differ along three dimensions: ignorance of (a) facts about the profession, (b) literature (works written by and about the profession) and (c) thinking skills for professionals (Abbott, 2010)

To explain the dimensions, facts can pertain to the profession’s history, practice, demography, organizations, and licensing and regulation. Literature includes histories, chronicles, research and studies, polemics (debates and critiques), and institutional analyses. Thinking skills include moral reasoning and judgements, empirical judgements, rigor, consilience (linking disciplinary knowledge together), open mindedness, active listening, and willingness for theoretical change if warranted (Abbott, 2010)

To elaborate the types, Abbott proposed that amateurs are not necessarily ignorant of the facts or the professional literature, but they lack the professional’s specialized thinking skills (especially knowledge of theory and rigor) required to evaluate and order the facts and the literature (i.e., they lack synthetic power). Expert ignorance pertains to a particular person working within a profession. Also called synthetic ignorance, it refers to experts being ignorant of things they once knew. Their prolonged engagement with the profession (facts, literature, and thinking) has led to “too much synthetic power rather than too little” (2010, p.186), which occurs with amateurism. Their very memory prevents experts from learning keeps them ignorant.

Professional ignorance has three subtypes. A professional with nonspeciality ignorance has facts and thinking skills but lacks knowledge of adjacent literature in other specialities. Core-literature ignorance pertains less to facts and thinking skills and more to lack of knowledge of the core literature in the field. These professionals treat core literature superficially if at all. In-speciality ignorance is not so much thinking skills or literature but ignorance of facts within one’s speciality area of expertise. These professionals rely on facts that even amateurs may know instead of facts generated by peers (Abbott, 2010)

The FCS and home economics profession can use this typology as it encounters ignorance within and externally. To illustrate, when negatively impacted by amateurs espousing and applying knowledge germane to our field, we moved to certification (accreditation) and/or legislation. These initiatives ensure, respectively, that (a) our higher education programs and lifelong learning initiatives keep professional knowledge current; or (b) people who use our name or engage in similar but regulated practice can be legally penalized (similar to protection afforded social workers, doctors, lawyers, and engineers) (McGregor, 1995; Pucciarelli et al., 2016)

Expert ignorance might have been problematic within home economics and FCS in the recent past (i.e., many people had been practicing for so long that they forgot what they used to know) but not anymore. With a rapidly aging cohort not being replaced at sufficient levels with appropriately trained people (McGregor, 2018a), the real problem is

novice ignorance (coined for this paper) especially their lack of knowledge of both facts and literature about the profession. Hampered by this ignorance, so-called novices are ill equipped to successfully argue for the inclusion of home economics and FCS in the official curriculum and to assert the discipline and profession’s legitimacy and relevance.

Professional ignorance (especially nonspeciality, and core literature ignorance) runs rampant in home economics and FCS because of hyperspecialization (Brown, 1993; McGregor, 2023) This too compromises professionals’ inclination and incentive to successfully argue for the inclusion of official home economics and FCS curricula as well as assert the profession’s rightful place in the multidimensional political milieu.

Nottelmann’s Typology of Ignorance

On a final note, Nikolaj Nottelmann (Danish philosopher) tendered his typology of ignorance to “present in a fair light the most important debates [about contemporary epistemology, philosophical semantics, and the philosophy of mind], and guide the reader to a firmer understanding of the philosophical stakes involved” (2016, p. 34) His contribution is part of a Cambridge University Press collection of “important tools that can be fruitfully used in debates within and beyond philosophy” (Peels & Blaauw, 2016, Front matter).

Nottelmann (2016) posited that ignorance varies along three dimensions (i.e., kind, degree, and order) leading to four types. First, the kind dimension refers to what a person is ignorant of knowing including facts, know-how, answers to questions, objects, people, events, and properties. Second, ignorance can also vary by degree or the extent or amount to which it is present (i.e., people are more or less ignorant). For example, deep ignorance means someone has never, ever engaged with an idea. They have no knowledge of it whatsoever nor have they ever been interested. Shallow ignorance might mean they had entertained or considered the idea but remained ignorant of it. With several people, one person might be least ignorant of an idea.

Finally, order refers to the transparency or opaqueness of someone’s awareness of ignorance (whether it is what they know themselves or what others think they know about them). Specifically, first-order (Socratic) ignorance (transparent) means someone is ignorant of something, and they know it. Second-order (less transparent) means someone is ignorant of their ignorance. Third-order (opaque) is someone ignorant of the fact that they are ignorant of the fact that they are ignorant of a fact. They don’t know that they don’t know what they don’t know (Nottelmann, 2016).

Using this conceptualization, Nottelmann (2016) proposed four types of ignorance with detailed discussion along the three dimensions. Succinctly, he suggested (a) factual ignorance (lack of facts), which is different from lack of truth or belief expressed in propositions about facts; (b) practical or procedural ignorance (lack of how-to and knowhow); (c) objectual ignorance (lack of acquaintance with an object or an entity – person, city, experience, place, or property); and (d) erotetic ignorance (Greek erōtētikós, ‘per-

taining to questions’) (e.g., if Jane does not know how to sew, she does not know any correct answer to questions of how to sew). Erotetic ignorance can be complete or partial with the latter referring to not knowing some part of the answer to a question. Vogt (2017) advised Nottelmann to consider normative ignorance (what should be done, what is better/worse, right/wrong) and deliberative ignorance (what to do versus how to do).

Without question, Nottelmann’s (2016) four types of ignorance impact home economics. First, others take impactful actions against home economics based on their ignorance of facts about us (e.g., history, philosophy, knowledge base, and competencies). Second, because others devalue our status as an applied field that chose to draw on hard and soft sciences, they remain ignorant of our import for societal resiliency. Third, others are ignorant of the rigour of our university training as an academic discipline, and they disregard our professional status (objectual) deferring instead to specific specializations and untrained amateurs, respectively. Fourth, they know so little of us that they cannot field questions about home economics thus making it easier to marginalize or exclude it from official curricula.

Using Nottelmann’s (2016) insights, home economists and FCS can better counter any prevailing initiatives related to the “discrete and wholesale writing out of Home Economics from the official curriculum” (Renwick, 2017,

p. 164). Her choice of the adjective discrete is revealing in that it means separate and distinct (Anderson, 2014); policy makers are separating out FCS and home economics and removing it from the curriculum.

Conclusion

Reputable, highly recognized scholars have begun to develop typologies of ignorance for varied reasons including philosophizing about ignorance (Nottelmann, 2016) as well as understanding ignorance in the scientific endeavour (Proctor, 2008), within professions (Abbott, 2010), and in women’s health (Tuana, 2006) (see Table 1). Each typology proved useful for revealing various aspects of our own and others’ veils of ignorance about home economics and FCS. This suggests that other typologies and future theories of ignorance will be helpful as well.

Left in place, unchallenged ignorance will continue to compromise the potential of a century-old profession created to strengthen individuals and families for their own good and that of humanity. Theorists, researchers, and practitioners are, thus, strongly encouraged to engage the comprehensive, complex, and politicized notion of ignorance as it informs the home economics and FCS profession’s future viability and perceived legitimacy.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CCBY-4.0). View this license’s legal deed at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 and legal code at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode for more information.

References

Abbott, A. (1988). The system of professions Chicago University Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/ 9780226189666.001.0001

Abbott, A. (2010). Varieties of ignorance. The American Sociologist, 41(2), 174–189. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s12108-010-9094-x

Anderson, S. (Ed.). (2014). Collins English dictionary (12th ed.). Harper Collins.

Apple, M. W. (Ed.). (2003). The state and politics of knowledge Routledge Farmer.

Birkenholtz, T., & Simon, G. (2022). Introduction to themed issue: Ignorance and uncertainty in environmental decision-making. Geoforum, 132, 154–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.geoforum.2021.12.003

Brown, M. M. (1993). Philosophical studies of home economics in the United States: Basic ideas by which home economists understand themselves Michigan State University Press.

Collier, D., LaPorte, J., & Seawright, J. (2012). Putting typologies to work: Concept formation, measurement, and analytic rigor. Political Research Quarterly, 65(1), 217–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1065912912437162

Elliott, K. C. (2012). Ignorance, uncertainty, and the development of scientific language. In N. Janich, A. Nordmann, & L. Schebek (Eds.), Nichtwissenskommunikation in den wissenschaftenden (pp. 295–316). Peter Lang.

Elliott, K. C. (2013). Selective ignorance and agricultural research. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 38(3), 328–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243912442399

Fforde, A. (2020). Towards a theory of ignorance. Journal of Philosophical Economics, 13(2), 137–161. https://doi.org/10.46298/jpe.10739

Gross, N., & McGoey, L. (Eds.). (2022). Routledge international handbook of ignorance studies (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Haider, J., & Rödl, M. (2023). Google Search and the creation of ignorance: The case of the climate crisis. Big Data & Society, 10(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/20539517231158997

Harper, D. (2024). Online etymology dictionary. https:// www.etymonline.com/

Hoek, W. V. D., Jaspars, J., & Thijsse, E. (2004). Theories of knowledge and ignorance. In S. Rahman, J. Symons, D. M. Gabbay, & J. P. van Bendegem (Eds.), Logic, epistemology, and the unity of science: Vol. 1 (pp. 381–418). Springer

Kourany, J., & Carrier, M. (2020). Introducing the issues. In J. Kourany & M. Carrier (Eds.), Science and the production of ignorance (pp. 3–26). MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/12146.003.0003

Le Morvan, P., & Peels, R. (2016). The nature of ignorance: Two views. In R. Peels & M. Blaauw (Eds.), The epistemic dimensions of ignorance (pp. 12–32). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/ 9780511820076.002

McGregor, S. L. T. (1995). Self regulation of Canadian profession. Journal of the Institute of Home Economics, 14(1), 2–5.

McGregor, S. L. T. (2018a). Home economics baby boomer professors in retirement: An inaugural study. International Journal of Home Economics, 11(1), 54–71. https://www.ifhe.org/fileadmin/user_upload/ e_Journal/IJHE_Volume_11_Issue_1_2018.pdf

McGregor, S. L. T. (2018b). Understanding and evaluating research Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/ 9781071802656

McGregor, S. L. T. (2022). Justifying home economics: Fight the right war. International Journal of Home Economics, 15(2), 33–45. https://www.ifhe.org/ fileadmin/user_upload/e_Journal/Vol_15_2_corr/ P05.pdf

McGregor, S. L. T. (2023). Professional accountability via professional imperatives. Journal of Family & Consumer Sciences, 115(3), 7–16. https://doi.org/ 10.14307/JFCS115.3.7

McLean, G. N. (2011). Writing theory, conceptual, and position articles for publication. In T. S. Rocco & T. Hatcher (Eds.), The handbook of scholarly writing and publishing (pp. 209–221). Jossey-Bass.

Myers, I. B., & Myers, P. (1980). Gifts differing: Understanding personality type Davies-Black. Nottelmann, N. (2016). The varieties of ignorance. In R. Peels & M. Blaauw (Eds.), The epistemic dimensions of ignorance (pp. 33–56). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9780511820076.003

Palmer, B. (2005, October 4). Conference to explore the social construction of ignorance [News release]. Stanford News Service. https://web.archive.org/web/ 20070724074303/http://news-service.stanford.edu/ pr/2005/pr-agno-100505.html

Peels, R., & Blaauw, M. (Eds.). (2016). The epistemic dimensions of ignorance Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9780511820076

Proctor, R. N. (1995). Cancer wars Basic Books.

Proctor, R. N. (2008). A missing term to describe the cultural production of ignorance (and its study). In R. N.Proctor & L. Schiebinger (Eds.), Agnotology: The making & unmaking of ignorance (pp. 1–33). Stanford University Press.

Proctor, R. N., & Schiebinger, L. (Eds.). (2008). Agnotology: The making & unmaking of ignorance. Stanford University Press.

Pucciarelli, D. L., Hall, S., & Harden, A. (2016). A national survey of the perceived value of American Association of Family and Consumer Science Accreditation. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 44(4), 375–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/ fcsr.12170

Renwick, K. (2017). The making of ignorance: Undermining the value of home economics. In M. Bauer Edstrom, M.-L. de Zwart, & J. Tong (Eds.), Proceedings of the 14th Canadian Symposium on Issues and Directions for Home Economics/Family Studies/ Human Ecology Education (pp. 164–173). London, Ontario. https://kirsty-robbinsjdym.squarespace.com/s/2017-symposiumproceedings.pdf

Seese, S. (2014, December 21). The purpose of ignorance LinkedIn Blog. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ purpose-ignorance-shawnee-bigelow-phdc-mba Smithson, M. (2010). Ignorance and uncertainty. In V. A.Brown, J. A. Harris, & J. Y. Russell (Eds.), Tackling wicked problems through the transdisciplinary imagination (pp. 84–97). Earthscan.

Tuana, N. (2004). Coming to understand: Orgasm and the epistemology of ignorance. Hypatia, 19(1), 194–232. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1527-2001.2004.tb01275.x

Tuana, N. (2006). The speculum of ignorance: The women’s health movement and epistemologies of ignorance. Hypatia, 21, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1527-2001.2006.tb01110.x

Van Allen, J. (2000). “Bad future things” and liberatory moments: Capitalism, gender and the state in Botswana. Radical History Review, 76, 136–168. https://doi.org/10.1215/01636545-2000-76-136

Vogt, K. V. (2017, April 3). [Review of the book The epistemic dimensions of ignorance, by R. Peels & M. Blaauw, Eds.]. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/the-epistemicdimensions-of-ignorance/

Flachmeier, K., Carpiac, M., Aghekyan, M., & Archer, J. (2025). “Who Am I Without My Partner; I’ve Lost Half My Whole.”: Do You Believe in Love After Loss? Gender and Repartnering in Older Widowhood. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 117(1).

“Who Am I Without My Partner; I’ve Lost Half My Whole.”: Do You Believe in Love After Loss? Gender and Repartnering in Older Widowhood.

