| Literature DB >> 31600938 |
Agnes Giboreau1, Camille Schwartz2, David Morizet3, Herbert L Meiselman4.
Abstract
A photography method was used to measure waste on food trays in school lunch in France, using the 5-point quarter-waste scale. While food waste has been studied extensively in US school lunches, the structure of the French lunch meal is quite different, with multiple courses, and vegetables (raw and cooked) in more than one course. Vegetables were the most wasted food category as usually seen in school lunch research, especially cooked vegetables, which were wasted at rates of 66%-83%. Raw vegetables were still wasted more than main dishes, starchy products, dairy, fruit, and desserts. Vegetables were also the most disliked food category, with the classes of vegetables falling in the same order as for waste. Waste and liking were highly correlated. Sensory characteristics of the food were cited as a main reason for liking/disliking. There is a strong connection between food liking and food consumption, and this connection should be the basis for future attempts to modify school lunch to improve consumption. The photographic method of measuring food waste at an individual level performed well.Entities:
Keywords: French meals; food waste; liking; photography; school lunch; vegetables
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31600938 PMCID: PMC6835983 DOI: 10.3390/nu11102410
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Diversity of scales used to measure food waste through visual estimation.
| Scale | Authors | Food Left in the Plate |
|---|---|---|
| 3-point scale | Kandiah et al. 2006 [ | all; >50%; <50% |
| 4-point scale | Hiesmayr et al. 2009 [ | all; 1/2; 1/4; none |
| 5-point scale | Graves et al. 1983 [ | all; 3/4; 1/2; 1/4 or less; none or almost none |
| Hanks et al. 2014 [ | all; 3/4; 1/2; 1/4; none | |
| 6-point scale | Comstock et al. 1981 [ | all; 1 bite eaten; 3/4; 1/2; 1/4; none |
| Navarro et al. 2016 [ | 100%; 90%; 75%; 50%; 25%; 0% | |
| 7-point scale | Sherwin et al. 1998 [ | all; 1 mouthful eaten; 3/4; 1/2; 1/4; 1 mouthful left; none |
| 11-point scale | Williamson et al. 2003 [ | 100%; 90%; 80%; 70%; 60%; 50%; 40%; 30%; 20%; 10%; 0% |
The 5-point scale—quarter-waste method – is recommended by Hanks et al. (2014) as the most reliable.
Figure 1General scheme of the protocol with children.
Number of children by grade (boys/girls). * CLIS class (classe pour l’inclusion scolaire) is composed of children of different ages with school difficulties and training assistance.
| 1st Grade | 2nd Grade | 3rd Grade | 4th Grade | 5th Grade | CLIS* | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Day 1 | 30 (14/16) | 29 (13/16) | 35 (20/15) | 32 (13/19) | 32 (18/14) | 7 (4/3) | 165 |
| Day 2 | 30 (16/14) | 37 (18/19) | 29 (19/10) | 17 (6/11) | 35 (19/16) | 0 (0/0) | 148 |
| Day 3 | 31 (12/19) | 44 (19/25) | 34 (20/14) | 32 (14/18) | 32 (18/14) | 7 (5/2) | 180 |
| Day 4 | 35 (15/20) | 47 (20/27) | 32 (19/13) | 35 (13/22) | 28 (14/14) | 8 (5/3) | 185 |
| Day 5 | 25 (11/14) | 40 (16/24) | 31 (21/10) | n/a | n/a | 2 (1/1) | 98 |
| Total | 151 (68/83) | 197 (86/111) | 161 (99/62) | 116 (46/70) | 127 (69/58) | 24 (15/9) | 776 (383/393) |
Figure 2Example of the captured image of a disposed tray.
Food items and food categories served during the 5 observation days.
| Food Categories | Food Items |
|---|---|
| 1. Starter—Raw vegetable | Diced tomatoes |
| 2. Starter—Cooked vegetable served cold | Leeks |
| 3. Starches | Chickpea salad |
| 4. Side dish—Cooked vegetable served warm | Eggplant gratin |
| 5. Main dish | Breaded fish (hoki) |
| 6. Dairy products | Blue cheese |
| 7. Fruits and desserts | Apple Sauce |
Figure 3Mean rate of individual wastage of meal components (Error bars are standard deviations. Food with the same letter are not significantly different ANOVA 5% risk level).
Figure 4Categories of likes/disliked food components.