Closing the loop in online food delivery: a systematic literature review of consumer behavior toward post-consumption waste PDF Free Download
1 / 21/21
100%
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 01 frontiersin.org
Closing the loop in online food
delivery: a systematic literature
review of consumer behavior
toward post-consumption waste
AnaLuiza Camargo MascarinCunha
1*, MariaTeresa
deAlvarengaFreire
1*, GessuirPigatto
2 and VivianLaraSilva
1
1Departamento de Engenharia de Alimentos (ZEA), Faculdade de Zootecnia e Engenharia de
Alimentos da Universidade de São Paulo (FZEA/USP), Rede All4Food, Pirassununga, Brazil,
2Departmento de Gestão, Desenvolvimento e Tecnologia (GDTec), Faculdade de Ciências e
Engenharia, Universidade Estadual Paulista "Julio Mesquita Filho", Rede All4Food, Tupã, Brazil
Post-consumption waste generation, particularly from food waste and packaging,
has emerged as a critical sustainability challenge within the global food system,
where consumer behavior plays a decisive role and circular economy strategies are
urgently needed. In this context, the main objective of this study is to organize and
critically synthesize existing scientific knowledge on consumer behavior related to
post-consumption solid waste, specifically food and packaging waste, in online
food delivery (OFD) systems. The rapid expansion of online food delivery (OFD)
services has amplified these challenges by stimulating over-ordering, portion
mismanagement, and reliance on single-use packaging, raising urgent concerns
for sustainability and circular economy solutions within food systems. To achieve
our main objective, we conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) in line with
the PRISMA 2020 protocol, complemented by bibliometric mapping and an in-
depth thematic analysis that together provided both a structural overview of the
field and a critical interpretation of its conceptual foundations. Searches in Web
of Science and Scopus yielded 91 records, of which 55 met the inclusion criteria.
Bibliometric techniques using the Bibliometrix package in R were employed to
map the scientific landscape, while a profound reading of the manuscripts enabled
a deep thematic analysis and discussion. The analysis identified five thematic
clusters: Behavior Engine, Footprint, Loss and Friction, Experience Lens, and
LCA Core, with consumer attitudes and behavioral determinants– often framed
by the Theory of Planned Behavior– emerging as the conceptual nucleus of
the field. Beyond this, the qualitative synthesis revealed several critical themes.
Studies on packaging reusability highlight barriers related to hygiene concerns and
perceived inconvenience, but also point to innovative business models and digital
tracking systems that can foster adoption. Research on packaging materials and
innovative solutions examines environmental trade-os across polypropylene,
aluminum, and polystyrene, alongside promising biopolymer alternatives from
agricultural residues. Investigations into waste management and measurement
provide empirical evidence of the scale and spatial patterns of food delivery waste,
underscoring gaps in infrastructure and consumer sorting practices. Literature on
food waste behavior, particularly the role of apps and over-ordering, emphasizes
how platform design, promotional strategies, and hygiene perceptions influence
excessive consumption. Finally, integrated perspectives on food and packaging
waste management remain scarce but crucial, as these streams are deeply
interdependent in shaping environmental outcomes. By combining bibliometric
mapping with in-depth thematic synthesis, this review goes beyond descriptive
analysis, oering conceptual depth, critical discussion, and research guidance.
OPEN ACCESS
EDITED BY
José Martinez,
Institut National de Recherche pour
l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et
l’Environnement (INRAE), France
REVIEWED BY
Bosompem Ahunoabobirim Agya,
Hochschule Nordhausen, Germany
Michael Christian,
University of Bunda Mulia, Indonesia
*CORRESPONDENCE
Ana Luiza Camargo Mascarin Cunha
ana.mascarin@usp.br
Maria Teresa de Alvarenga Freire
freiremt@usp.br
RECEIVED 05 September 2025
REVISED 19 December 2025
ACCEPTED 22 December 2025
PUBLISHED 28 January 2026
CITATION
Cunha ALCM, Freire MTA, Pigatto G and
Silva VL (2026) Closing the loop in online
food delivery: a systematic literature review of
consumer behavior toward
post-consumption waste.
Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 9:1700028.
doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
COPYRIGHT
© 2026 Cunha, Freire, Pigatto and Silva. This
is an open-access article distributed under
the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (CC BY). The use,
distribution or reproduction in other forums is
permitted, provided the original author(s) and
the copyright owner(s) are credited and that
the original publication in this journal is cited,
in accordance with accepted academic
practice. No use, distribution or reproduction
is permitted which does not comply with
these terms.
TYPE Systematic Review
PUBLISHED 28 January 2026
DOI 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 02 frontiersin.org
It identifies pathways for waste minimization, circular packaging adoption, and
consumer-centered interventions, ultimately contributing to the advancement
of waste management and sustainable food systems.
KEYWORDS
behavior, circular economy, consumer, food system, food waste (FWL), packaging,
sustainability, waste
1 Introduction
In recent years, the online food delivery (OFD) and food takeaway
sectors have experienced signicant change, driven by rapid
technological advances, evolving urban lifestyles, and increasing
consumer demand for convenience. ese platforms have not only
altered food consumption habits by providing convenience and
accessibility but have also greatly expanded their share in the broader
food service industry. e rise in demand for ready-to-eat meals,
supported by mobile apps and third-party delivery services, has
changed the landscape of food distribution, especially in urban areas
where time is limited and digital connectivity is high. Globally, the
economic impact of these sectors is considerable; the industry includes
the growth in users and revenue for two types of delivery services -
one for restaurant-prepared meals and one for platform-based
solutions. According to Statista (2025), revenue in the market is
expected to reach US$455.85 billion in 2025, with continued growth
at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 2.69% from 2025 to
2030 - projecting a market size of about US$520.65 billion by 2030.
On a global scale, China leads the market, with projected revenue of
US$193.35 billion in 2025. Additionally, the average revenue per user
in the market is expected to be US$205.99 in 2025, and the number of
users is forecast to reach 2.5 billion by 2030 (Statista, 2025).
Nonetheless, the rapid expansion of OFD services has
intensified concerns regarding their environmental sustainability,
particularly concerning the generation of solid waste. This
includes both food waste, often resulting from over-ordering, lack
of control over portion sizes, convenience and impulse buying,
inadequate storage, and packaging waste, largely attributed to the
widespread use of single-use materials such as plastic, cardboard,
and aluminum foil. Unlike traditional dining contexts, the
logistics and hygiene of OFD typically use redundant layers of
packaging, much of which is non-recyclable or ends up improperly
disposed of. The lack of standardized portion sizes and limited
consumer access to and knowledge of source-separated disposal
systems exacerbate the environmental impacts of this
expanding sector.
is concern is especially signicant regarding packaging
waste, which has emerged as a major environmental issue within
the food delivery ecosystem. Takeaway and delivery food
packaging are now recognized among the primary sources of
single-use plastics globally (Gallego-Schmid et al., 2019; Li et al.,
2021). e magnitude of this problem is evident in various
national contexts. For instance, in 2020, the takeaway food
industry in China generated approximately 1.6 million tons of
plastic waste, equivalent to 3% of the total plastic content in
municipal solid waste (Zhang and Wen, 2022). Earlier estimates
also indicated 1.5 million metric tons of delivery food packaging
waste in Chinese megacities in 2017 (Song et al., 2018) and
approximately 600,000 metric tons annually in South Korea (Jang
et al., 2020).