Kathleen Flachmeier1 , Maria Carpiac, PhD2a , Marine Aghekyan, PhD3b , Jesse Archer4c

1 California State University, Long Beach, 2 Gerontology Program, California State University, Long Beach, 3 Family and Consumer Science, California State University, Long Beach , 4 Gerontology Program , California State University, Long Beach

Keywords: Widows, widowers, repartnering, relationships, roles, identity, grief, living apart together, remarriage, cohabitation

Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences

Vol. 117, Issue 1, 2025

In the dynamics of family relationships, the death of a spouse or partner affects not only the surviving partner, but other family members as well. Understanding how older people cope with this loss and their desire, or lack of desire, to repartner can be challenging for everyone involved. Little attention has been giving to the romantic interests of older widowed people. Previous studies have indicated that men desire, and are more likely to repartner. Available studies are outdated and may not reflect current attitudes. The purpose of this study is to better understand the current gendered differences in the desire of older adults repartner, how it relates to existing literature and what these relationships may look like now. The findings indicate that theories on repartnering are more complex than initial suggested illustrating the need for further, updated research.

As couples age, the death of one of the partners can become an expected yet devastating occurrence. That death changes the future in a moment. Older adults suddenly find themselves alone and striving to cope with a life they had not planned for. Emotionally, loneliness and social isolation are major stressors for those trying to deal with this loss (Wu et al., 2014). In older widowed adults, these impacts are magnified by age and the length of the partnership (Davidson, 2001). How older people cope may be reflected in their desire, or lack of desire, to repartner. It is suggested in society and in literature (Carr, 2004; Davidson, 2002; De Jong Gierveld, 2002; Schneider et al., 1996; Stevens, 2002) that the desire to repartner is gender specific. The cliché that women mourn and men replace suggests that men have a far greater desire to repartner than women do.

It can be more difficult for older adults to adapt to a new life and role identity after the loss of a spouse or partner. It requires a resolution of one’s previous life and the redefinition of a new life (Hiltz, 1978) Studies suggest men feel their masculinity is in peril and seek to reclaim it while women must find a new identity as a single female. How both achieve these aims can be very different. Women will depend on the support of family and friends (Davidson, 2002). Men often suppress their emotions in an effort to maintain control and therefore are hindered in their ability

to cope with their grief (K. M. Bennett, 2007) Repartnering for men is an important consideration to reclaiming their masculine identity (K. M. Bennett et al., 2003) Conversely, women are claiming control of their lives irrespective of a new romantic relationship. Many studies have found that surviving women enjoy a new found freedom and independence after the loss of their spouse (Carr, 2004; Davidson, 2002; Kestin Van Den Hoonaard, 2002; Schneider et al., 1996; Stevens, 2002; Wu et al., 2014).

As the majority of the current available literature is more than a decade old, there is a need for an updated, more complete examination of what repartnering means to the surviving partners. Similarly, attitudes of the “Boomer” generation (1946 – 1964) may not be reflected in available literature. The 1970s saw the advance of the feminist agenda which has contributed to the gain in women’s roles become more egalitarian (Donnelly et al., 2016) Emerging changes in attitudes are not reflected in the available outdated literature.

Similarly, relationships are being redefined in older widowed adults. Marriage may not be the singular solution to the desire to repartner. Both the type of relationship and how and where couples choose to live should be considered in any discussion of repartnering.

This article is organized into five sections. A definition of terms is needed to ensure the concepts discussed are foun-

Professor and Gerontology Program Director

Professor, Family and Consumer Science

Professor

dationally transparent. The objective section will discuss five major themes highlighted in the available literature and the assumptions made from those writings. Next, the methods section will present focus groups information and how the qualitative research was conducted. In the results section, the findings garnered from the focus groups and interview will be discussed reflecting the current thoughts and opinions on the themes. Finally, we will conclude with results and discussion of the study and suggestions for future avenues of research.

Definitions of Terms

Caregiving: In this study, caregiving is used to denote meeting both physical and emotional needs as well as service-oriented tasks (Davidson, 2001, 2002)

Domestic: Relating to the running of a home or family relations (Oxford University, n.d.-a)

Gender: In this study, gender is used to indicate male and female as defined by social and cultural distinctions (Oxford University, n.d.-b).

Loss: In this study, loss refers to the departing of one’s spouse through death (Oxford University, n.d.-c)

Older adults: For the purpose of this study, older adults are considered those in the age range over 60 years old.

Partner: For the purpose of this study, the heterosexual person in a long term, committed relationship not recognized by the legality of marriage.

Repartner: A new partner relationship after the death of a spouse (Stevens, 2002); a second couplehood (Koren, 2011) This includes not just marriage, but other types of relationships as well.

Spouse: An individual married to another individual. For purposes of this study the term refers to the heterosexual partner of a legally married couple (Legal Information Institute, n.d.)

Widow: For the purpose of this study, a woman whose spouse or partner has died.

Widower: For the purpose of this study, a man whose spouse or partner has died.

Objective: Themes in current literature

Loneliness

One aspect of the desire to repartner in both genders as suggested by the literature is the alleviation of loneliness that inevitably follows the death of a spouse. Both genders view repartnering as a way to ward off the emotional devastation of being lonely. Carr (2004) defined loneliness as the “lack of meaningful interpersonal relationships” (p. 1054). Studies have found that both men and women with strong social relationships are less inclined to desire to repartner as opposed to those with little to no social support (Carr, 2004; Schneider et al., 1996; Van Baarsen & Broese Van Groenou, 2001; Wu et al., 2014) Further, it has been discovered that as social relationships improve over time, the desire to repartner lessens in both genders, but more so in men (Carr, 2004; Van Baarsen & Broese Van Groenou, 2001) Even with these shared reasons for the desire to

repartner, there is still a gendered difference in the percentages of repartnering. Carr (2004) and Stevens (2002) state that approximately 2% of older widows and 20% of older widowers remarry. Wu et al. (2014) further expands the breakdown after 10 years of widowhood. They note that about 7% of widows and 29% of widowers are repartnered.

Women take more time to mourn (Motsoeneng, 2021) McWilliams and Barrett (2014) found that women typically take twice as long in the grieving process as men. They take time to be alone and recover emotionally. They care for themselves and their families. Men, conversely, start to focus on new relationships as a way to mitigate their loneliness and fill the void left in their lives. Schneider et al. (1996) noted that men have an easier time entering into new relationships and feel less guilty about it. They also noted that over time, a widower’s likelihood of developing new relationships decreases. An explanation can be found in the study by Bennett (2010) that determined that over time, widowed people increased the number of friends they had and their involvement with them. This may go a long way toward ameliorating the loneliness of widowers.

Women want someone to go out with, men want someone to come home to (Davidson, 2001, 2002; Koren, 2015; Stevens, 2002) Women may seek male companionship while avoiding long term obligations (Carr, 2004). Men seek committed relationships, while women want companionship without the demands of caring for someone else (McWilliams & Barrett, 2014) Desire for companionship is influential in seeking relationships in that women wish for companionship outside, and men want companionship inside the home. Aloneness, rather than loneliness, is the issue with widows (Davidson, 2002)

Perspective of Widowhood

Another contributing factor to the gender differences in the desire to repartner is the way in which the different genders cope with various states of life. There is evidence that the perspective of bereavement and widow(er)hood are gender based. Bereavement represents the personal, psychological experience following the death of a spouse and is associated with a sense of deep loss, sorrow and mourning. It is considered relatively short-term (K. Bennett, 2010) Widowhood, on the other hand, becomes the description of a continuing life following that loss. It involves the change in social status from being married to widowed (Koren, 2015) As discussed below, most studies regarding how individuals cope with these states of life indicate that there is a gender-based difference. They also suggest that some women come through bereavement with a new sense of mastery and personal growth (Moorman et al., 2006).

The trope is that women mourn [grieve], and men replace (Carr, 2004; Davidson, 2001, 2002). This same literature indicates that this is applicable to both the state of bereavement as well as the social status of widowhood. Women are described as resilient and able to cope with loss through varying strategies, while men are more often described as vulnerable and emotionally shattered. Koren (2015) describes resiliency as the ability to maintain a relatively stable, healthy level of mental and physical function-

ing following a traumatic experience. Vulnerability, however, refers to anxieties and the ability to adapt after exposure to stress. Widowers speak of the emotional devastation of their loss (Schneider et al., 1996). They talk of being lonely (Davidson, 2002), of the large void left by death (K. Bennett, 2010), and the profound emptiness they experience (Bandini & Thompson, 2013) Men describe their lives as “meaningless” without a wife (Kestin Van Den Hoonaard, 2002, p. 90). Bandini and Thompson (2013) note that the solution for men to alleviate these feelings is to find a new partner. Men believe this would help them rebound from their loss. Analyses by McWilliams and Barrett (2014) found that men seek committed relationships while women prefer companionship without the restrictions of domestic roles.

Conversely, the surviving women speak of their sense of liberation, their newfound independence, and the freedom they feel from caregiving and domestic duties. Stevens (2002) noted that many widows no longer want to fulfill the traditional women’s role in marriage, “that of servicing the needs of a man” (p. 30).

Most research on grief and loss focuses on women. Widowhood is considered the domain of older women due to men’s higher rate of mortality. Therefore, discussions of widowers’ issues are often viewed through the lens of similarities and differences to widows, rather than from a truly unique male perspective.

Social Interaction

The loss of a partner affects a person’s ability to socialize as discussed by Stevens (2002) Widowed people miss the social life they led as a couple. Both genders view repartnering as a way to be welcomed back into a social life that is couple-centric (Stevens, 2002). Both men and women feel that they have become second class citizens in the world of social interaction (K. M. Bennett, 2007). In a society that is couple-centric, singleness only serves to further isolate and create additional feelings of loneliness in both sexes. De Jong Gierveld (2002) notes that a partnered relationship provides the best opportunities for social integration.

Studies indicate that women are better able to cope with this phenomenon because of their established social connections (K. M. Bennett et al., 2003; Carr, 2004; Van Baarsen & Broese Van Groenou, 2001) Men typically rely on their wives to coordinate the social aspect of their lives and are left without those connections when they find themselves single. Due to this low social engagement, it is believed that early in their bereavement, men receive more support (K. M. Bennett et al., 2003; Koren, 2015) However, long term, the general consensus is that women cope better with being widowed (K. M. Bennett, 2007; K. M. Bennett et al., 2003; Carr, 2004; Davidson, 2002; Wu et al., 2014).

With the death of a partner, there is a reversal of social roles. Men are initially socialized to be self-reliant and women to seek interpersonal relationships. In widowhood, men seek interpersonal relationships while women seek their independence (K. M. Bennett et al., 2003; Davidson, 2001) Koren (2015) found that both widows and widowers were more interested in repartnering when their levels of

social support from family and friends were lower. This desire for emotional closeness was a larger motivation than the need for instrumental support or economic stability.

Studies support that both men and women with strong social relationships are less inclined to desire to repartner as opposed to those with little to no social support (Carr, 2004; Schneider et al., 1996; Van Baarsen & Broese Van Groenou, 2001; Wu et al., 2014) Further, it has been discovered that as social relationships improve over time, the desire to repartner lessens in both genders, but more so in men (Carr, 2004; Van Baarsen & Broese Van Groenou, 2001)

While resiliency among older adults gives them the ability to cope with the stress of loss, it is the subsequent change in personal identity, environment and companionship (or lack of) that creates difficulties (K. Bennett, 2010) Those who have been in long term relationships often lack the external social support needed to handle the grief and sorrow of their loss, their spouses were the major source of emotional and domestic support built during a life together (Van Baarsen & Broese Van Groenou, 2001)

Being left alone can additionally affect the health of both genders. In general, men rely on their spouses for health maintenance (K. M. Bennett, 2007) This often leads to neglect for managing their own health, resulting in a declining physical state. Men also tend to suppress their emotions which also contributes to health issues (K. M. Bennett et al., 2003) Van Baarsen and Broese Van Groenou (2001) stated that while older women reported more chronic symptoms, they often had a more positive evaluation of their overall health. They conclude that this is a positive factor in social interactions to cope with grief. Yet ill health tends to contribute to social isolation (Van Baarsen & Broese Van Groenou, 2001).

Identity and Roles

In moving through the state of bereavement into widowhood, a new central identity for a woman can be “widow” while “widower” is much less acceptable to men (Kestin Van Den Hoonaard, 2002) Bennett, et al. (2003) noted that both the academic community and society in general viewed widowhood in older age as problematic for men.

In a discussion of men and masculinity, it was noted that men look to preserve or recoup their masculine identity. Women, conversely, seem to embrace the construction of new self-identity. In bereavement, women resolve their old roles and relationships and go on to build new ones (Hiltz, 1978) Men seek to regain their previous roles and find relationships through a new partner. Gillies and Neimeyer (2006) explore activities in which individuals begin to build a new life and identity. They note that those who adapt in positive ways go on to take on new roles and identities. In the literature reviewed, it is most often the surviving women who embrace their new roles and the accompanying freedom and liberation. Widowers, conversely, attempt to regain their strength, control and capability, both emotionally and socially, by repartnering (K. M. Bennett, 2007; K. M.Bennett et al., 2003)

Another unique difficulty for men is the challenge that loss presents to their masculinity. Socially constructed masculinity is already challenged in an aging man (K. M. Bennett, 2007; K. M. Bennett et al., 2003). Adding to this difficulty is the gendered differences in the experience of marriage in an older cohort; the masculine role is deeply ingrained in the social construct of marriage. So, masculinity matters in widowhood (Bandini & Thompson, 2013) Widowhood challenges the notions of strength, capability and control (K. M. Bennett et al., 2003) The expectations of what it means to be a man heavily influence how a widower restructures his new life. While for some, taking on domestic duties can be viewed as being feminized, other men will reframe this into a type of labor that is worthy of the masculine role by emphasizing masculine ideals such as strength and control (K. M. Bennett, 2007; K. M. Bennett et al., 2003) In an effort to re-establish their masculine selfhood, some widowers believe that repartnering is the best way and will seek to do so soon after their loss (K. M. Bennett et al., 2003). Repartnering with a younger partner is also equated with masculine success (McWilliams & Barrett, 2014).