Per capita gures further illustrate the scale of the issue. According
to Statista (2025), single-use plastic waste generation– much of it
linked to food delivery items such as bags, containers, and cutlery–
reaches up to 76 kg annually in Singapore, 53 kg in the United States,
and 44 kg in South Korea. ese materials are oen non-recyclable
due to contamination with food residues, which severely limits their
recyclability and typically results in disposal via landll or incineration
(Song et al., 2018). Beyond volume, the environmental impacts of this
packaging is driven largely by its life cycle: production accounts for
approximately 45% of the total impact and disposal for another 50%,
emphasizing the urgent need for more sustainable packaging solutions
(Wen et al., 2019, as cited in Li et al., 2020).
While packaging waste has drawn considerable attention due to
its material intensity and end-of-life challenges, another equally
critical issue is food waste interconnected with the practices of food
delivery and takeaway services.
Food waste represents a rapidly escalating global concern, with
severe environmental, social, and economic implications.
Approximately one-third of all food produced is never consumed,
instead of being discarded - resulting in nearly 1.3 billion tons of waste
annually. is ineciency incurs an estimated global economic loss
of US$2.6 trillion (FAO, 2019; Massari et al., 2021; Amicarelli and Bux,
2021). Within this broader context, the food delivery sector has
emerged as a critical area of concern. Scholars have increasingly
emphasized the hospitality sector’s substantial contribution to global
food waste, positioning it as the third-largest source worldwide
(Filimonau and De Coteau, 2019; Kasavan et al., 2022; Dhir et al.,
2020). As food waste within the online food delivery (OFD) ecosystem
continues to rise - driven by over-ordering, lack of portion control,
and impulse-driven consumption becomes critical to investigate the
behavioral mechanisms that drive waste generation. Understanding
these behavioral drivers is essential for designing interventions that
address not only environmental degradation but also social equity.
In this context, the role of the consumer emerges as a central
factor in mitigating the negative externalities of the OFD model. It is
ultimately the consumer who exercises agency in deciding whether to
order food, which platforms to use, how much to order, and how to
manage post-consumption waste. Variables such as perceived
convenience, environmental awareness, cost sensitivity, and digital
platform design signicantly shape consumption patterns (Gunden et
al., 2020). Consequently, a deeper understanding of consumer
behavior (its drivers, habits, and barriers) becomes essential for the
development of sustainable solutions, whether they are regulatory,
technological, or educational. Investigating these behavioral
dimensions is critical not only to reducing waste at the household level
but also to fostering more responsible and circular practices across the
food delivery ecosystem.
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 03 frontiersin.org
e main objective of this paper is to organize and critically
synthesize existing scientic knowledge on consumer behavior
concerning post-consumption solid waste - specically food and
packaging waste - in the context of online food delivery (OFD).
rough a systematic review of peer-reviewed research, the study
maps the state of the art by examining behavioral, perceptual, and
attitudinal factors that inuence unsustainable consumption patterns,
as well as practices oriented toward waste minimization, such as
reuse, waste separation, and reduced over-ordering. Particular
attention is given to how these behaviors vary across geographical
and cultural contexts and under exceptional conditions such as the
COVID-19 pandemic. By combining bibliometric techniques with
in-depth qualitative content analysis, the review identies dominant
theoretical frameworks, methodological tendencies, and recurring
themes in the literature. In doing so, it also claries the key conceptual
and empirical gaps that limit current understanding– most notably
the separation of food and packaging waste streams, the reliance on
intention-based behavioral models, and the lack of research in diverse
socio-economic contexts - and uses these gaps as a foundation to
articulate a forward-looking, systems-oriented research agenda that
integrates behavioral, infrastructural, environmental, and regulatory
dimensions of OFD waste. is expanded perspective seeks to
support future investigations and interventions that advance circular
economy principles and promote sustainability within digitally
mediated food systems.
To maintain conceptual accuracy when reporting the ndings of
primary studies, this review preserves the terminology originally
employed by each article. In line with FAO denitions, food loss and
food waste are conceptually distinct, reecting dierent stages of the
food supply chain. However, the reviewed literature frequently uses
these terms interchangeably—particularly when addressing consumer
behavior—without explicitly engaging with this distinction. To ensure
analytical coherence and navigational clarity, the manuscript therefore
adopts the following broad categories for synthesis: food waste
(including organic waste generated at the consumer level), packaging
waste, and solid waste as an umbrella term encompassing both.
2 Materials and methods
A systematic literature review was conducted to understand the
current state of knowledge on the topic food delivery consumer
behavior toward circular economy and sustainability. e review
followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and
Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, ensuring the quality and
transparency of the process (Page et al., 2021; Moher et al., 2009).
is review followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines (Page et al.,
2021). e completed PRISMA 2020 checklist is provided in
Appendix 1 No deviations from PRISMA 2020 were identied.
e methodological process followed three main stages as shown in
Figure 1. In the rst stage, the scope of the review was dened and search
strings were constructed. e second stage involved study selection
using the PRISMA Protocol, including database searches, screening, and
eligibility assessment. In the third stage, literature analysis was conducted
using both quantitative and qualitative approaches. Bibliometrix (R
package) supported the bibliometric analysis, while data from full-text
readings were coded into Excel spreadsheets and summarized in Word
documents. e analysis included both descriptive metrics (e.g., journal,
authorship, keywords) and content mapping (e.g., theoretical
frameworks, methodologies, and research objectives).
FIGURE 1
Systematic literature review process. The figure illustrates the three methodological stages used in the review. Source: The authors.
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 04 frontiersin.org
In addition, a formal Quality Appraisal (Risk of Bias assessment)
was conducted for all included studies using Mixed Methods Appraisal
Tool (MMAT). Details are provided in Section 2.4.
2.1 Definition of the scope of the review
e search strategy combined terms related to consumer behavior
and perception, solid waste, packaging, food loss and waste, circular
economy, and delivery. Before the present strings were dened, 32
string tests were performed to verify preliminary results. One
workshop was held with four researchers, including post-doctoral
fellows and professors, to validate the search terms and ensure the
accuracy of the results.