Another gender related challenge for widowers relates back to the previous issue, that of the gendered differences in a marital relationship. Women are usually the caregivers in a marriage, whether it is health related or simply caretaking of a spouse (Davidson, 2001). McWilliams and Barrett (2014) noted that men felt a sense of entitlement to a care partner. Davidson also (2001) noted that the widows in her study considered that men lived selfish lives. Supporting this, Carr (2004) noted that men and women experience marriage in different ways. She speaks of the difference of “his” marriage versus “her” marriage. His marriage provides the man with practical and emotional support. Her marriage is burdensome with caring and domestic roles (Carr, 2004). Widowerhood takes away the caring, female role, while widowhood provides liberation and freedom from the female role. While this can be an impetus for widowers to find a new partner with all the ensuing perks, it can be also be an impetus for widows to remain uncommitted.

Many widowers indicated that they felt less free as they were now obligated to take on domestic duties (Davidson, 2001) The discussion of domestic duties figures prominently in widowers’ discussions. They are not happy about having to assume domestic duties in the house. They may hire someone to perform the duties, or simply ignore them to the detriment of their comfort and possibly health.

Living Arrangements

Little attention has been given to the new types of partnering relationships that are emerging in the older widowed community and the gendered differences. Wu et al. (2014) explore remarriage and cohabitation as types of relationships in repartnering options. Stevens (2002) expanded the exploration of relationships to include steady companions and service providers. De Jong Gierveld (2002) looks at the choices of how and where people choose to live in repartnering relationships. Koren (2011) blended findings

of Wu et al. (2014) and De Jong Gierveld (2002) by including a type of living arrangement in repartnering relationships.

The three choices of living arrangements which seem to be prevalent in repartnering in older age are remarriage, which offers security and familiarity, unmarried cohabitation, which brings with it more uncertainties yet still provides a level of emotional intimacy, and living apart together, which allows for life as usual. While little research has been done on living apart together, Davidson (2002) found that women preferred this type of arrangement, while men preferred living together whether in marriage or cohabitation. Other studies supported these findings (De Jong Gierveld, 2002; Koren, 2011, 2015). Wu et al. (2014) further expanded these observations by noting that cohabitation may be preferrable to marriage among older people regardless of gender. More flexible bonds with a new partner give equality to partner positions and support ongoing independence (De Jong Gierveld, 2002).

The desire to repartner can be prompted by an insufficiency of resources. Wu et al. (2014) found that the pooling of economic means can be a motivation for repartnering. In many instances cohabitation rather than remarriage is the desired living arrangement. This same arrangement can also protect inheritances from becoming common assets. Conversely, remarriage can negatively affect pension incomes. These studies illustrate that economic considerations may affect the type of repartnering, as well as being a factor in the decision to repartner.

Statement of the Problem

Very little attention has been given to the romantic interests of older widowed people. A review of available literature reveals that studies are outdated and very little new information has been published in recent years. Through online communities, social gatherings, and weekend conferences, the widowed community has voiced their search for reidentification and validation in their life choices. They look for explanations for the challenges of repartnering or deciding not to repartner. The aim of this study is to examine if there are gendered differences in the desire to repartner. It further seeks to examine the different types of relationship and living choices desirable to widows and widowers. Finally, the study seeks to provide some insight into the changing landscape of widowhood and provide understanding between the sexes.

Methods

This study utilized qualitative research methods to gather and analyze data. Data collection through the use of four focus groups was selected for this study as the information sought is subjective and personal and focus groups allow for the free flow of information and opinions. In a focus group setting, one person’s narrative may inform another, which may in turn inform another. This research design allowed for the exploration of current views of repartnering in an older adult cohort as well as uncovering views not previously discussed in existing literature.

Recruitment was done in early 2024 through an online community for widowed people. Permission was obtained from the foundation. Subjects were solicited via a snowball method using the foundation’s administration. A Qualtrix link was sent via email to members of the community, who were then screened through the completion of a short survey. A secondary recruitment for male participants was done through a post online via LinkedIn. Elimination of participants included anyone under the age of 60. Any participant that had been in a relationship other than heterosexual was also eliminated. Historically, recruitment for the four focus groups would ideally be between 10 and 12 people for commercial focus groups. Krueger and Casey (2014) recommend 5 to 8 people for a noncommercial topic so everyone will be able to fully participate and have their opinions heard. This size also aids in recruitment and makes the participants more comfortable participating (Krueger & Casey, 2014). There were 35 respondents. Four of these were eliminated as potential scammers based on the survey response time (all within 5 minutes) and the location of the IP addresses (Kenya). The participant pool was also confined to the United States and Canada which also precluded these responses. Of the remaining respondents (Table 1), 6 women between the ages of 60 and 69 participated, 7 women aged 70 and older participated, 3 men between the ages of 60 and 69 participated, and 1 man 70 or older participated. In order to maintain the age categories, the man over 70 was interviewed independently. The breakdown of the respondents in each group is representative of the ratio of widows to widowers in the general population. The discussions and interview were done via zoom, recorded and transcribed for analysis.

Data was collected through visual and audio recordings via Zoom conferencing. The recordings were then transcribed. All personal information was removed. After data collection, the transcribed interviews were reviewed and assigned coding based on themes gathered from reviewed literature and presented in the discussion questions. The information was analyzed for both the commonality and disparity of themes in the responses. The underlying age and gender categories were further utilized to add perspective to the responses. Once a summary of the themes was created, it was compared to information obtained through the literature review to determine which ideas were substantiated, which ideas were expanded upon and what new findings are open to future research. A summary of the findings are described in the section below.

Discussion and Results

A review of available literature reveals that studies are outdated and based on a past generation. Very little new information has been published in recent years. Stereotypes that may no longer be applicable are still prevalent in aging literature. The results of the qualitative research in this study have substantiated these premises. Following is a discussion of those changing attitudes.

The loss of a spouse or partner affects everyone differently. Understanding the nuances of this loss through the desire to repartner can aid individuals, families and pro-

fessionals in supporting the widowed person. Family members may be struggling to understand why Dad wants to “replace” Mom so quickly. Friends may be exerting pressure on their widowed friend to find a new partner. In reviewing the findings, new opinions and attitudes may open the way for a better understanding of the subtleties in constructing a new life after loss.

In the conversation with the men’s focus group and individual interview all of the respondents referred to being alone. No one initially spoke of being lonely. Participant 1 even spoke of differentiating his feelings of being alone from being lonely. Conversely, a majority of all respondents in both women’s focus groups spoke of being lonely. The younger age focus group spoke of loneliness being one of the most difficult aspects of their loss. This seems to counter the premise in the literature that men suffer from loneliness while women are all right with being alone.

No women in either focus group expressed a feeling of freedom and independence. They also did not speak of a freedom from caregiving and domestic duties. One female respondent in the 60-69 group and one in the 70+ group

both expressed an unwillingness to take on a caregiver role in the future, but both stated that if they were in a committed relationship and that was required, they would do what was necessary. Two women in each group talked about personal growth and a sense of mastery over household tasks previously handled by their partners.

Several of the women in both focus groups discussed the loss of social acceptance by their coupled friends. Two of the men also reflected on similar experiences, however there was a very different perception between the two genders. Multiple respondents in the both women’s groups noted that they felt that a single woman was viewed as a threat to married couples. There was a loss of friendship if the couple’s friends were the partner’s friends. The widow was no longer included. Participant 3 in the 60-69 group noted that her “partner’s friends turned their backs on me.” The men, however, did not express any notion of being a threat, but felt that their coupled friends were just uncomfortable with them without their partners. All of the respondents spoke of the social support provided through the widowed community of which they were all a part. Many spoke of the importance of the support of other widowed people in understanding the grief journey.

The 70+ women’s focus group focused on the impact of their identity as one of the most difficult aspects of their loss. Participant 1 stated “who am I without my partner, I’ve lost half of my whole.” Three other respondents discussed how no longer being a caregiver to their partner impacted their identity. This loss of identity was also discussed by two of the respondents in the 60-69 women’s group. No one in the men’s group or the interviewee spoke of an impact on their identity. However, the interviewee did mention that no longer being a caregiver gave him too much free time that he struggled to fill. This corresponds to the study findings that women must seek to establish a new identity after loss. One respondent in each of the women’s groups mentioned the feeling of personal accomplishment in assuming tasks previously handled by their partners and how this helped with the feeling of building a new life. Nothing, however, in the discussions with men indicated that they felt a need to reclaim a lost identity. Two of the men indicated that they returned to work, but believed it was more to cope with loss rather than reclaim an identity. While these results support the premise in literature that widows must find a new identity, it contradicted the literature on widowers’ identities being impacted in any meaningful way.

Also in conflict with available literature is the supposition that most women prefer living together apart while men prefer remarriage or cohabitation. Of the 13 women in the focus groups, all but two preferred cohabitation or remarriage, while conversely two of the men preferred cohabitation, but not remarriage and two preferred living apart

together. None of the five women in the 70+ group preferred cohabitation, only remarriage. The other two preferred living apart together. The 60-69 group was equally divided between cohabitation and remarriage. Two of those who did not want to remarry cited not wanting to give up their husband’s last name as a primary reason. One cited legal reasons in her desire to remarry in order to have spousal rights.

Limitations

Base study assumptions were made on a cohort that was pre-World War II, which reflects societal norms that may no longer apply. This study included only heterosexual couples; any LBGTQ relationship was not considered nor does this study include any other gender categories. The indications in the original studies were that the ethnicity of the participants was extremely homogenous, most were Caucasian. The use of the online widowed community provided a large pool; however, the respondents were still homogenous and seemed to share a foundational “sameness” in that they all sought support and grief conversations. The length of time after the death of a spouse/partner was not considered in any discussion of the desire to repartner. No information was gathered regarding the working status of widows which may reflect changing attitudes.

Recommendations

The purpose of this study is to encourage continued academic conversations and present avenues for future research about the changing landscape of relationships as adults age, focusing specifically on heterosexual views of repartnering after the death of a spouse or partner. Further studies, designed to enlarge the understanding of the desire to repartner should expand the demographics to include LGBTQ+ relationships as well as all minorities. Additionally, more studies are needed which focus on the issues of men in their widowerhood through the masculine lens, not in opposition to widows. Influences that affect the desire to repartner should be re-evaluated and elaborated on, such as children and even grandchildren, economic status and financial stability. Other studies should extend to a larger, more diverse pool of widows and widowers. Future studies could seek to explore the similarities and differences in older adults who were widowed and those who were divorced in later life. The exploration of gender differences in the desire to repartner may contribute to better understanding of those dealing with these issues, socially and professionally.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CCBY-4.0). View this license’s legal deed at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 and legal code at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode for more information.

References

Bandini, J., & Thompson, E. H., Jr. (2013). “Widowerhood”: Masculinities and spousal loss in the late-1960s. Omega: Journal of Death and Dying, 68(2), 123–141. https://doi.org/10.2190/OM.68.2.c

Bennett, K. (2010). How to achieve resilience as an older widower: Turning points or gradual change? Ageing & Society, 30(3), 369–382. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0144686X09990572

Bennett, K. M. (2007). “No sissy stuff”: Towards a theory of masculinity and emotional expression in older widowed men. Journal of Aging Studies, 21(4), 347–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2007.05.002

Bennett, K. M., Hughes, G. M., & Smith, P. T. (2003). “I think a woman can take it”: Widowed men’s views and experiences of gender differences in bereavement. Ageing International, 28(4), 408–424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12126-003-1012-x

Carr, D. (2004). The desire to date and remarry among older widows and widowers. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 66(4), 1051–1068. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.0022-2445.2004.00078.x

Davidson, K. (2001). Late life widowhood, selfishness and new partnership choices: A gendered perspective. Ageing and Society, 21(3), 297–317. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X01008169

Davidson, K. (2002). Gender differences in new partnership choices and constraints for older widows and widowers. Ageing International, 27(4), 43–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12126-002-1014-0

De Jong Gierveld, J. (2002). The dilemma of repartnering: Considerations of older men and women entering new intimate relationships in later life. Ageing International, 27(4), 61–78. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s12126-002-1015-z

Donnelly, K., Twenge, J. M., Clark, M. A., Shaikh, S. K., Beiler-May, A., & Carter, N. T. (2016). Attitudes toward women’s work and family roles in the United States, 1976–2013. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(1), 41–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0361684315590774

Gillies, J., & Neimeyer, R. A. (2006). Loss, grief, and the search for significance: Toward a model of meaning reconstruction in bereavement. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 19(1), 31–65. https:// doi.org/10.1080/10720530500311182

Hiltz, S. R. (1978). Widowhood: A roleless role. Marriage & Family Review, 1(6), 1–18. https:// www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/widowhoodroleless-role/docview/199556004/ se-2?accountid=103518

Kestin Van Den Hoonaard, D. (2002). Attitudes of older widows and widowers in New Brunswick, Canada towards new partnerships. Ageing International, 27(4), 79–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12126-002-1016-y

Koren, C. (2011). Continuity and discontinuity: The case of second couplehood in old age. The Gerontologist, 51(5), 687–698. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/ gnr018

Koren, C. (2015). Men’s vulnerability–women’s resilience: From widowhood to late-life repartnering. International Psychogeriatrics, 28(5), 719–731. https:// doi.org/10.1017/S1041610215002240

Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2014). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. https:// public.ebookcentral.proquest.com/choice/ publicfullrecord.aspx?p=7106821

Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). 26 CFR § 301.7701-18 – definitions; spouse, husband and wife, husband, wife, marriage Cornell Law School. https:// www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/26/301.7701-18

McWilliams, S., & Barrett, A. E. (2014). Online dating in middle and later life: Gendered expectations and experiences. Journal of Family Issues, 35(3), 411–436. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X12468437

Moorman, S. M., Booth, A., & Fingerman, K. L. (2006). Women’s romantic relationships after widowhood. Journal of Family Issues, 27(9), 1281–1304. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0192513X06289096

Motsoeneng, M. (2021). Remarriage of elderly widows: Widows’ attitude and fear regarding new romantic relationships. Technium Social Sciences Journal, 26, 864–872. https://doi.org/10.47577/tssj.v26i1.5210

Oxford University. (n.d.-a). Domestic Oxford Languages. https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/7972988804

Oxford University. (n.d.-b). Gender Oxford Languages. https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/7030384806

Oxford University. (n.d.-c). Loss Oxford Languages. https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/3364017810

Schneider, D. S., Sledge, P. A., Schuchter, S. R., & Zisook, S. (1996). Dating and remarriage over the first two years of widowhood. Annals of Clinical Psychiatry, 8(2), 51–57. https://doi.org/10.3109/ 10401239609148802

Stevens, N. (2002). Re-engaging: New partnerships in late-life widowhood. Ageing International, 27(4), 27–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12126-002-1013-1

Van Baarsen, B., & Broese Van Groenou, M. I. (2001). Partner loss in later life: Gender differences in coping shortly after bereavement. Journal of Loss & Trauma, 6(3), 243–262. https://doi.org/10.2190/PDUXBE94-M4EL-0PDK

Wu, Z., Schimmele, C. M., & Ouellet, N. (2014). Repartnering after widowhood. The Journals of Gerontology. Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 70(3), 496–507. https://doi.org/10.1093/ geronb/gbu060

Hinson,

Reducing Household Food Waste for a Sustainable Future

Jacinta D. Hinson, MPhil1a , Karen L. Alexander, PhD1b

1 Family and Consumer Sciences Education, Texas Tech University

Keywords: household food waste, sustainability, food management, consumer behavior, family and consumer sciences

Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences

Vol. 117, Issue 1, 2025

Household food waste (HFW) presents a global sustainability challenge, significantly impacting the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Particularly, HFW hampers the progress of SDG 2 (zero hunger) and SDG 12 (responsible consumption and production). With an estimated global annual food waste of 931 million tons, consumers are significant contributors to HFW, influenced by sociodemographic traits and consumption habits. Factors such as excessive production, overbuying, improper planning, and confusion over expiration dates exacerbate HFW across the supply chain. Reducing HFW is essential for addressing hunger, climate change, food security, and resource conservation. Family and Consumer Science (FCS) professionals are identified as key players in addressing HFW through comprehensive education, advocacy, and collaboration. This paper, therefore, proposes practical strategies for FCS professionals to promote effective food purchase planning and enhance food-management skills as sustainable solutions. These strategies, if implemented effectively, can significantly contribute to the UN’s ambitious target of halving global food waste by 2030, enhancing sustainability, and improving overall well-being.

The United Nations designed the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to tackle the world’s most pressing problems: poverty, hunger, and climate change (United Nations, 2015) While SDG 12 attempts to ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns, SDG 2 aspires to end hunger, achieve food security, and promote sustainable agriculture (United Nations, 2015). Food waste has been established as a significant sustainability challenge that hampers attaining these goals (Gustavsson et al., 2011). It is a critical concern worldwide, with an estimated 931 million tons of food wasted yearly, roughly 17% of all food produced (Gustavsson et al., 2011), impacting society, the economy, and the environment (De Los Mozos et al., 2020) Similarly, Thyberg and Tonjes (2016) believe that food waste is a significant contributor to the problems with the global food system. Waste occurs throughout the production process, from farming to distribution to stores and homes of customers (Ang et al., 2021) Also, everyday activities such as eating, cooking, and shopping can result in food waste (Hebrok & Boks, 2017)

According to the United Nations (2015), food waste is “the intentional or unintentional discarding of food that is still edible” (p. 11). The FAO (2015) estimates that nearly 1.6 billion tons of food are thrown away annually by the global population, which accounts for almost one-third of

PHD Student

CFCS

Professor, Famliy and Consumer Sciences Education

the food produced. This amount equals more than 1.3 billion tons annually and could feed more than twice as many hungry people on Earth (World Food Programme [WFP], 2021). In addition, WFP (2021) highlights that food waste significantly influences widespread world hunger. It also contributes to food shortages, famine, and malnutrition (Pérez-Escamilla, 2017).

When food is wasted rather than eaten, the environmental effects of food production and consumption are further compounded (Scherhaufer et al., 2018) For instance, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, 2024b) indicates that, in 2021, food waste emitted 380 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, 6% of all greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. EPA (2024b) highlights that this level of emissions is comparable to driving 84 million cars or providing electricity to 73 million homes. Additionally, the production of this wasted food consumed 22 trillion gallons of freshwater, which is 22% of the nation’s total freshwater usage, matching the combined freshwater consumption of California, New York, and Texas (EPA, 2024a) Moreover, the agricultural land that produced this wasted food represents 16% of all U.S. cropland (EPA, 2024a) De Los Mozos et al. (2020) argue that unnecessary resource use, landfill space-filling, and greenhouse gas emissions caused by food waste all contribute to climate change and

global warming. Researchers estimate that population expansion and rising consumption will increase global demand for food for at least 40 years, leading to the intensified use of natural resources, particularly land, water, and energy (Godfray et al., 2010)

The economic losses are substantial, encompassing production, storage, transportation, and disposal costs. Food waste in the United States represents an annual economic loss of approximately $285 billion, the equivalent of 130 billion meals (ReFED, 2021) In 2021, the United States produced 91 million tons of food waste, representing about 38% of the total 241 million tons of the country’s food supply. This equates to approximately 549 pounds of waste per person annually (Food Waste in America in 2024: Statistics & Facts, 2024) The economic value of this wasted food is estimated at $444 billion, or 2% of the U.S. GDP (Harwood et al., 2023) Of this food waste, only 22% comprised inedible parts, while another 33% was spoiled or discarded due to safety concerns. Consequently, around 45% of the discarded food was still suitable for human consumption (Harwood et al., 2023) This extensive human interference significantly undermines the sustainability and quality of ecosystems (UNEP, 2024) To sustainably ensure enough food to feed the world’s expanding population, it is becoming evident that many adverse environmental effects of food systems must be reduced (Tilman et al., 2001)

There is a growing interest in preventing and recovering food waste, as seen by federal and provincial legislation (Pearson et al., 2013; Platt et al., 2014). Reducing food waste is one of the top concerns for various countries and international organizations (Chinie, 2020) For instance, the United Nations seeks to cut global food waste by half by 2030 (Ang et al., 2021) This effort is essential to reaching the 2nd and 12th SDGs of the United Nations, which call for ending world hunger and promoting responsible consumption and production (Chinie, 2020; FAO, 2019). Reduced food waste and effective waste management can contribute to food security, economic resource conservation, and a reduction in the adverse effects of food waste on waste management systems (Thyberg & Tonjes, 2016) De Los Mozos et al. (2020) assert that donating leftover food while still edible can help alleviate hunger, advance social equality, and provide food security for an expanding population. Similarly, Fatimah et al. (2020) suggest that developing strategies to reduce food waste remains the first step to achieving ambitious sustainability targets instead of focusing on the waste and how it is processed.

In light of the pressing need to reduce food waste, this paper provides Family and Consumer Sciences (FCS) professionals with practical strategies to reduce food waste, thereby contributing to sustainability and achieving the United Nations’ SDGs 2 and 12. Through education, advocacy, and collaboration, FCS professionals can promote food purchase plans and improve food management skills, ultimately minimizing food waste and enhancing the overall well-being of individuals, families, and communities.

Causes of Food Waste

Several reasons, such as excessive production, spoilage, and improper handling and storage, contribute to the problem of food waste (Australian Government Department of Agriculture Water and the Environment, 2022) Based on statistics, household food waste (HFW) accounts for most of the food waste produced globally in industrialized countries (Aggidis et al., 2013). As per a Food Waste Index analysis from the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP, 2021), households account for 61% of all global food waste. Parfitt et al. (2010) add that, globally, up to one-third of the food produced is wasted in households. In the United States, households comprise approximately 43% of all food waste, about 30–40% of the country’s overall food supply (United States Department of Agriculture, 2021). Moreover, numerous studies have shown that HFW is a widespread problem worldwide, with the United Kingdom wasting almost 4.5 million tons of food annually (WRAP, 2021) Again, in Australia, households waste around $10 billion worth of food each year (Australian Government Department of Agriculture Water and the Environment, 2022)

According to the United States Department of Agriculture (2021), consumers are responsible for most food waste, as they discard food even when it is still suitable for human consumption. Aschemann-Witzel et al. (2015) purport that the leading cause of HFW is the tendency of consumers to overbuy food due to improper planning of purchases, which is frequently related to consumers’ ignorance of the food stocks already present at home. The authors added that retailers’ pricing strategies and consumers’ confusion over product expiration dates because most people cannot correctly distinguish between “best before” and “use by” are additional causes of HFW. Halloran et al. (2014) assert that most often when individuals enter a grocery store, they do not have a clear idea of what they intend to purchase; instead, they experience emotions like being moved, shocked, or bewildered by the products displayed on the shelves, and visual cues may solely influence their decision-making.

Other contributing factors include consumers’ sociodemographic traits and consumption habits (Di Talia et al., 2019) Their desire for food variety, large portions, and cultural norms that favor abundance and excess all contribute to this wasteful behavior (Di Talia et al., 2019) Van Geffen et al. (2020) indicate that individuals are already concerned about the issue of food waste. Therefore, Stöckli et al. (2018) suggest that applying various strategies and interventions can facilitate the execution of the intention to decrease food waste, providing critical insights into reducing HFW. Van Geffen et al. (2020) assert that interventions should emphasize raising awareness of food waste reduction and serve people best by offering encouragement or commitment. They add that interventions should also promote goal-seeking by enhancing people’s capacities and opportunities to manage food efficiently. Van Geffen et al. (2020) further state that interventions should assist people in managing food to achieve their other important goals without consuming additional resources while simultaneously preventing food waste.

Practical Strategies and Roles for FCS Professionals

According to the International Federation of Home Economics (IFHE, 2021), households are the bedrock of sustainable societies. Since HFW is the major contributor to global food waste (UNEP, 2021), there is an urgent need to address this issue within households to sustain the environment and society. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, 2024c) has shown that minimizing HFW can combat climate change, improve food security, productivity, and economic efficiency, and conserve energy and other resources. FCS is regarded as the pioneering field of study concentrating on daily life’s economic, social, and ecological elements, including judicious resource usage (IFHE, 2021). The profession aims to enhance and sustainably improve living situations for individuals, families, and communities, recognizing the interconnectedness of all individuals around the globe as it tackles complex environmental and social issues (IFHE, 2021). Worldwide, FCS professionals hold scientific and professional positions. They encourage the growth of new knowledge through research and give families and their communities the tools they need to act responsibly. They exemplify the unified, multi-level perspective essential to attaining Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and encourage beneficial fundamental measures that elevate the quality of life (IFHE, 2021). Therefore, FCS professionals are well-equipped to address the issue of HFW effectively. They can employ various practical strategies closely tied to their educational, advocacy, and collaborative roles.

Educational Initiatives

Cappelletti et al. (2022) believe that educating consumers about more environmentally friendly food storage, preparation, and disposal methods is essential to reduce food waste. FCS professionals can provide education and raise awareness about the consequences of wasteful practices on budgets, health, and the environment (Hebrok & Boks, 2017; Pellegrini et al., 2019) Langen et al. (2015) proposed that a tried-and-true strategy to minimize such waste is to educate consumers through broad awareness campaigns. Launching public awareness campaigns can inform the broader community about the importance of reducing food waste and practical steps to achieve it. By integrating sustainable consumption practices into curricula at all educational levels, from schools to community programs, individuals can develop the necessary knowledge, skills, and behaviors to minimize HFW (Aschemann-Witzel et al., 2015). These educational initiatives can include practical training sessions in meal planning and management techniques based on available ingredients, shopping list creation, and appropriate portion size preparation (Aschemann-Witzel et al., 2015; Manzocco et al., 2016) Likewise, FCS professionals can educate households about proper food storage practices to extend the shelf life of perishable items (Verghese et al., 2015). Individuals should be taught about temperature control, storage containers, and proper handling techniques to prevent food spoilage and waste

(Manzocco et al., 2016) In the same way, enhancing culinary skills and teaching efficient cooking techniques can help reduce HFW (van der Werf et al., 2021) These efforts involve teaching individuals how to interpret food labels, understand expiration dates, repurpose food scraps, and utilize leftovers effectively and creatively with minimal waste (van der Werf et al., 2021) FCS professionals can teach individuals and families how to transform less desirable food into delicious dishes. Educational interventions that modify the environment to facilitate behaviors can empower individuals and families to make informed decisions and take action, leading to reduced food waste (Comber & Thieme, 2013; van Geffen et al., 2020).

Advocacy Roles

FCS professionals can advocate for consumer rights, policies, and initiatives related to food quality and safety that support food waste reduction efforts at the household level and promote sustainable food practices (Pellegrini et al., 2019). FCS’ contribution to developing and implementing policies can involve conducting research and providing evidence-based recommendations to inform policymakers to adopt strategies addressing food waste’s root causes and consequences. They can work with government agencies, non-profit organizations, and other stakeholders to advocate for policy changes, such as improved food labeling regulations, better incentives for food donations, support for composting and recycling programs, and increased transparency in the food supply chain (Hebrok & Boks, 2017; ReFED, 2021) This advocacy effort can create an environment that encourages local and sustainable food systems, considering individual purchasing decisions’ social and environmental implications (Reynolds et al., 2019; Stöckli et al., 2018). Consequently, achieving SDGs 2 and 12 related to zero hunger and sustainable consumption and production can be realized.

Another critical yet often overlooked area for advocacy is supermarket packaging practices. Research highlights that pre-packaged quantities, particularly bulk sizes or fixed portions, frequently fail to align with the needs of smaller households or individual consumers, leading to over-purchasing and food spoilage before consumption (Verghese et al., 2015). While packaging is essential in preserving food and extending shelf life, it can also inadvertently contribute to waste when the quantities offered are too large or inflexible. Supermarkets, driven by perceived value, often push bulk buying, exacerbating waste, especially as demographic trends shift toward smaller households (Verghese et al., 2015) Many consumers struggle with larger packaged goods, such as two-for-one deals or family-sized products, resulting in higher food waste due to purchasing large quantities for perceived savings yet failing to consume them before spoilage. To address this issue, FCS professionals can advocate for more flexible and innovative packaging solutions that are better suited to diverse household needs. Smaller households, in particular, would benefit from more customizable packaging options, such as single-serve portions, subdivided packs, or resealable packs, allowing for better portion control and longer preservation (Williams et

al., 2012) Collaborating with retailers and policymakers, FCS professionals can promote packaging designs and policies that meet consumer demand with sustainability, encouraging retail practices that empower consumers to purchase only what they need, thus reducing waste and promoting responsible consumption patterns as outlined in SDG 12.