In accordance with PRISMA 2020 and reproducibility standards,
the complete Boolean search strings used in each database are
reported below. Minor database-specic adaptations were required
due to dierences in indexing and search syntax. Searches were
conducted using the ‘Title, Abstract, Keywords’ elds in Scopus and
‘Topic’ elds in Web of Science, which incorporate title, abstract,
author keywords, and Keywords Plus.
Web of Science Search String
TS = (“solid residues” OR “solid waste” OR “food waste” OR “food
loss” OR “single-use packaging” OR packaging OR “recyclable
packaging” OR “packaging waste” OR “circular economy*”).
AND
(consumer OR “consumer behavior” OR “consumer behavior” OR
“consumer perception” OR “public attitude*”)
AND
(“food delivery” OR “takeaway food” OR “food delivery app*” OR
“online food delivery”)
Scopus Search Strings
(TITLE-ABS-KEY (“solid residues” OR “solid waste” OR “food
waste” OR “food loss” OR “single-use packaging” OR packaging OR
“recyclable packaging” OR “packaging waste” OR “circular economy*”))
AND
(TITLE-ABS-KEY (consumer OR “consumer behavior” OR
“consumer behavior” OR “consumer perception” OR “public attitude*”))
AND
(TITLE-ABS-KEY (“food delivery” OR “takeaway food” OR
“online food delivery” OR “food delivery app*”))
Quotation conventions followed standard Boolean logic:
quotation marks were used for multi-word expressions; truncation
symbols (*) were applied only when conceptually appropriate;
parentheses controlled logical grouping; and Boolean connectors
followed PRISMA standards.
Searches were conducted in the Web of Science and Scopus
databases. No limitations were imposed on the publication date. us,
articles published up to December 31, 2024, were included.
2.2 Study identification and selection
process
e adoption of the PRISMA protocol ensured a systematic
and replicable approach for identifying and analyzing relevant
literature, contributing to a comprehensive understanding of the
topic studied. Searches were performed in two major academic
databases: Web of Science (n = 63) and Scopus (n = 18), yielding
a total of 81 records. An additional 10 records were identied
through citation searching, leading to an overall pool of 91
records.
Before screening, 15 duplicate records were removed. e
remaining 66 records were screened by title and abstract, resulting in
the exclusion of 2 articles. A total of 64 full-text reports were sought
for retrieval, although 3 could not be accessed (2 from databases and
1 from citation search), resulting in 70 full-text reports assessed for
eligibility (62 from databases and 8 from citation search).
Grey literature was not included as part of the formal systematic
review process. To ensure methodological rigor, transparency, and
comparability, especially given the heterogeneous nature of the
evidence, eligibility was restricted to peer-reviewed journal articles
indexed in Web of Science and Scopus. Consequently, conference
proceedings, theses, government documents, preprints, reports, and
industry publications were excluded from the search, screening, and
synthesis stages.
Grey literature was used only to provide general contextual
background (e.g., sector denitions, descriptive statistics, market
information) and did not contribute to the systematic evidence base.
ese sources did not inuence study selection, coding, or thematic
synthesis; their use was limited to introductory framing and contextual
motivation.
From the 62 database-sourced full texts, 11 reports were excluded
based on the following predened reasons:
Reason 1. Focus on organic food not related to waste or packaging
(n = 1).
Reason 2. Emphasis on health impacts or biosafety of substances/
processes (n = 6).
Reason 3. General waste management unrelated to consumer
behavior (n = 1).
Reason 4. Material quality or composition not linked to consumer
action or packaging (n = 2).
Reason 5. Focus on transportation logistics (n = 1).
From the 8 citation-based full texts, 4 reports were excluded for
the following reasons:
Reason 6. Not focused on delivery or takeaway food services
(n = 2).
Reason 7. Not focused on waste generation (n = 2).
As a result, 55 studies met the eligibility criteria and were included
in the nal synthesis. Each study corresponded to a single report;
therefore, the total number of studies and reports included was 55.
No restrictions were imposed regarding the publication date, and
studies published up to December 31, 2024, were considered. e
inclusion criteria focused on studies addressing organic waste
(including food loss and food waste) and/or post-consumer packaging,
specically within the context of consumer behavior and food delivery
services.
e screening and analysis process was conducted by a team of
four researchers independently. Each week, two to four articles were
assigned to each team member for independent reading and synthesis.
Weekly meetings were held to collectively discuss the content, resolve
disagreements, and assess the articles’ relevance to the research
questions. is collaborative and iterative approach to resolve
disagreements and nding consensus ensured a consistent evaluation
and rigorous selection of the studies, although no formal kappa
statistics were calculated.
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 05 frontiersin.org
No automation tools were used at any stage of the screening or
selection process. e full PRISMA 2020 ow diagram summarizing
the selection process is presented in Figure 2.
2.3 Data extraction and content analysis
A structured content analysis was conducted to ensure both
methodological rigor and analytical depth. e selected articles were
read in full to evaluate their alignment with the research objective of
assessing the state of the art on consumer behavior related to food
delivery services, circular economy, and sustainability.
Data extraction was carried out through a systematic coding
process using an Excel spreadsheet specically developed to support
data organization, screening, and synthesis. e spreadsheet contained
detailed elds to capture essential metadata and analytical dimensions
of each study, including: (i) article identication number in the
database; (ii) title; (iii) authors; (iv) journal and publication details; (v)
whether the study addresses organic waste, packaging, or both; (vi)
theoretical frameworks employed; (vii) methodological approaches
used; (viii) research objectives and guiding questions; (ix) availability
of research instruments; (x) suggestions for future research; and (xi)
justication for exclusion when applicable.
To complement the structured coding, a Word document was
used to summarize each article, highlighting key points not directly
captured by the spreadsheet elds, such as conceptual reections,
implicit hypotheses, or methodological nuances. is dual-recording
strategy supported more nuanced interpretation and synthesis.
Given the methodological heterogeneity of the included studies,
inter-coder reliability was ensured through a calibration-based
approach. All coders participated in two pilot rounds of
independent coding using a shared protocol. Discrepancies were
discussed collectively, and the coding framework was rened to
enhance consistency and conceptual clarity. Aer calibration, the
remaining articles were coded independently, with weekly meetings
used to resolve disagreements and maintain interpretive
convergence.
Because the dataset encompasses multiple evidence types
(surveys, interviews, experiments, LCAs, modeling studies, and
conceptual papers), formal reliability coecients such as Cohen’s κ
were not uniformly applicable. Instead, coder agreement was achieved
through iterative calibration, consensus discussions, and continuous
renement of the coding protocol, which reects best practices for
mixed-evidence systematic reviews.
e coding phase enabled the identication of recurring patterns,
thematic consistencies, and methodological divergences within the
selected literature. By systematically categorizing information
concerning theoretical foundations, research objects, and geographical
distribution, the review mapped the contours of the eld both
quantitatively and qualitatively.