Moreover, the economic implications of these innovative packaging solutions cannot be overlooked. While initial costs may seem high, they ultimately provide savings by reducing the quantity of unused food that is subsequently thrown away, presenting a compelling case for change. Research, such as the Champions 12.3 report, demonstrates that investments in reducing food waste, including improved packaging, frequently offer substantial returns, thus compensating for the initial costs and providing significant long-term economic and environmental benefits (Hanson & Mitchell, 2017). Therefore, FCS professionals should champion these sustainable practices and spearhead research into the cost-benefit analyses of such packaging innovations. This research will provide critical insights into these changes’ economic viability and sustainability benefits, supporting a more persuasive advocacy strategy. As FCS professionals, continuous research and collaboration must relentlessly inform our advocacy. We must ensure that our efforts to promote sustainable packaging practices are heard and integrated into industry standards and consumer habits, securing a sustainable future for all. This dedication to advancing sustainable consumption practices will address immediate waste reduction goals and pave the way for long-lasting environmental stewardship and economic efficiency.

Collaboration Efforts

Collaboration plays another critical role in FCS professionals addressing food waste. They can foster partnerships between community organizations, food banks, local businesses such as grocery stores, schools, and government agencies to collectively implement programs that address food waste, promote food security, and promote behavior change and sustainable practices (Soma et al., 2020). These collaborations can lead to the development of educational programs, campaign workshops, community events, and cooking demonstrations focused on reducing food waste (Yamakawa et al., 2017). Again, they can encourage households to redistribute food to those in need by donating excess food, participating in food recovery programs, or engaging in community composting projects (Fan et al., 2022; ReFED, 2024)

By employing these practical strategies and leveraging their roles in education, advocacy, and collaboration, FCS professionals can be instrumental in addressing HFW, promoting sustainability, and enhancing the well-being of individuals, families, and communities.

Recommendations for Future Research

While this paper provides valuable insights into household food waste (HFW) within the United States, it is imperative to recognize that the challenges and solutions related to HFW can vary significantly across different regions worldwide. Therefore, further research is urgently needed to explore and address HFW in other countries. Such studies should identify regional differences by investigating the unique factors contributing to HFW in various cultural, economic, and environmental contexts, which can help tailor more effective global strategies. Additionally, it is crucial to develop culturally relevant interventions that are sensitive and appropriate for different communities, as what works in one country may not be effective in another due to differences in consumption habits, food management practices, and socio-economic conditions. It is also essential to facilitate international collaboration among researchers, policymakers, and practitioners from different countries to share knowledge, best practices, and innovative solutions to enhance the global effort to achieve the United Nations’ SDGs related to food waste. By expanding the scope of research to include diverse geographic regions, FCS professionals can develop a more comprehensive understanding of HFW and create more effective, globally applicable solutions crucial for advancing sustainability, improving food security, and achieving the ambitious target of halving global food waste by 2030.

Conclusion

Household food waste (HFW) poses a significant global sustainability challenge, impeding the achievement of the United Nations’ SDGs 2 and 12. The enormity of HFW, driven by factors such as excessive production, consumer behavior, and improper planning, demands urgent action to address hunger, climate change, food security, and resource conservation. FCS professionals are fundamental in this effort, offering practical strategies through education, advocacy, and collaboration. FCS professionals can foster behaviors that reduce waste by educating consumers on sustainable food management practices. They can raise awareness about the environmental, economic, and social impacts of HFW and provide practical skills in meal planning, food storage, and efficient cooking techniques. Advocacy efforts can influence policies that support food waste reduction, such as improved food labeling and incentives for food donations. Collaborative initiatives can unite community organizations, food banks, businesses, and government agencies to implement comprehensive programs addressing food waste and promoting food security. Reducing HFW is essential for advancing sustainability and achieving the UN’s goal of halving global food waste by 2030. Through their multifaceted roles, FCS professionals are wellequipped to lead this change, significantly contributing to a more sustainable and equitable future.

References

Aggidis, G., Arbon, I., Brown, C., Clarke, C., Earp, J., Fox, T., & Williams, D. (2013). Global food: Waste not want not. Institution of Mechanical Engineers Global Food Report. https://catalogue.unccd.int/1482_IMEGlobal-Food-Report.pdf

Ang, W., Narayanan, S., & Hong, M. (2021). Responsible consumption: Addressing individual food waste behavior. British Food Journal, 123(9), 3245–3263. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-03-2021-0328

Aschemann-Witzel, J., De Hooge, I., Amani, P., BechLarsen, T., & Oostindjer, M. (2015). Consumerrelated food waste: Causes and potential for action. Sustainability, 7(6), 6457–6477. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/su7066457

Australian Government Department of Agriculture Water and the Environment. (2022). Food waste https://www.dcceew.gov.au/environment/protection/ waste/food-waste

Cappelletti, F., Papettia, A., Rossia, M., & Germani, M. (2022). Smart strategies for household food waste management. Procedia Computer Science, 200, 887–895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2022.01.286

Chinie, A. (2020). Challenges for reducing food waste. Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, 14(1), 819–828. https://doi.org/10.2478/ picbe-2020-0078

Comber, R., & Thieme, A. (2013). Designing beyond habit: Opening space for improved recycling and food waste behaviors through persuasion social influence and aversive affect. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 17, 1197–1210. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00779-012-0587-1

De Los Mozos, E. A., Badurdeen, F., & Dossou, P. (2020). Sustainable Consumption by reducing Food Waste: A review of the current state and directions for future research. Procedia Manufacturing, 51, 1791–1798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2020.10.249

Di Talia, E., Simeone, M., & Scarpato, D. (2019). Consumer behaviour types in household food waste. Journal of Cleaner Production, 214, 166–172. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.216

Fan, L., Ellison, B., & Wilson, N. L. W. (2022). What food waste solutions do people support? Journal of Cleaner Production, 330, 129907. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129907

FAO. (2015). Save food: Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction https://www.fao.org/3/i4068e/ i4068e.pdf

FAO. (2019). The State of food and agriculture: Moving forward on food loss and waste reduction. https:// www.fao.org/3/ca6030en/ca6030en.pdf

Fatimah, Y. A., Govindan, K., Murniningsih, R., & Setiawan, A. (2020). Industry 4.0 based sustainable circular economy approach for smart waste management system to achieve sustainable development goals: A case study of Indonesia. Journal of Cleaner Production, 269, 122263. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122263

Food waste in America in 2024: Statistics & Facts (2024). RTS. https://www.rts.com/resources/guides/foodwaste-america/

Godfray, H. C. J., Beddington, J. R., Crute, I. R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J. F., Pretty, J., Robinson, S., Thomas, S. M., & Toulmin, C. (2010). Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science, 327(5967), 812–818. https://doi.org/10.1126/ science.1185383

Gustavsson, J., Cederberg, C., Sonesson, U., van Otterdijk, R., & Meybeck, A. (2011). Global food losses and food waste: Extent causes and prevention. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. http://www.fao.org/3/i2697e/i2697e.pdf

Halloran, A., Clement, J., Kornum, N., Bucatariu, C., & Magid, J. (2014). Addressing food waste reduction in Denmark. Food Policy, 49, 294–301. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.foodpol.2014.09.005

Hanson, C., & Mitchell, P. (2017). The business case for reducing food loss and waste Champions 12.3. https:// champions123.org/publication/business-casereducing-food-loss-and-waste

Harwood, A., Mao, S., Ringland, M., & Zurita, J. (2023). ReFED’s new estimates on food waste in the United States: 2020-2021, trends, and COVID-19 impact. ReFed. https://refed.org/articles/refed-s-newestimates-on-food-waste-in-the-unitedstates-2020-2021-trends-and-covid-19-impact/

Hebrok, M., & Boks, C. (2017). Household food waste: Drivers and potential intervention points for design. An extensive review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 151, 380–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jclepro.2017.03.069

International Federation of Home Economics (IFHE). (2021). Achieving sustainable living for all: A home economics perspective https://www.ifhe.org/ fileadmin/user_upload/UN_statements/ Overview_Home_Economics_and_SDGs_2019.pdf

Langen, N., Göbel, C., & Waskow, F. (2015). The effectiveness of advice and actions in reducing food waste. Waste and Resource Management, 168(2), 72–86. https://doi.org/10.1680/warm.13.00036

Manzocco, L., Alongi, M., Sillani, S., & Nicoli, M. C. (2016). Technological and consumer strategies to tackle food wasting. Food Engineering Reviews, 8, 457–467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12393-016-9149-z Parfitt, J., Barthel, M., & Macnaughton, S. (2010). Food waste within food supply chains: quantification and potential for change to 2050. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences, 365(1554), 3065–3081. https://doi.org/10.1098/ rstb.2010.0126

Pearson, D., Minehan, M., & Wakefield-Rann, R. (2013). Food waste in Australian households: Why does it occur. The Australasian-Pacific Journal of Regional Food Studies, 3(1), 118–132.

Pellegrini, G., Sillani, S., Gregori, M., & Spada, A. (2019). Household food waste reduction: Italian consumers’ analysis for improving food management. British Food Journal, 121(6), 1382–1397. https:// doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-07-2018-0425

Pérez-Escamilla, R. (2017). Food security and the 2015–2030 sustainable development goals: From human to planetary health. Current Developments in Nutrition, 1(7), e000513. https://doi.org/10.3945/ cdn.117.000513

Platt, B., Goldstein, N., Coker, C., & Brown, S. (2014). State of composting in the US (pp. 1–131). Institute for Local Self-Reliance. https://cdn.ilsr.org/wp_ilsr/wpcontent/uploads/2015/07/brendaplatt-2015-composting-presentation.pdf

ReFED. (2021). Food waste solution database https:// refed.org/

ReFED. (2024). Food donation improvement act Federal Policy. https://policyfinder.refed.org/federal-policy/ food-donation-act

Reynolds, C., Goucher, L., Quested, T., Bromley, S., Gillick, S., Wells, V. K., Evans, D., Koh, L., Carlsson Kanyama, A., Katzeff, C., Svenfelt, Å., & Jackson, P. (2019). Review: Consumption-stage food waste reduction interventions – What works and how to design better interventions. Food Policy, 83, 7–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2019.01.009

Scherhaufer, S., Moates, G., Hartikainen, H., Waldron, K., & Obersteiner, G. (2018). Environmental impacts of food waste in Europe. Waste Management, 77, 98–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.wasman.2018.04.038

Soma, T., Li, B., & Maclaren, V. (2020). Food waste reduction: A test of three consumer awareness interventions. Sustainability, 12(3), 907. https:// doi.org/10.3390/su12030907

Stöckli, S., Niklaus, E., & Dorn, M. (2018). Call for testing interventions to prevent consumer food waste. Resources Conservation and Recycling, 136, 445–462. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.resconrec.2018.03.029

Thyberg, K. L., & Tonjes, D. J. (2016). Drivers of food waste and their implications for sustainable policy development. Resources Conservation and Recycling, 106, 110–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.resconrec.2015.11.016

Tilman, D., Fargione, J., Wolff, B., D’Antonio, C., Dobson, A., Howarth, R., Schindler, D., Schlesinger, W.H., Simberloff, D., & Swackhamer, D. (2001). Forecasting agriculturally driven global environmental change. Science, 292(5515), 281–284. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1057544

UNEP. (2021). Food waste index report https:// www.unep.org/resources/report/unep-food-wasteindex-report-2021

UNEP. (2024). Global resources outlook 2024 https:// www.unep.org/resources/Global-ResourceOutlook-2024

United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. https:// sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/ transformingourworld

United States Department of Agriculture. (2021). Food waste FAQs. https://www.usda.gov/foodwaste/faqs United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2024a, January 22). From farm to kitchen: The environmental impacts of U.S. food waste https:// www.epa.gov/land-research/farm-kitchenenvironmental-impacts-us-food-waste

United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2024b, April 11). Inventory of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and sinks https://www.epa.gov/ ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gasemissions-andsinks#:~:text=In%202021%2C%20U.S.%20greenhouse %20gas,sequestration%20from%20the%20land%20se ctor

United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2024c, June 11). United States 2030 food loss and waste reduction goal. https://www.epa.gov/sustainablemanagement-food/united-states-2030-food-lossand-waste-reduction-goal

van der Werf, P., Seabrook, J. A., & Gilliland, J. A. (2021). Reduce food waste, save money: Testing a novel intervention to reduce household food waste. Environment and Behavior, 53(2), 151–183. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0013916519875180

van Geffen, L., van Herpen, E., & van Trijp, H. (2020). Household Food Waste—How to Avoid It? An Integrative Review. In E. Närvänen, N. Mesiranta, M. Mattila, & A. Heikkinen (Eds.), Food waste management. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-030-20561-4_2

Verghese, K., Lewis, H., Lockrey, S., & Williams, H. (2015). Packaging’s Role in Minimizing Food Loss and Waste Across the Supply Chain. Packaging Technology and Science, 28(7), 603–620. https://doi.org/10.1002/ pts.2127

WFP. (2021). The drivers of hunger are not what you think they are https://www.wfpusa.org/explore/wfps-work/ drivers-of-hunger/

Williams, H., Wikström, F., Otterbring, T., Löfgren, M., & Gustafsson, A. (2012). Reasons for household food waste with special attention to packaging. Journal of Cleaner Production, 24(0), 141–148. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.11.044

WRAP. (2021). Food surplus and waste in the UK key facts https://wrap.org.uk/resources/report/foodsurplus-and-waste-uk-key-facts

Yamakawa, H., Williams, I., Shaw, P., & Watanabe, K. (2017, October 2–6). Food waste prevention: Lessons from the love food hate waste campaign in the UK. Proceedings of the 16th International Waste Management and Landfill [Symposium] Italy.

Harmon, J., & Siddika, A. (2025). When Natural Isn’t Sustainable Enough: Consumer Impressions of Biomaterial Bacterial Cellulose and Implications for FCS Educators. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 117(1).

When Natural Isn’t Sustainable Enough: Consumer Impressions of Biomaterial Bacterial Cellulose and

Implications

for FCS Educators

Jennifer Harmon, PhD1a , Ayesha Siddikab

1 Department of Family and Consumer Sciences , University of Wyoming

Keywords: sustainability, textiles, biomaterial, consumer impressions, bacterial cellulose

Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences

Vol. 117, Issue 1, 2025

Consumers are increasingly willing to pay more for sustainably produced goods, yet many find these alternatives too costly and less effective. The fashion industry struggles to balance sustainability and performance, particularly in textiles, where synthetic fibers dominate. Education is key to informed consumer choices, and biomaterials, like bacterial cellulose (BC), offer promise as sustainable textiles. In the survey, consumer impressions of a BC ottoman compared to leather alternatives were explored, revealing that while BC was perceived as natural, it is also seen as less comfortable and mistakenly thought to be the cheapest. This highlights the need for enhanced consumer education and further development of biomaterials to meet performance expectations.