Subsequently, an integrative and interpretative analysis was
conducted to synthesize the findings and construct a cohesive
understanding of the research landscape. The combination of
structured metadata organization and qualitative thematic
interpretation enhanced the clarity and depth of the review.
Findings were categorized thematically based on keywords and
trends identified across the publications. All documents analyzed
were publicly accessible and were used strictly for academic
purposes, respecting copyright laws and research ethics
principles.
FIGURE 2
PRISMA protocol systematic literature review. Source: The authors.
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 06 frontiersin.org
2.4 Risk of bias and quality appraisal
e methodological quality of the included studies was assessed
through a formal risk-of-bias appraisal using the Mixed Methods
Appraisal Tool (MMAT), version 2018 (Pluye and Hong, 2014; Hong
et al., 2018), in accordance with PRISMA 2020 recommendations.
Given the methodological heterogeneity of the corpus, which
comprised quantitative surveys, qualitative interviews, experimental
designs, mixed-methods studies, and analyses based on secondary
data, the MMAT was selected for its capacity to accommodate diverse
research designs within a single appraisal framework.
Each of the 55 included studies was evaluated against the relevant
MMAT criteria, encompassing six cross-method quality dimensions:
clarity of the research questions, appropriateness of the study design,
transparency and quality of data collection procedures, rigor of
analytical methods, acknowledgment of biases and limitations, and
substantive relevance to the scope of the review. e appraisal was
conducted independently by two reviewers, with disagreements
resolved through discussion and consensus.
Overall, the assessment indicates a moderate to good level of
methodological quality across the reviewed literature. Most studies
met core criteria related to clearly articulated research questions,
alignment between research design and objectives, and internal
coherence between data collection, analysis, and interpretation.
Nevertheless, recurrent limitations were identied, particularly among
cross-sectional survey studies, including heavy reliance on self-
reported data, limited consideration of non-response bias, and
insucient justication of sampling strategies. Mixed-methods
studies generally demonstrated strong integration of qualitative and
quantitative components, although variability was observed in the
transparency with which integration procedures were reported.
MMAT scores were not used as exclusion criteria; rather, they
served to contextualize and inform the interpretation of ndings
during synthesis. Studies exhibiting lower methodological rigor were
retained in the review, but their limitations were explicitly considered
when interpreting empirical patterns, theoretical contributions, and
the identication of research gaps. A summary of the MMAT appraisal
results is presented in Appendix 2, which reports the distribution of
studies across the MMAT criteria and enables readers to assess the
overall robustness of the evidence base underpinning this review.
2.5 Bibliometric approach
To further enhance the analysis and deepen the understanding of
the state of the art on consumer behavior toward food delivery,
circular economy, and sustainability, a quantitative bibliometric
approach was incorporated using the Bibliometrix package in R
version 4.4.2. e Bibliometrix R package provides a set of tools for
quantitative research in bibliometrics and scientometrics. It includes
a user-friendly interface called Biblioshiny, which enables analysis,
presentation, and manipulation of data. e data can also be exported
to Excel, for further graphical use. Using this soware, it was possible
to analyze the evolution of academic production over time, as well as
the main topics discussed, among other aspects, which are presented
in the next section.
To investigate the conceptual structure and thematic organization
of the literature at the intersection of consumer behavior, sustainability,
and food delivery systems, a co-occurrence network analysis was
conducted using the Keywords Plus eld. ese are algorithmically
assigned terms extracted from the titles of cited references and were
chosen for their high degree of standardization, frequency, and
connectivity, qualities that enhance the robustness and interpretability
of co-word networks.
e dataset was built using a structured search strategy, and the
co-occurrence matrix was normalized using the association strength
method. is normalization adjusts raw co-occurrence frequencies
based on the total frequency of each term, reducing the bias of highly
frequent keywords and yielding a more accurate representation of
conceptual proximity.
To ensure analytical precision, only pairs of keywords that
co-occurred in at least two documents were included, applying a
minimum edge threshold of 2. is ltering criterion removes weak
or spurious connections and highlights more meaningful thematic
relationships. Cluster detection was performed using the Walktrap
algorithm, which identies communities based on the likelihood that
short random walks remain within densely connected subgraphs,
making it particularly eective for detecting modular structures and
coherent thematic clusters.
For visualization, a repulsion force parameter of 0.1 was used to
optimize the spatial distribution of nodes and avoid overlap, thereby
facilitating the recognition of distinct conceptual regions within the
network.
Together, these methodological choices– association strength
normalization, edge ltering, Walktrap clustering, and calibrated
layout parameters – enabled the construction of a reliable and
informative co-occurrence network. e resulting structure reveals
the main research domains and their interconnections, highlighting
how topics such as food waste, packaging waste, consumer attitudes,
and sustainable consumption are organized and related within the
literature.
3 Mapping the scientific landscape of
consumer behavior and solid waste in
online food delivery: a bibliometric
overview
Bibliometric analysis of the Systematic Literature Review (SLR)–
examining citation counts, authorship networks, and thematic
clusters, oers valuable insights into the academic interests and
maturity of consumer behavior toward delivery food ordering and
solid residues and sustainable behavior theme. In this research, the
soware R and its bibliometrix package were used to obtain these
results.
3.1 Annual scientific production
e annual scientic production in the eld illustrates a signicant
increase in research output over time as shown in Figure 3. Key
observations from the data are as follows: between 2017 and 2020,
there was minimal growth in the number of published articles,
indicating limited scholarly attention to the topic during this period.
However, from 2021 onward, a substantial rise in publication volume
is evident, particularly between 2021 and 2023, where the number of
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 07 frontiersin.org
articles surged from approximately 5 to 20. In 2024, a slight decline in
scientic production compared to 2023 suggests either a stabilization
or a shi in research priorities.
is increasing number of publications aligns with the growing
global concern over sustainability in food delivery services.
Specically, research has focused on the environmental impact of solid
waste accumulation from packaging, consumer behavior trends
inuenced by sustainability awareness in food ordering habits, and the
role of technological advancements in reducing waste and promoting
sustainability. e spike in publications post-2020 corresponds with
the rapid expansion of online food delivery services during the
COVID-19 pandemic, which signicantly increased both the demand
for takeout meals and the volume of packaging waste. Additionally,
the theme was probably previously researched within the food services
group. e peak observed in 2023 may reect the culmination of
academic interest, policy interventions, and technological research
addressing sustainability concerns. Meanwhile, the slight decline in
2024 could indicate either saturation of the research eld or a shi
toward more specialized areas within sustainability and consumer
behavior in food delivery services.
e results of the analyses involved years of publication return
data starting from the year 2017, even though no specic starting year
was set during the data search. is is likely because the topic is
relatively new in academic literature, and relevant studies or
publications have only emerged in recent years. As a result, the
available data reects the recent development and growing interest in
this area of research.