Introduction

Consumers are increasingly aware of the environmental impact of their purchases, with 80% reporting a willingness to pay more for sustainably produced or sourced goods (PwC, 2024) However, over half (53%) of US consumers say that the environmentally friendly alternatives are too expensive or do not work as well as conventional products (37%) (GfK Insights, 2022) Simultaneously, consumers often have difficulty making effective environmental product decisions (Steenis et al., 2017) Marketers also face challenges in persuading consumers to adopt ethical and ecofriendly products, partly due to the widespread availability of low-cost, less sustainable alternatives (Arauzo-Carod et al., 2022)

In our current marketplace, textiles consumers are accustomed to both lower prices and increased performance made possible by synthetic fibers and dyes. While trying to meet the rising demand for sustainable products, the fashion industry faces the challenge of developing textile products which are both sustainable and fashionable. Given the complex, multifaceted nature of sustainability issues, education is vital. Engaging consumers in an educational dialogue around sustainability can provide an effective platform for disseminating knowledge among customers and creating social learning among consumer communities (Valon et al., 2022)

Biomaterials are a promising development towards sustainable and fashionable textiles. Biomaterials are materials derived from, or produced by, biological organisms like plants, animals, bacteria, fungi and other life forms (Penn

State, 2020) Bacterial cellulose (BC) is a biomaterial extruded by certain types of bacteria as a by-product of fermentation, often in static conditions. This means no arable land or additional production water is required to produce BC.

Furthermore, BC is also highly biodegradable and needs less extensive processing than is common for other cellulose materials (Iguchi et al., 2000) Acetobacter xylinus BC bacteria is gram-negative, bacillus, acetic-acid bacterium that thrives in aerobic conditions (Cai & Kim, 2010; Iguchi et al., 2000) Of all cellulose producing acetic-acid organisms, Gluconacetobacter strains have received the most attention due to their comparatively high cellulose production capability (El-Saied et al., 2004). BC and plant cellulose are chemically equivalent, however, BC has a substantially greater surface area due to the material’s nano-scale fibers (Wang et al., 2019)

The unique properties of bacterial cellulose (BC), like its mechanical strength, porosity, and biocompatibility, make it an attractive biomaterial for medical and textile applications (Chan et al., 2017; Sandhu et al., 2019) Currently, BC is used in a number of specialty products, such as high-end acoustic items, medical wound dressings and tissue scaffolds (Hu et al., 2014; Lee et al., 2013), but challenges persist in finding an appropriate product for the mass market. For textiles, BC has been explored for its potential in producing a sustainable alternative to traditional fabrics, eco-friendly materials and zero-waste design (Chan et al., 2017)

The hand, or feel, of BC can be modified in a number of ways including chemical and mechanical alterations, in ad-

dition to adjusting cultivation and drying conditions (Harmon et al., 2020; Hu et al., 2014; Lee et al., 2013). Fernandes et al. (2019) developed a bacterial cellulose bio composite with acrylated epoxidized soybean oil to investigate potential applications of this material as a replacement for leather. The material they created was hydrophobic and performed satisfactorily in terms of strength and flexibility but consumer impressions were not measured (Fernandes et al., 2019).

While bacterial cellulose (BC) shows promise as a biomaterial, understanding consumer acceptance is limited due to the lack of attention given to this area. Without further exploration, it is challenging to provide opinions or guidance for future product development or determine whether the natural and sustainable properties of this cellulose will provide sufficient consumer value to drive its adoption.

Consumer Impressions

As Krishnaraj et al. (2022) described, consumer beliefs, feelings and behaviors influence resulting attitudes towards any object and these elements are highly interdependent. Beginning in the 1990s, ethical consumerism wherein consumers emphasize environmental and social issues of consumption, began to gain traction (Sudbury-Riley & Kohlbacher, 2016). In textiles consumption, the perceived availability of money affects sustainable consumption (Chang & Watchravesringkan, 2018). Although BC is welldocumented as a sustainable biomaterial, consumer impressions of it remain underexplored.

To gather consumer impressions for a BC textile used in a consumer good, BC was cultivated and applied to an interior ottonman. Using BC strain ATCC 53524, bacteria were grown in Hestrin-Schramm agar and media with mannitol (Harmon et al., 2020). The media consisted of glucose (4%), peptone (0.5%), yeast extract (0.5%), disodium phosphate (0.27%), citric acid (0.115%), and mannitol (4%) mixed with deionized water. Bacteria were transferred into the containers filled with sterilized media to grow for 21 days at 32°C. After incubation, the BC mats were disinfected with a 1% NaOH soak for 24 hours at room temperature. Subsequently, the mats were treated with a 4% glycerol, 1% germaben solution at room temperature for 24 hours. This process was repeated and finally, the mats were treated with a 10% commercial bleach and deionized water solution, rinsed and then soaked in a glycerol and germaben 24-hour soak.

ASTM Standard D-123 hand descriptors were used with a 7-point semantic differential to evaluate consumer perception of hand. Fabric sensibility and preference were based on modified versions used by Ju, Jin and Cho (2016). Participants were given information about each material type and the estimated product cost for the ottoman made from it from which they ranked their interest in the ottomans. After evaluating the ottomans, participants answered demographic questions, the ethically minded consumer behavior scale (Sudbury-Riley & Kohlbacher, 2016) and environmental concern and eco-friendly scales (Abdul‐Muhmin, 2007; Gam, 2011)

After harvesting the material, 3 white ottomans, a BC, imitation leather and traditional leather, were constructed measuring 15 ½ inches in length, 9 ¼ inches in height and 11 ½ inches in depth. Estimated material cost for the ottomans was $199.99 for the BC, $99.99 for the traditional leather and $29.99 for the imitation leather. Thirty-eight participants were asked to evaluate the three ottomans in a university textile science lab so that materials could be assessed under industry standard conditions. Participants ranged in age from 18 to 63 (M=28.61), thirteen participants identified as male, 24 as female, and one preferred not to disclose their gender. Only 4 of the 38 participants replied they identified as vegetarian or vegan.

The BC ottoman was ranked as more natural than both the imitation leather and traditional leather ottomans. However, the BC ottoman was also perceived (ASTM Standard D-123) as a less comfortable material, as well as stiffer and rougher than the other materials evaluated. Interestingly, the BC material was perceived (Ju et al., 2016) to cost the least when it would, in fact, cost the most of all three materials. The hand test rankings revealed that consumers associated artificiality with lower cost when it came to the imitation leather material. But surprisingly, the inverse relationship, in which a fiber perceived as more natural would also be perceived as more expensive, was not observed in the hand evaluation for the bacterial cellulose.

Ottoman Hand Evaluation

Sixteen participants ranked the bacterial cellulose ottoman as their first or second choice out of the three ottomans. Interestingly, only one of the four vegan participants ranked the bacterial cellulose ottoman as their first or second choice. Of the 16 BC preferring consumers, 4 were college majors in various textiles specializations compared to 0 in the comparison group.

FCS Implications

Natural fibers and biomaterials often struggle to meet the performance expectations of modern consumers due to their inherent chemical limitations. In this survey, con-

Figure 1. Ottomans. Top- BC, bottom left- traditional leather, bottom right- intimation leather

Descriptor

sumers viewed bacterial cellulose as the most natural fiber but also perceived it to be the least expensive. General ethical behavior and environmental concern had minimal influence on sustainable material preferences. Only environmental concern related to apparel production specifically displayed an influence of consumer preference. The trends, together with the difficulty consumers find in deciphering sustainable product claims, illustrate the need for more investment in biomaterial product development and call for more effective consumer education about sustainable textile products.

While BC presents promising possibilities, future research could explore plant-based biomaterials as additional sustainable options. Materials such as plant based cellulose or algae-derived fibers might offer similar or improved mechanical properties while potentially addressing consumer concerns related to comfort, performance, and cost. Investigating plant-based alternatives could also provide more sustainable, scalable solutions for the textile industry, particularly for those seeking fibers that align more closely with consumer expectations of natural materials. Furthermore, expanding research on hybrid biomaterials with combinations of bacterial cellulose and synthetic fibers components, could present new opportunities to overcome performance limitations. Such combinations could offer a balance between sustainability and functionality, allowing product developers to better meet consumer demands for both eco-friendly and high-performing textiles.

As sustainability gains significance, the pressure to produce scalable, high-performance, and affordable sustainable alternatives is intensifying. Simultaneously, it is paramount for future product developers to make sustainable

consumption more approachable by further developing the performance capabilities and providing incentives for the adoption of bio-materials. To meet this challenge, future research should focus on identifying and refining a wide array of sustainable materials, including plant-based alternatives, protein-based fibers, and recycled textiles. Innovations in material science will be key to offering alternatives that can satisfy the growing demand for environmentally friendly products without sacrificing functionality or affordability.

Educational programs in Family and Consumer Sciences (FCS) play a crucial role in preparing future professionals to address these sustainability challenges. By integrating the latest research on sustainable materials into curricula, FCS educators can empower students to innovate and contribute to the development of textiles that balance environmental impact with consumer needs. Additionally, educators can emphasize sustainability as a foundational concern that will continue to shape the marketplace and drive product development. FCS professionals, especially textiles educators within FCS, can further the success of sustainability initiatives for textiles by developing educational materials focusing on the long term consequence of unsustainable consumption (Thompson et al., 2012). 4 of the 16 respondents who preferred the BC ottoman were students majoring in a textile-related field, highlighting the impact of education on environmental concerns related to apparel production. Further curriculum focusing on the energy, water, land, and waste saved by adopting biomaterials would better illustrate their value proposition of BC material. FCS educators could also partner with industry in order to facilitate co-creation of sustainable knowledge and value system

between brands and their consumers (Valon et al., 2022) Consumer education is mounting need for demonstrating the value added proposition provided by biomaterials and eco-friendly textiles.

Acknowledgment

This project was possible with a University of Wyoming AES; NIFA grant, as well as a University of Wyoming Department of Family and Consumer Sciences Research Request

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CCBY-4.0). View this license’s legal deed at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 and legal code at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode for more information.

References

Abdul‐Muhmin, A. G. (2007). Explaining consumers’ willingness to be environmentally friendly. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31(3), 237–247. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1470-6431.2006.00528.x

Arauzo-Carod, J., Kostakis, I., & Tsagarakis, K. P. (2022). Policies for supporting the regional circular economy and sustainability. The Annals of Regional Science, 68(2), 255–262. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00168-022-01124-y

Cai, Z., & Kim, J. (2010). Bacterial cellulose/poly (ethylene glycol) composite: characterization and first evaluation of biocompatibility. Cellulose, 17(1), 83–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-009-9362-5

Chan, C. K., Shin, J., & Jiang, S. K. (2017). Development of tailor-shaped bacterial cellulose textile cultivation techniques for zero-waste design. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 36(1), 33–44. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0887302x17737177

Chang, H. J., & Watchravesringkan, K. T. (2018). Who are sustainably minded apparel shoppers? An investigation to the influencing factors of sustainable apparel consumption. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 46(2), 148–162. https:// doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-10-2016-0176

El-Saied, H., Basta, A. H., & Gobran, R. H. (2004). Research progress in friendly environmental technology for the production of cellulose products (bacterial cellulose and its application). PolymerPlastics Technology and Engineering, 43(3), 797–820. https://doi.org/10.1081/PPT-120038065

Fernandes, M., Souto, A., Gama, M., & Dourado, F. (2019). Bacterial cellulose and emulsified AESO biocomposites as an ecological alternative to leather. Nanomaterials, 9(12), 1710. https://doi.org/10.3390/ nano9121710

Gam, H. J. (2011). Are fashion-conscious consumers more likely to adopt eco-friendly clothing? Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 15(2), 178–193. GfK Insights. (2022, December 10). US consumers question cost, effectiveness of sustainable products https://nielseniq.com/global/en/news-center/2022/ us-consumers-question-cost-effectiveness-ofsustainable-products-gfk-consumer-life/ Harmon, J., Fairbourn, F., & Thibault, N. (2020). Exploring the potential of bacterial cellulose for use in apparel. Journal of Textile Science and Fashion Technology, 5(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.33552/ JTSFT.2020.05.000606

Hu, W., Chen, S., Yang, J., Li, Z., & Wang, H. (2014). Functionalized bacterial cellulose derivatives and nanocomposites. Carbohydrate Polymers, 101, 1043–1060. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.carbpol.2013.09.102

Iguchi, M., Yamanaka, S., & Budhiono, A. (2000). Bacterial cellulose—a masterpiece of nature’s arts. Journal of Materials Science, 35(2), 261–270. https:// doi.org/10.1023/A:1004775229149

Ju, J., Jin, B., & Cho, H. (2016). US consumers’ subjective hand, sensibility, and preference for textile products made of bast fiber. The Journal of The Textile Institute, 107(12), 1554–1564. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00405000.2015.1129780

Krishnaraj, G., Elangovan, N., & Prakash, C. (2022). Factors influencing consumer purchasing behaviour towards purchase of palm leaf craft. Journal of Natural Fibers, 19, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 15440478.2022.2029664

Lee, K., Buldum, G., Mantalaris, A., & Bismarck, A. (2013). More than meets the eye in bacterial cellulose: Biosynthesis, bioprocessing, and applications in advanced fiber composites. Macromolecular Bioscience, 14(1), 10–32. https:// doi.org/10.1002/mabi.201300298

Penn State. (2020). What is a biomaterial? https:// aese.psu.edu/teachag/curriculum/modules/ biomaterials/what-is-a-biomaterial

PwC. (2024). PwC 2024 voice of the consumer survey https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/news-room/pressreleases/2024/pwc-2024-voice-of-consumersurvey.html

Sandhu, S., Arpa, A., Chen, X., Kumar, R., & Jaworski, J. (2019). Engineering bacterial cellulose for diverse biomedical applications. Recent Progress in Materials, 1(4), 1–1. https://doi.org/10.21926/rpm.1904006

Steenis, N. D., Van Herpen, E., Van Der Lans, I. A., Ligthart, T. N., & Van Trijp, H. C. (2017). Consumer response to packaging design: The role of packaging materials and graphics in sustainability perceptions and product evaluations. Journal of Cleaner Production, 162, 286–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jclepro.2017.06.036

Sudbury-Riley, L., & Kohlbacher, F. (2016). Ethically minded consumer behavior: Scale review, development, and validation. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 2697–2710. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jbusres.2015.11.005

Thompson, N. E., Harden, A. J., Clauss, B., Fox, W. S., & Wild, P. (2012). Key Concepts of Environmental Sustainability in Family and Consumer Sciences. Journal of Family & Consumer Sciences, 104(1), 14–21.