3.2 Theoretical frameworks
e analysis of theoretical frameworks reveals a predominance of
behavioral, sustainability-oriented, and policy-based perspectives.
Consumer Behavior eories and Models are the most frequently
applied (7 articles), drawing on paradigms such as the Economic Man
model, Psychodynamic and Behaviorist approaches, and cognitive
perspectives like the Stimulus-Organism-Response model and the
eory of Buyer Behavior (Howard and Sheth, 1969). ese
frameworks help explain consumer motivations, decision-making
routines, and post-consumption practices.
e eory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and its extended forms
(six articles) also feature prominently. TPB proposes that behavior is
driven by intentions shaped by attitudes, subjective norms, and
perceived behavioral control, with extensions adding moral norms,
self-identity, and habitual behavior. is framework is widely used in
OFD studies, such as Sharma et al. (2021), which examine how
positive attitudes and trust in food delivery apps contribute to over-
ordering and food waste.
A further body of work emphasizes sustainability policy analysis
and food-system perspectives (6 articles), addressing institutional,
political, and environmental dimensions of waste reduction. Drawing
on seminal authors such as Armstrong and Kamieniecki (2019) and
Runhaar et al. (2006), these studies employ tools like stakeholder
mapping, predictive modeling, and cost–benet analysis to support
the design of adaptive interventions. Complementary approaches,
including Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) (ve articles) and Waste
Management Frameworks (ve articles), oer technical assessments
of packaging and delivery impacts, oen aligned with circular
economy principles.
ese theoretical orientations are reected in the most frequent
keywords - “attitudes,” “intention,” and “determinants” - which
underscore the eld’s emphasis on behavioral and psychological
constructs. eir recurrence indicates a sustained eort to identify
sociodemographic, psychological, and contextual factors shaping
sustainable consumption in OFD environments.
3.3 Co-occurrence network analysis
To explore the conceptual structure underlying consumer
behavior, packaging, and food waste in the literature, a co-occurrence
network was generated based on Keywords Plus and indexed terms.
Using bibliometric techniques, particularly node centrality measures
(betweenness centrality, closeness centrality, and PageRank), the
FIGURE 3
Annual scientific production on food loss and waste from 2017 to 2024. Source: generated by the authors using the Bibliometrix package of R software
(R Core Team, 2024).
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 08 frontiersin.org
network was analyzed to identify thematic clusters and their relative
inuence within the broader research eld. Five distinct clusters were
identied as shown in Figure 4, each representing a conceptual
subeld with varying degrees of inuence and integration. e
distribution of articles across clusters further reinforces the thematic
boundaries and conceptual coherence of the network.
e rst and most prominent cluster (Cluster 1. Behavior Engine,
red) represents what may be considered the core thematic nucleus of
the network, about consumption behavior and behavioral
determinants, encompassing high-frequency and high-centrality
terms such as consumption, attitude, intention, and planned behavior.
is cluster exhibits the highest PageRank score (0.0390), indicating
it is the most inuential set of terms in the overall structure. Its
closeness centrality of 0.0178, also the highest among all clusters,
underscores its strong integration, allowing ecient connections
across the network. A betweenness centrality of 19.42 further conrms
that this cluster serves as a conceptual bridge, linking behavioral
theories with applied settings such as restaurants, management, and
adoption practices. e presence of self-ecacy and extended theory
further highlights the inuence of psychological constructs in
explaining pro-environmental intentions and sustainable consumption
choices. A total of 35 articles were associated with this cluster,
including references shown in Table 1, indicating a strong empirical
and theoretical emphasis on behavioral constructs in sustainable
consumption.
Despite occupying a central and inuential position in the
network, Cluster 1. Behavior Engine also exposes a core limitation of
the eld: the heavy dependence on attitudes and intentions as
substitutes for actual consumer behavior. Although these constructs
frequently achieve statistical signicance, the synthesis conducted in
this review shows that they provide only partial and oen unstable
explanations of post-consumption outcomes. e predominance of
cross-sectional, self-reported survey designs amplies this weakness,
given their susceptibility to recall bias and social desirability eects,
particularly in relation to food waste and disposal practices.
Consequently, favorable attitudes or strong pro-environmental
intentions do not reliably translate into measurable reductions in food
or packaging waste. is persistent intention–behavior gap constrains
the explanatory and predictive capacity of Cluster 1. Behavior Engine
and signals that sustainability outcomes in online food delivery
contexts cannot be inferred solely from cognitive or intentional
measures.
e second cluster (Cluster 2. Footprint, blue) is organized
around themes of environmental concerns and household waste,
with central terms including packaging waste, households,
generation, and behavior. is cluster holds a PageRank of 0.0266,
placing it as a moderately inuential thematic domain, particularly
relevant to studies investigating post-consumption waste generation
and domestic sustainability behaviors. Its closeness centrality of
0.0168 indicates strong connectivity, although its betweenness
centrality of 16.81 suggests a less central role in bridging concepts
compared to Cluster 1. is cluster likely reects empirical studies
centered on packaging disposal, waste-sorting behavior, and
household-level sustainability practices. It comprises 23 articles,
including references shown in Table 1, highlighting the intersection
between consumer behavior and environmental outcomes at the
household level.
Cluster 2. Footprint captures a structurally signicant
transformation associated with online food delivery: consumption
previously classied as out-of-home increasingly takes place within
domestic environments, transferring responsibility for post-
consumption waste management to households. By focusing on
packaging waste, households, and waste generation, this cluster
redirects analytical attention to domestic sustainability, where sorting
practices and disposal decisions ultimately shape environmental
outcomes. is emphasis is particularly relevant given the
heterogeneity of household contexts, which dier markedly in
infrastructure access, time constraints, and routine practices.
FIGURE 4
Co-occurrence network generated from Keywords Plus, showing thematic clusters. Source: Generated by the authors using the bibliometrix package
in R (R Core Team, 2024).
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 09 frontiersin.org
At the same time, the literature clustered here tends to approach
household waste as a continuation of conventional domestic behavior
rather than as the result of a newly congured consumption pattern
introduced by OFD. Although shis in waste volume and disposal
routines are frequently reported, they are more oen documented
than analytically interrogated. us, while Cluster 2. Footprint plays
an important role in situating OFD impacts within the household
sphere, it oers limited insight into how the relocation of consumption
actively reshapes domestic sustainability practices and responsibilities.
A more peripheral grouping, Cluster 3. Loss and Friction (green),
encapsulates literature focused on food loss and systemic challenges,
primarily centered around the terms losses and challenges. is cluster
has a PageRank of 0.0195, the lowest among the ve, indicating a
relatively marginal presence in the broader conceptual structure. Its
closeness centrality is 0.0115, and betweenness centrality stands at
13.00, reinforcing its structural detachment. However, its content
reveals a policy- and infrastructure-oriented concern with food
systems, likely reecting discussions on logistical ineciencies, supply
chain barriers, and macro-level loss mitigation. Only three articles, as
shown in Table 1, fall into this category, conrming its niche scope but
important thematic focus.
Cluster 3. Loss and Friction addresses a critical yet weakly
developed dimension of OFD-related waste: the inuence of
infrastructure on food loss and systemic ineciencies. e studies
grouped here move beyond individual-level explanations by
foregrounding logistical constraints, coordination failures, and
structural limitations within food and waste-management systems. In
doing so, they make clear that loss outcomes are conditioned not only
by consumer behavior but also by infrastructural capacity and system
performance.
Nevertheless, the peripheral position of this cluster and the small
number of associated studies indicate that infrastructure remains
insuciently integrated into the dominant analytical frameworks of
the eld. Infrastructural conditions are frequently treated as
background context rather than as active determinants of waste
outcomes, and their interaction with behavioral and household-level
dynamics remains weakly articulated. As a consequence, Cluster 3.
Loss and Friction provides an essential structural perspective but
remains analytically marginal within the broader literature on OFD
sustainability.
Cluster 4. Experience Lens (purple) introduces terms associated
with product quality and customer perception, such as perception,
impact, quality, products, and customer satisfaction. is cluster
shows a PageRank of 0.0272, reecting substantial inuence, especially
within consumer research literature focused on value perception and
experiential drivers of sustainable practices. Despite having the lowest
betweenness centrality (12.63) among the integrated clusters,
indicating a less pivotal role in connecting subthemes, it presents a
closeness centrality of 0.0166, highlighting its internal coherence and
network integration. e empirical corpus associated with this cluster
includes 14 articles - Table 1 - suggesting growing scholarly attention
to how perceived quality and satisfaction mediate environmentally
responsible consumer choices.
Cluster 4. Experience Lens brings attention to the role of perceived
quality, satisfaction, and consumer experience in shaping receptiveness
to sustainability-oriented practices in online food delivery. By
TABLE 1 Authors and associated studies assigned to each co-occurrence network clusters.
Cluster Keywords Authors Count
Cluster 1.
Behavior
Engine
Consumption, attitude, consumers, determinants,
intention, moderating role, barriers, management,
planned behavior, adoption, design, information,
plate, restaurants, self-ecacy, extended theory
Li et al. (2021), Gallego-Schmid et al. (2019), Zhang and Wen (2022), Zhang et al.
(2022), Gu et al. (2023), Liu et al. (2020), Sha (2023), Islam et al. (2024), Sia et al. (2024),
Amicarelli et al. (2022), Sharma et al. (2021), Shankar et al. (2022), Kristia et al. (2023),
Trivedi et al. (2023), Varese et al. (2024), Chiu et al. (2023), Talwar et al. (2023),
Mahmood et al. (2022), Chen and Lee (2022), Coelho and Leocádio (2022), Filipová et
al. (2017), Borghesi and Morone (2023), Ambad et al. (2022), Jabeen et al. (2023), Liu et
al. (2021), Naruetharadhol et al., 2023, Pandey et al. (2022), Liao et al. (2018), Yeo et al.
(2021), Leal Filho et al. (2022), Tao et al. (2024), Tenhunen-Lunkka et al. (2024), Li et al.
(2024), Li et al. (2024), Li et al. (2025), and Ali et al. (2021)
35
Cluster 2.
Footprint
behavior, packaging waste, environmental impacts,
generation, households
Caspers et al. (2023), Li et al. (2021), Gallego-Schmid et al. (2019), Schuermann and
Woo (2022), Zhang and Wen (2022), Zhang et al. (2022), Liu et al. (2020), Jang et al.
(2023), Hu et al. (2023), Amicarelli et al. (2022), Wei et al. (2023), Chiu et al. (2023),
Mahmood et al. (2022), Chen and Lee (2022), Filipová et al. (2017), Amicarelli and Bux
(2021), Borghesi and Morone (2023), Tang et al. (2023), Jabeen et al. (2023), Tenhunen-
Lunkka et al. (2024), Tenhunen-Lunkka et al. (2024), Song et al. (2018), and Li et al.
(2022)
23
Cluster 3.
Loss and
Friction
Challenges, losses Li et al. (2021), Amicarelli et al. (2022), and Amicarelli and Bux (2021) 3
Cluster 4.
Experience
Len
Perception, impact, quality, products, customer
satisfaction
Zhang and Wen (2022), Gu et al. (2023), Jang et al. (2023), Amicarelli et al. (2022),
Kristia et al. (2023), Mahmood et al. (2022), Chen and Lee (2022), Borghesi and Morone
(2023), Ambad et al. (2022), Naruetharadhol et al. (2023), Tenhunen-Lunkka et al.
(2024), Tenhunen-Lunkka et al. (2024), Li et al. (2025), and Ali et al. (2021)
14
Cluster 5.
LCA core
Disposable cups, LCA Caspers et al. (2023) and Gallego-Schmid et al. (2019). 2
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 10 frontiersin.org
emphasizing perception and impact, this body of work contributes to
understanding how experiential evaluations inuence acceptance and
favorable assessments of sustainable options.
Yet the analytical contribution of this cluster is constrained by its
limited engagement with post-consumption behavior. Although
positive experiences and quality perceptions are linked to favorable
attitudes and intentions, their implications for sustained waste-
reducing practices or measurable environmental outcomes are seldom
examined empirically. As such, Cluster 4. Experience Lens enriches
understanding of experiential mediation but stops short of clarifying
whether these perceptions translate into concrete sustainability gains
within OFD systems.
Finally, Cluster 5. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Core (orange)
focuses on technical sustainability assessment, anchored by the terms
disposable cups and LCA. While this cluster is structurally peripheral–
evidenced by a betweenness centrality of 0.00 and a closeness centrality
of 1.0000, suggesting detachment from the rest of the network– it
holds a surprisingly high PageRank of 0.0330. is anomaly indicates
that despite limited interconnectivity, the cluster possesses thematic
signicance, likely due to its relevance in policy and quantitative
environmental analysis. With only two articles linked to this theme, it
represents a focused, methodologically rigorous niche within the
broader eld, possibly aligned with engineering and environmental
science perspectives rather than behavior-oriented studies.
Cluster 5. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) constitutes a
methodologically rigorous but conceptually isolated strand of the
literature, centered on life cycle assessment and quantitative evaluation
of environmental impacts. Its elevated PageRank, despite minimal
network connectivity, reects the importance of LCA-based evidence
for policy discussions and environmental benchmarking in the
context of online food delivery.