Valon, T. D., Cegarra-Navarro, J. G., García-Pérez, A., & Martínez-Martínez, A. (2022). Co-creating sustainable competitiveness in an unpredictable business reality. Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, 16(1), 47–58. https://doi.org/10.2478/picbe-2022-0007

Wang, J., Tavakoli, J., & Tang, Y. (2019). Bacterial cellulose production, properties and applications with different culture methods – A review. Carbohydrate Polymers, 219, 63–76. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.carbpol.2019.05.008

Smith, E.,

The Influence of Culinary Interventions on Eating Habits in a Post-Secondary Educational Environment. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 117(1).

The Influence of Culinary Interventions on Eating Habits in a PostSecondary Educational Environment

Elizabeth

Smith, PhD1a ,

Domanique Richard

2b ,

Garvita Thareja3 , Erik Dempsey

1c ,

Christina Tayler Byrd

4d

1 Middle Tennessee State University, 2 Health Professions, North Carolina Central University, 3 Health Professions, Metropolitan State University of Denver, 4 MTSU Center for Health and Human Services, Middle Tennessee State University

Keywords: healthy eating, cooking classes, college students, healthy choices, nutrition education

Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences

Vol. 117, Issue 1, 2025

Often, students entering college find themselves in a transitional phase, gaining new independence and responsibilities, including purchasing food and beverages and making decisions that may not have been necessary before. Blue Raiders Drink Up (BRDU) is a grant-funded program by the Tennessee Department of Health, under the Project Diabetes Initiative. This program strives to help Middle Tennessee State University (MTSU) students make healthier food and beverage decisions. Students at MTSU were invited to participate in a four-part series cooking class led by a registered dietitian. Students learned various cooking basics to make simple, budget-friendly, healthy meals. Students were also instructed on meal planning strategies and grocery shopping skills (i.e., reading and translating nutrition labels and shopping on a budget). Data were collected over three years using a pretest/posttest design to assess changes in knowledge and behavior toward food and beverages. Participants could attend optimal subsequent health coaching sessions with a certified health coach or registered dietitian. In total, 229 students completed the pretest/posttest assessment. Significant improvement was noted in knowledge level, kitchen safety and familiarity, and meal-planning/grocery shopping skills. Although college students may enter the university with previous cooking and nutrition knowledge obtained from secondary-level FCS classes or their home environments, the number of education hours necessary to evoke behavior change may not be sufficient to lead to long-lasting changes. In addition, students are frequently living independently and purchasing their food for the first time. These challenges may explain why some of the measured behaviors did not result in the desired changes and outcomes. The BRDU classes were successful in significantly improving self-reported knowledge and increased intention to practice food preparation and shopping skills learned in this course leading to healthier food choices, such as consuming more fruits and vegetables.

A deficit of cooking skills (de-skilling) among college students and young adults is a growing concern as convenience foods and dining out become more prevalent (Rowat et al., 2019) Many young adults lack basic culinary skills, which were often not adequately addressed at the secondary school level due to a decrease in the offering of family and consumer science courses or a lack of skills taught by families in their home environments (Lavelle et al., 2016; Muzaffar et al., 2018; Policastro et al., 2023)

Even when FCS courses are offered at the secondary level, including enough hours of nutrition education to achieve meaningful changes in dietary behaviors may be of

concern. Forty to fifty hours of instruction may be necessary to effect significant behavioral changes (Contento & Sharp, 2016). Contento and Sharp’s (2016) findings underscore the importance of committing sufficient instructional time to foster substantial improvements in students’ dietary practices. The change in first-time independent living and purchasing one’s own foods may also contribute to additional educational needs. Without basic cooking and nutritional knowledge, many students may rely on fast food or pre-packaged meals, sugar-sweetened beverages (Bawadi et al., 2019; Lee et al., 2023; Malik & Hu, 2022), and alcohol (Robinson et al., 2021), leading to poor dietary habits and

a b c d

Associate Professor and Dietetic Internship Director

Dietetic Intern and graduate student

Graduate Student

Senior Program Coordinator

Richard, D., Thareja, G., Dempsey, E., & Tayler Byrd, C. (2025).

potential health issues. Research has shown that students with cooking skills are more likely to consume fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, and less likely to consume highfat, high-sugar foods (Lichtenstein et al., 2015). By acquiring these skills in high school, students can carry healthy habits, encompassing physical, mental, and emotional well-being, into their university years, which is crucial for their overall health (Oleribe et al., 2018)

Moreover, FCS courses also teach students about budgeting and meal planning, skills that are indispensable for university life (Caraher et al., 2019). Many students face financial constraints while in college, and knowing how to prepare cost-effective meals can alleviate some of the financial pressure. This knowledge helps students manage their finances better and reduces their reliance on unhealthy, expensive dining options. According to Caraher et al. (2019), students who can cook are more likely to save money and less likely to experience food insecurity, a growing issue on college campuses.

Cooking classes aim to mitigate and reverse the trend of de-skilling (Rowat et al., 2019) Students may enter the university setting without the knowledge and skills needed to purchase, plan, and prepare their foods and meals. Studies have shown that students choose more processed and fast foods but fewer fruits, vegetables, nuts, or seeds (Slater et al., 2018) This trend is exacerbated by busy lifestyles, limited kitchen access in some college settings, and a need for more emphasis on cooking education (Slater et al., 2018) As a result, young adults may miss out on the benefits of home-cooked meals, which are declining in the U.S. (Rowat et al., 2019; Smith et al., 2013), which may include better nutrition, cost savings, and the satisfaction of preparing food themselves.

It is concerning that university students are more likely to exhibit lower levels of food literacy, which includes food preparation, than those who did not attend university (Zareimanesh & Namdar, 2022), so there is a need to address this issue in university education, especially since incoming university students are likely to be unfamiliar with such skills (Ronto et al., 2016) One reason for this difference between university students and those who do not attend university is that those with higher educational levels are less likely to eat at home (Zeballos & Restrepo, 2018), which is associated with lower food literacy (Zareimanesh & Namdar, 2022). Ronto et al. (2016) and Zareimanesh and Namdar (2022) suggest discrepancies in both informal education (in the home) and formal education (e.g., lack of family and consumer science courses in high schools). It is also suggested that informal learning is more effective for food literacy (Zareimanesh & Namdar, 2022). However, this is complicated by the trend of low skill levels among adults (Rowat et al., 2021). Therefore, universities may be positioned to fill the educational gap by providing novel food literacy education interventions. Targeting university education is not meant to exclude or diminish food literacy interventions in K-12 education; rather, it recognizes a critical life stage toward increased independence and the need for informed decision-making. For others in this life stage who do not attend university, the university setting re-

mains a starting point for outreach, such as Cooperative Extension education and community nutrition students offering education to the greater community (Lawlis et al., 2019).

Some studies suggest that university students involved in hands-on cooking classes have better healthy food choice/consumption outcomes due to knowing how to prepare healthier food choices (Alpaugh et al., 2020; Reicks et al., 2014). The “Blue Raiders Drink Up” (BRDU) program at Middle Tennessee State University works with the Tennessee Department of Health Project Diabetes initiative to reduce poor eating and beverage choices and minimize the prevalence of obesity-related diseases. The prevalence of obesity and obesity-related diseases, such as diabetes, is on the rise in the U.S., especially among college students (Obesity Medicine Association, 2022) Many factors contribute to obesity and other chronic diseases where nutrition may be a contributing factor in university students, including stress, lack of activity, and poor food and drink choices (da Costa Pelonha et al., 2023; Ozberak, 2010).

This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the BRDU in improving eating and drinking choices among university students. By examining the outcomes of the program’s cooking classes, this research aims to determine whether hands-on food and nutrition education can improve dietary habits, potentially leading to decreases in the incidence of nutrition and health-related issues in the college student population. The research question for this study is: How effective is the BRDU cooking classes in improving dietary habits and decisions on food and beverage purchases and intake among university students?

Methods

Over three years, Blue Raiders Drink Up conducted four in-person and nine online cooking class series for MTSU students. The classes were taught by a registered dietitian and are modeled after the Cooking Matters initiative, developed by the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance ProgramEducation Program (SNAP-Ed), which assists low-income individuals and families in making healthy and affordable food choices. The theoretical framework of the SNAP-Ed Cooking Matters program is rooted in the Social Cognitive Theory. The Social Cognitive Theory emphasizes the role of observational learning, social interactions, and self-efficacy in behavior change (Gordillo & Prescott, 2023). These factors are pivotal in teaching college student participants to adopt healthier eating habits through cooking, grocery shopping, and nutrition education. By demonstrating practical skills and providing hands-on experience, the program enhances students’ confidence in preparing nutritious, or nutrient dense meals (Bucher et al., 2017)

Each class covered weekly topics such as basic nutrition information, beverage consumption education, knife skills, food safety, cooking principles, meal prepping, and a grocery store tour. The cooking classes were held each Wednesday evening for four weeks straight. The term ‘series’ means the four-week period in which the classes are held. Students were given weekly incentive items, such as cooking supplies, to take home. This ensured the students

had the supplies to practice cooking at home and motivated them to return for the next session. If the students came to three of the four classes in the series, they were rewarded with a $100 Amazon or Kroger grocery card.

Participants

Individuals enrolled in the cooking class were current MTSU students. Students had to meet no other criteria to participate in the series. Participant’s ages ranged from 18-35 years of age. The total sample size of the in-person cooking class could be, at most, 25 due to safety precautions and spatial limitations in the food lab. The online cooking classes could accommodate up to 30 students. While each class varied, the attrition rate for those enrolled in the four-week cooking class series was 10.7% (n = 39). Specifically, the attrition rate of the in-person cooking classes was 7.3%, and that of the online classes was 12.3%.

Setting and Materials

Four of the thirteen series were held in person, in a group-style setting, in the MTSU food lab. Students would begin the lesson sitting at three large tables while they were introduced to the topics for that session. To assess the participants’ knowledge and behavioral changes, they would begin by taking a weekly knowledge check. If this was the first or final session, they would complete a pre or posttest. Students who did not complete the posttest assessment were presumed to have dropped the class, and their data were excluded from the final analysis. Next, they would be split into five even groups and designated to a specific kitchen space to create their assigned recipes with assistance from the dietitian and experienced dietetics students.

The nine remaining courses were switched to an online learning platform called D2L due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The students still received the same curriculum as if they were in person, and specific goals were set for each week. For instance, they would create the same recipes at home and post pictures of what they made for credit. During this time, the Blue Raiders Drink Up team would pack boxes of the items needed to recreate the assigned recipes and mail them to the participant’s house.

The grocery store tour was the only difference between the online and in-person format. To get a similar experience, the registered dietitian devoted the third session of the online class to nutrition label education, creating a ‘scavenger hunt’ locating healthy snacks on a budget and asking the participants to review videos of a grocery store tour utilizing Arizona State University’s campus health team’s materials.

Procedures

Cooking class participants were recruited via flyers posted on campus and social media. MTSU professors, organizations, and departments helped recruiters by sharing flyers at on-campus events and in their classes. Some professors offered extra credit for attending the cooking

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics

classes. Lastly, word of mouth by peers played an instrumental role in recruitment.

These data were not collected as part of a research study. Instead, they were collected for grant evaluation and reported only to the funder. The MTSU compliance officer informed the program coordinator that an IRB was unnecessary. This analysis is conducted under an IRB utilizing pre-existing data. The protocol number is IRB-FY2024-208.

Results

All data from the Blue Raiders Drink Up 2019-2022 cooking classes were compiled and analyzed. Initially, 268 students responded to the pretest survey; however, there were dropouts (n = 39) in the posttest survey—229 participants completed the pretest and posttest evaluations. Table 1 shows demographics.

As a result of the cooking series, several positive findings emerged between the pretest and posttest evaluations. Students were asked to rate their feelings about cooking and their cooking skills on a scale of 1-10. Both responses indicated that students felt significantly more positive (alpha < .05, two-tailed) following the class series. Significant positive findings were also shown for “How many times a week do you cook at home?” More students started comparing food prices after the series, looking at nutritional labels before purchasing food items, choosing to eat healthy more often, making meals using raw ingredients or from scratch (Lavelle et al., 2016), consuming more produce, and choosing low-fat, low-sodium, or non-dairy products when grocery shopping. Furthermore, students began planning their meals ahead of time and started to consistently develop and take grocery lists with them to the store.

Conversely, the posttest results indicated an increase in students’ concerns about not having enough money for food and a rise in the frequency of purchasing sodas or juice when grocery shopping. Additionally, students reported having less time to cook, feeling that cooking is too much work, and needing more proper cooking equipment at home. Furthermore, the number of times students ate fast

Table 2. Results from paired T-tests

I compare the prices when buying food items.

I usually plan my meals ahead of time.

I develop a grocery list and take it with me to the store.

I am sometimes worried that I will not have enough money for food.

I try to look at the nutritional labels before purchasing a food item.

How often do you choose to eat healthy?

I usually make meals from scratch using basic, whole ingredients.

In an average week, I consume multiple fruits and vegetables.

When grocery shopping, I usually pick low-fat, low-sodium, or non-dairy products.

When grocery shopping, I buy soda or juice.

I don’t have enough time to cook.

Cooking is too much work.

I don’t have the proper equipment to cook at home.

On a scale of 1-10, how do you feel about cooking?

On a scale of 1-10, rate your cooking skills.

How many times a week do you cook at home?

How many times a week do you eat fast food or dine out?

Do you meal prep for a busy week ahead?

food or dined out each week increased after the sessions. Results from t-tests are shown in Table 2

Discussion

Posttest results showed significant improvement in selfreported at-home meal preparation and decision-making while shopping for food. Although many of the results showed significant and positive trends, a few response questions reported differing results. It is postulated that these results may be due to various reasons including, but not limited to, students being tired, busy, and overwhelmed while studying for exams near the end of the semester. Responses showing a decline in behaviors following the series included eating out or at fast food restaurants more frequently, not having the proper cooking equipment, inadequate cooking time, or cooking being too much work. Students also responded that they worried they would not have enough money for food and purchased more juice or soda. These trends may have occurred due to the timing of the post-class survey. Students may need more resources, including time and money, near the end of the semester. Students may also have realized post-series that eating healthy could cost more if fresh produce was purchased. It is suggested that one reason for the lack of reported improvements in these behaviors may be the limited educational and skill-building hours included in the BRDU class series. According to Contento and Sharp (2016), a minimum of

40-50 hours of instruction are necessary to see changes in behavior. In contrast, the BRDU class series provided eight hours of instruction over four weeks. BRDU provided optional health coaching or registered dietitian sessions as a method of increasing skill-building hours. Additionally, Middle Tennessee State University encourages students to enroll in food science and food literacy courses to further develop and master these skills in the future. BRDU has hosted several cooking class series to further nutritional education. While no definitive link between home-cooked meals and a healthier lifestyle has been discovered, one cohort study from the U.K. found that:

In accordance with our hypothesis, a higher frequency of consuming home-cooked main meals was significantly associated with indicators of a healthier diet, namely Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) score, Mediterranean Diet Score (MDS), plasma vitamin C, fruit intake and vegetable intake. Similarly, eating home-cooked meals more frequently was significantly associated with several markers of cardio-metabolic health, including a lower likelihood of having an overweight BMI and a lower likelihood of excess percentage body fat. (Mills et al., 2017, p. 7).

The BRDU cooking classes emphasize the importance of food skills among college students. A critical consideration that may be noticed is why these college students frequently need to gain these skills in the first place. This gap

in food literacy can often be traced back to a lack of early education in cooking and nutrition in family homes, which underscores the importance of introducing these FCS skills during secondary education (Rowat et al., 2019). Specifically, incorporating Family and Consumer Sciences (FCS) courses into high school curricula is a proactive solution that could address this deficiency before students enter college.

College students are extremely busy, often trying to balance their educational, professional, and personal lives (Ozberak, 2010). In addition to demanding schedules, challenges such as a lack of financial resources, knowledge of how to prepare a meal, and a lack of facilities to do so further complicate this situation (Soederberg Miller et al., 2023) Most are left to choose from whatever options are provided on and around campus, which on many college campuses include fast food options via student meal plans. Research indicates that even when healthier options are available, some students opt for the less healthy option (Racine et al., 2022). Fast-food menu choices often lead to consuming generous portions and things like fried foods, burgers, or sugary beverages (Mohammadbeigi, 2018). The fact that students are typically young adults and may not consciously focus on their health can be an issue which leads to a continuous cycle of picking items that may be perceived as better tasting. This trend may continue into adulthood when they make more money (Roy et al., 2019).

Understanding that college students often operate on a fixed or minimal income can help educators focus on nutrition education rooted in the fiscal limitations many students face (Lacaille et al., 2011) Furthermore, the limited resources and cooking facilities available to many students create an environment ripe for snacking on ultra-processed foods (Soederberg Miller et al., 2023). Teaching students how to prepare healthy foods using limited resources should be a top priority at the secondary and university levels.

Limitations

BRDU project limitations were noted. All measures collected were self-reported. For example, future projects that collect actual behavioral change measures, such as weight changes or photos of meals prepared or prepped, could demonstrate more concrete outcomes. Not all participants

completed the classes and did not complete the post-evaluation. Examining project attrition rates and the reason for the attrition would be beneficial as data continues to be examined and analyzed.

The length of the BRDU series was four sessions. The short time span could have hindered behavior changes. Finally, the in-person to online switch of format due to the Covid -19 shutdown may have added to the challenges of data collection.

In the future, follow-up with participants could provide an opportunity to encourage and motivate students to further enhance their knowledge and skills by utilizing university-offered general education courses and free sessions with health coaches and registered dietitians. These resources are frequently overlooked, as many students are unaware of these valuable university benefits.

Conclusion

There is evidence that nutrition education can substantially impact the quality of diet. The success of BRDU in improving students’ knowledge of nutrition basics, from the checkout line to consumption, highlights the need for more research and resources to be devoted to nutrition education.

Teaching the basics of nutrition and cooking skills is essential. However, a multi-faceted approach, with nutrition education beginning at the secondary school level, may significantly impact this unique college student population. Programs that incorporate teaching best practices for accountability and mitigation of issues such as food insecurity may lead to the most significant opportunity for success. The inclusion of meal prepping, learning to stretch one’s food dollars, and knowledge of available community and university resources may be essential factors to include in all future BRDU series. For example, students often need more kitchen equipment and tools to prepare meals. Combating unhealthy eating on a national scale requires better choices at the local level, which begins with programs like BRDU.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CCBY-4.0). View this license’s legal deed at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 and legal code at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode for more information.

References

Alpaugh, M., Pope, L., Trubek, A., Skelly, J., & Harvey, J. (2020). Cooking as a health behavior: Examining the role of cooking classes in a weight loss intervention. Nutrients, 12(12), 3669. https://doi.org/10.3390/ nu12123669

Bawadi, H., Khataybeh, T., Obeidat, B., Kerkadi, A., Tayyem, R., Banks, A. D., & Subih, H. (2019). Sugarsweetened beverages contribute significantly to college students’ daily caloric intake in Jordan: Soft drinks are not the major contributor. Nutrients, 11(5), 1058. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11051058

Bucher, T., Hartmann, C., Rollo, M. E., & Collins, C. E. (2017). What Is Nutritious Snack Food? A Comparison of Expert and Layperson Assessments. Nutrients, 9(8), 874. https://doi.org/10.3390/ nu9080874

Caraher, M., Seeley, A., Wu, M., & Lloyd, S. (2019). Food affordability, access and security: A practical focus. Public Health Nutrition, 22(1), 205–214.

Contento, I. R., & Sharp, D. (2016). The role of nutrition education in improving dietary behavior: Evidence and recommendations. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 48(5), 317–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jneb.2016.04.001

da Costa Pelonha, R. N., Jomori, M. M., Maciel, T. G., Rocha, J. A. D., Passos, T. S., & Maciel, B. L. L. (2023). Low cooking skills are associated with overweight and obesity in undergraduates. Nutrients, 15(11), 2424. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu15112424

Gordillo, P., & Prescott, M. P. (2023). Assessing the Use of Social Cognitive Theory Components in Cooking and Food Skills Interventions. Nutrients, 15(5), 1287. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu15051287

Lacaille, L. J., Dauner, K. N., Krambeer, R. J., & Pedersen, J. (2011). Psychosocial and environmental determinants of eating behaviors, physical activity, and weight change among college students: A qualitative analysis. Journal of American College Health, 59(6), 531–538. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 07448481.2010.523855

Lavelle, F., Spence, M., Hollywood, L., McGowan, L., Surgenor, D., McCloat, A., Mooney, E., Caraher, M., Raats, M., & Dean, M. (2016). Learning cooking skills at different ages: A cross-sectional study. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 13(1), 119. https://doi.org/10.1186/ s12966-016-0446-y

Lawlis, T., Sambell, R., Douglas-Watson, A., Belton, S., & Devine, A. (2019). The food literacy action logic model: A tertiary education sector innovative strategy to support the charitable food sector’s need for food literacy training. Nutrients, 11(4), 837. https:/ /doi.org/10.3390/nu11040837

Lee, S. H., Park, S., Lehman, T. C., Ledsky, R., & Blanck, H.M. (2023). Occasions, locations, and reasons for consuming sugar-sweetened beverages among U.S. adults. Nutrients, 15(4), 920. https://doi.org/10.3390/ nu15040920

Lichtenstein, A. H., Ludwig, D. S., McKeown, N. M., & Jacques, P. F. (2015). Food literacy: How do communications and marketing impact consumer knowledge, skills, and behaviors? Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 47(4), S137–S143.

Malik, V. S., & Hu, F. B. (2022). The role of sugarsweetened beverages in the global epidemics of obesity and chronic diseases. Nature Reviews Endocrinology, 18(4), 205–218. https://doi.org/ 10.1038/s41574-021-00627-6

Mills, S., Brown, H., Wrieden, W., White, M., & Adams, J.(2017). Frequency of eating home cooked meals and potential benefits for diet and health: Cross-sectional analysis of a population-based cohort study. The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 14, 109. https://doi.org/10.1186/ s12966-017-0567-y

Mohammadbeigi, A. (2018). Fast food consumption and overweight/obesity prevalence in students and its association with general and abdominal obesity. Journal of Preventive Medicine and Hygiene, 59(3). https://doi.org/10.15167/2421-4248/ jpmh2018.59.3.830

Muzaffar, H., Metcalfe, J. J., & Fiese, B. (2018). Narrative review of culinary interventions with children in schools to promote healthy eating: Directions for future research and practice. Current Developments in Nutrition, 2(6), nzy016. https:// doi.org/10.1093/cdn/nzy016

Obesity Medicine Association. (2022, July 22). Obesity care in college students in the U.S. Obesity Medicine Association. https://obesitymedicine.org/blog/ obesity-care-in-college-students-in-the-us/

Oleribe, O. O., Ukwedeh, O., Burstow, N. J., Gomaa, A. I., Sonderup, M. W., Cook, N., Waked, I., Spearman, W., & Taylor-Robinson, S. D. (2018). Health: redefined. The Pan African Medical Journal, 30, 292. https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2018.30.292.15436

Ozberak, C. (2010). The social factors of college lifestyle that may cause weight gain in undergraduate students. Perspectives, 2(1). https://scholars.unh.edu/ perspectives/vol2/iss1/ 20?utm_source=scholars.unh.edu%2Fperspectives%2 Fvol2%2Fiss1%2F20&utm_medium=PDF&utm_camp aign=PDFCoverPages

Policastro, P., Brown, A. H., & Comollo, E. (2023). Healthy helpers: Using culinary lessons to improve children’s culinary literacy and self-efficacy to cook. Frontiers in Public Health, 11, 1156716. https:// doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1156716

Racine, E. F., Schorno, R., Gholizadeh, S., Bably, M. B., Hatami, F., Stephens, C., Zadrozny, W., Schulkind, L., & Paul, R. (2022). A college fast-food environment and student food and beverage choices: Developing an integrated database to examine food and beverage purchasing choices among college students. Nutrients, 14(4), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/ nu14040900

Reicks, M., Trofholz, A. C., Stang, J. S., & Laska, M. N. (2014). Impact of cooking and home food preparation interventions among adults: Outcomes and implications for future programs. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 46(4), 259–276. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2014.02.001

Robinson, E., Humphreys, G., & Jones, A. (2021). Alcohol, calories, and obesity: A rapid systematic review and meta-analysis of consumer knowledge, support, and behavioral effects of energy labeling on alcoholic drinks. Obesity Reviews, 22(6), e13198. https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.13198

Ronto, R., Ball, L., Pendergast, D., & Harris, N. (2016). Adolescents’ perspectives on food literacy and its impact on their dietary behaviors. Appetite, 107, 549–557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.09.006

Rowat, A. C., Soh, M., Malan, H., Jensen, L., Schmidt, L., & Slusser, W. (2019). Promoting an interdisciplinary food literacy framework to cultivate critical citizenship. Journal of American College Health, 69(4), 459–462. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 07448481.2019.1679149

Roy, R., Soo, D., Conroy, D., Wall, C. R., & Swinburn, B. (2019). Exploring university food environment and on-campus food purchasing behaviors, preferences, and opinions. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 51(7), 865–875. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jneb.2019.03.003

Slater, J., Falkenberg, T., Rutherford, J., & Colatruglio, S.(2018). Food literacy competencies: A conceptual framework for youth transitioning to adulthood. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 42(5), 547–556. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12471

Smith, L. P., Ng, S. W., & Popkin, B. M. (2013). Trends in U.S. home food preparation and consumption: Analysis of national nutrition surveys and time use studies from 1965–1966 to 2007–2008. Nutrition Journal, 12, 45. https://doi.org/10.1186/ 1475-2891-12-45

Soederberg Miller, L. M., Falbe, J., Chodur, G. M., & Chesnut, S. K. (2023). Home-prepared meals among college students at-risk for food insecurity: A mixedmethods study. Appetite, 188

Zareimanesh, B., & Namdar, R. (2022). Analysis of food literacy dimensions and indicators: A case study of rural households. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 6, 1019124. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fsufs.2022.1019124

Zeballos, E., & Restrepo, B. (2018). Adult eating and health patterns: Evidence from the 2014-16 Eating & Health Module of the American Time Use Survey United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. https://www.ers.usda.gov/ publications/pub-details/?pubid=90465

Distinguished Service Award has recognized members and their: superior achievements in Family and Consumer Sciences (FCS), outstanding contributions to the FCS profession, and sustained association leadership at both state and national levels.

Please join us as we

www.aafcs.org/support-us

Lizabeth Self-Mullens, Ph.D., CFCS-Retired, Tennessee holds degrees in Home Economics Education, Textiles & Apparel, and Human Ecology. Her career includes service as a faculty member, extension educator, program director, unit director, assistant dean, dean, assistant vice president for academic affairs, and provost. Liz retired in 2018 as Dean, of the College of Agriculture & Human Ecology at Tennessee Technological University. She served as the 2020-2021 AAFCS Board President, Counselor on the 2021-2022 AAFCS Board of Directors, and Chairperson of the AFCS Past Presidents’ Unit for two years. She participated in the AAFCS Council for Certification and Task Force for Program Advancement. She currently serves on the Leadership Council, Past Presidents’ Unit, ATD Showcase Committee, several communities, and as a mentor in the AAFCS Leadership Academy. Locally, Liz teaches quilting classes to adults and children, participates with the Friends of White Plains to restore an 1840s historic home, and chairs the Upper Cumberland Quilt Festival Board.

June 25-27,