At the same time, the structural detachment of this cluster points
to a persistent disconnect between technical environmental
assessment and consumer-centered research. While LCA studies oer
robust quantication and comparative insights into material
performance, they are rarely connected to behavioral, experiential, or
household-level analyses. Consequently, Cluster 5. Life Cycle
Assessment (LCA) strengthens the environmental evidence base but
remains weakly linked to the behavioral mechanisms and post-
consumption practices that ultimately shape real-world sustainability
outcomes in OFD systems.
In sum, the centrality metrics conrm the dominance of
behavioral and perceptual constructs in shaping the contemporary
research landscape on sustainable consumption. Cluster 1 not only
holds the highest centrality values but also functions as the
foundational theme, anchoring psychological theories and applied
behavioral interventions. In contrast, Cluster 5 illustrates how
methodological innovations, despite being structurally peripheral, can
possess substantial thematic relevance. Together, these ndings
reinforce the multidimensionality of the eld, where behavior, policy,
perception, and sustainability assessment converge. e distribution
of articles across clusters further supports the empirical salience and
conceptual delineation of each thematic domain.
To complement the network visualization, Table 1 details the
composition of each cluster by listing the most recurrent Keywords Plus,
the corresponding set of articles/authors assigned to the cluster, and the
count of publications. is representation allows a clearer understanding
of the thematic scope of each cluster, connecting the underlying
conceptual categories with the empirical corpus of studies. By linking
keywords and references, the table illustrates not only the dominant
topics captured by the bibliometric analysis but also the distribution of
scholarly contributions that sustain each thematic grouping.
3.4 Between behavior and systems:
interpreting the bibliometric OFD waste
research
e bibliometric overview shows that research on sustainability and
waste in online food delivery (OFD) systems is recent and rapidly
expanding, particularly aer 2020. is temporal concentration
indicates a eld in consolidation, in which scholars have primarily
drawn on established theories and familiar analytical units to organize
inquiry, rather than advancing fully integrated system-level explanations.
Within this context, literature is strongly oriented toward
individual-level analysis, with consumer behavior and consumption
experience forming the dominant analytical entry points. is focus
is reected in clusters centered on behavioral determinants and
experiential factors (Clusters 1 and 4), which are closely aligned with
the widespread application of the eory of Planned Behavior and
related behavioral frameworks. ese theories oer conceptual
structure and empirical accessibility, but they also direct attention
toward attitudes, intentions, and perceptions, frequently treating waste
outcomes as secondary or inferred rather than directly observed.
Systemic dimensions of waste generation remain comparatively
weak. Studies addressing food loss, logistical frictions, and
infrastructural constraints within OFD systems are scarce (Cluster 3),
reecting both methodological challenges in measuring losses across
digitally mediated supply chains and a prevailing tendency to treat
infrastructure as background context. Similarly, life cycle–oriented
research remains limited (Cluster 5) and is oen restricted to material
or packaging assessments, with less emphasis on disposability, end-of-
life pathways, and real-world waste management conditions.
Overall, the bibliometric patterns point to a literature that is
theoretically anchored but analytically fragmented, privileging
behavioral explanation while underrepresenting system-level
processes and material end-of-life dynamics. e thematic analysis in
Section 4 builds on this diagnosis by critically examining these
imbalances and outlining directions for research that more eectively
connect consumer behavior with infrastructural and environmental
dimensions of OFD-related waste.
4 Unpacking literature: thematic
discussions on consumer behavior
and solid waste in OFD systems
e preceding bibliometric analysis provides a systematic and
macro-structural overview of the eld, illuminating dominant
thematic patterns, intellectual proximities, and methodological
tendencies through keyword co-occurrence, publication networks,
and clustered relationships among Keywords Plus. is mapping
establishes a clear, evidence-based panorama of how the literature is
organized and how research trajectories have evolved over time.
Building upon this structural foundation, the review advances the
analysis by adding a second, complementary layer: a thematic
examination grounded in close reading. Whereas bibliometric
techniques reveal broad patterns, the thematic analysis captures the
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 11 frontiersin.org
interpretive richness of the studies, unpacking contextual nuances,
theoretical developments, and the diverse empirical strategies that
shape the eld. is deeper analytical engagement allows the review
to surface subtle distinctions, conceptual innovations, and emerging
tensions that are not visible through quantitative mapping alone.
By uniting macro-level mapping with micro-level interpretive
depth, the paper oers a more comprehensive and integrated
understanding of the research landscape. is dual approach not only
enriches the descriptive clarity of the review but also strengthens its
capacity to identify promising research avenues, illuminate areas that
merit further theoretical and methodological attention, and articulate
a grounded and forward-looking agenda for future work.
4.1 Distribution of studies across
packaging, food waste, and integrated
approaches
e categorization of the 55 selected articles into three thematic
groups– Food Waste (19/55 articles), Packaging (24/55 articles), and
studies addressing both Food Waste and Loss and Packaging
simultaneously (4/55 articles)–oers insights into the scope of research
and prevailing academic priorities. Additionally, 6 out of 55 articles
investigate consumer adoption and behavior in relation to food delivery
services in a broader sense, while 2 articles mention food delivery
applications only in their nal remarks. e predominance of studies
focused exclusively on Packaging (43.63%) reveals a marked academic
interest in understanding how material attributes, labeling practices,
design features, and sustainability claims inuence consumer decision-
making, post-consumption disposal behaviors, and environmental
outcomes. is scholarly emphasis appears aligned with growing global
concern regarding single-use plastics, evolving regulatory frameworks,
and the communicative role of packaging in sustainability narratives.
In parallel, the representation of Food Waste studies (34.54%)
underscores a signicant research eort aimed at identifying
behavioral determinants of food waste at the post-consumer level
within food services. ese include factors such as portion sizing,
purchasing routines, and knowledge related to waste sorting and
management. Such studies frequently examine the ways in which
individual choices contribute to food waste, and how targeted
interventions or awareness-raising strategies might help mitigate these
outcomes. Notably, only 4 out of 55 articles (7.27%) explore Food
Waste and Loss and Packaging in an integrated manner. is scarcity
of holistic approaches indicates a critical gap in the literature,
especially considering that packaging choices– ranging from materials
and portioning to reuse potential and end-of-life logistics – can
signicantly aect food preservation, consumption behaviors, and the
generation of waste. Addressing this thematic disjunction presents an
important opportunity for future interdisciplinary research seeking to
bridge consumer behavior, food waste, packaging and sustainability
within the context of online food delivery systems.
4.2 COVID scenario
e COVID-19 pandemic profoundly aected consumer
behavior, particularly in relation to food consumption, waste
generation, and the rapid expansion of online food delivery (OFD)
services. irteen studies in the reviewed sample incorporated
COVID-19 as a contextual variable (Hu et al., 2023; Sia et al., 2024;
Amicarelli et al., 2022; Sharma et al., 2021; Wei et al., 2023; Varese et
al., 2024; Chiu et al., 2023; Liboredo et al., 2023; Mahmood et al., 2022;
Amicarelli and Bux, 2021; Borghesi and Morone, 2023; Liu et al., 2021;
Leal Filho et al., 2022). Most studies report that lockdowns and
mobility restrictions drove a substantial rise in OFD use, reshaping
food consumption patterns and generating new concerns regarding
food safety, waste, and packaging.
Viewed analytically, the pandemic functions as a quasi-natural
experiment: an exogenous shock that abruptly altered mobility, risk
perceptions, and reliance on OFD, thereby testing which waste-related
behaviors are malleable versus entrenched under disrupted routines
(Hu et al., 2023; Sia et al., 2024; Chiu et al., 2023). e evidence
suggests behavioral plasticity in domains where consumers had both
heightened salience and greater temporal control—such as meal
planning and waste awareness among those conned at home—
leading to waste reductions in some cases (Amicarelli et al., 2022;
Borghesi and Morone, 2023). At the same time, the literature indicates
behavioral rigidity in core drivers of avoidable waste, including
persistent diculties with portion estimation and over-ordering,
which appear resilient to crisis conditions and, in some contexts,
remain rooted in pre-existing economic motivations rather than being
uniquely pandemic-induced (Hu et al., 2023; Wei et al., 2023; Varese
et al., 2024). Crisis conditions also introduced distinct, risk-driven
practices—particularly hygiene routines in food handling—that
reshaped household interactions with delivered food and packaging
(Mahmood et al., 2022; Chiu et al., 2023), while the intensied reliance
on OFD generated a structural increase in packaging waste pressures
on municipal systems (Liu et al., 2021; Leal Filho et al., 2022).
A recurrent nding is the heightened consumer awareness of food
waste among individuals conned at home. Remote workers and those
under extended lockdown reportedly became more cautious with food
purchases and meal planning, reducing waste in some cases
(Amicarelli et al., 2022). is increased awareness aligned with
broader sustainability concerns observed during the pandemic
(Borghesi and Morone, 2023). Nonetheless, challenges persisted:
many consumers continued to struggle with portion estimation and
over-ordering, contributing to avoidable food waste (Hu et al., 2023).
However, evidence from other contexts complicates this narrative.
A study in China found that increased OFD use during lockdown did
not necessarily lead to greater food waste, as pre-existing economic
motivations, particularly habitual over-ordering, were already
signicant drivers of waste (Wei et al., 2023; Varese et al., 2024). Such
ndings suggest that the pandemic intensied certain behaviors but
did not uniformly exacerbate waste across regions.
Concerns about hygiene also shaped consumer responses. Fears
of viral transmission led many individuals to adopt new safety
routines, including disinfecting packaging and reheating delivered
food before consumption (Mahmood et al., 2022; Chiu et al., 2023).
ese practices inuenced not only perceived food safety but also
broader attitudes toward food handling and waste prevention during
a period of heightened uncertainty.
At the same time, the surge in OFD contributed to increased food
and packaging waste worldwide, including in Brazil. Studies reported
that cities such as Bangkok and several Brazilian municipalities
experienced rises in both food and plastic waste linked to intensied
food delivery consumption (Liu et al., 2021; Leal Filho et al., 2022).
e proliferation of disposable containers and delivery bags
highlights enduring challenges for waste management systems and
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 12 frontiersin.org
the need for more sustainable consumption models and supply-chain
innovations.
Overall, the pandemic acted as a catalyst for both positive and
negative shis in food-related behaviors. While some consumers
became more mindful of food waste, others maintained or intensied
over-ordering and inadequate planning. ese mixed responses
underscore the complex and context-dependent relationship between
OFD usage, consumer behavior, and food waste during crisis
conditions.
Taken together, these ndings imply that crisis conditions amplify
OFD dependence and risk-salient routines, but they do not
mechanically translate into higher food waste; instead, they expose
which determinants are context-sensitive (plastic) versus structurally
persistent (rigid) in “normal” OFD consumption patterns (Wei et al.,
2023; Varese et al., 2024; Liu et al., 2021).
4.3 Packaging reusability
Packaging has become a central theme in OFD sustainability
research. Twenty-seven studies examined packaging-related issues,
ranging from environmental impacts and consumer perceptions to
material choices and disposal behaviors (Caspers et al., 2023; Li et al.,
2021; Collis et al., 2023; Gallego-Schmid et al., 2019; Schuermann and
Woo, 2022; Li et al., 2023; Zhang and Wen, 2022; Zhang et al., 2022;
Gu et al., 2023; Liu et al., 2020; Jang et al., 2023; Sha, 2023; Sia et al.,
2024; Chiu et al., 2023; Liboredo et al., 2023; Ma et al., 2023; Tang et
al., 2023; Liu et al., 2021; Chu et al., 2021; Liao et al., 2018; Recker et
al., 2024; Leal Filho et al., 2022; Hoseini et al., 2024; Tao et al., 2024;
Tenhunen-Lunkka et al., 2024; Li et al., 2025). e prominence of this
topic aligns with growing concern over the surge in packaging waste,
particularly plastics, driven by rising OFD consumption during and
aer pandemic lockdowns (Liu et al., 2021; Leal Filho et al., 2022).
Within this discourse, reusable packaging has gained signicant
attention. Studies focusing on reusable takeaway containers (Caspers
et al., 2023; Collis et al., 2023; Gallego-Schmid et al., 2019; Schuermann
and Woo, 2022; Li et al., 2023; Sia et al., 2024; Recker et al., 2024;
Hoseini et al., 2024; Tenhunen-Lunkka et al., 2024; Li et al., 2024)
emphasize that although reusable systems can substantially reduce
environmental impacts, their success depends on user adherence,
system design, and institutional support.
A major barrier to adoption is consumer sensitivity to container
wear. Even minor signs of deterioration signicantly reduce willingness
to reuse, a phenomenon termed “contaminated interactions” (Collis et
al., 2023). Because environmental benets depend on achieving
multiple reuse cycles, premature disposal hinders sustainability
outcomes. Hoseini et al. (2024) demonstrated, through LCA coupled
with willingness-to-reuse data, that consumers oen discard
containers before they outperform single-use alternatives, highlighting
a misalignment between environmental requirements and behavioral
realities. Suggested solutions include behavioral reframing (e.g.,
interpreting wear as evidence of environmental contribution) and
policy mechanisms incentivizing reuse.
To strengthen consumer trust and ensure system robustness,
technological tools such as QR codes and machine-learning
monitoring have been proposed to track container condition and
usage frequency (Collis et al., 2023). Such systems can improve
traceability and reinforce condence in hygiene and durability.
Psychological determinants also play a central role. Using the
extended TPB, Sia et al. (2024) found that attitudes and perceived
behavioral control strongly predict reuse intention, whereas subjective
norms and moral obligation exert little inuence. Practical barriers -
limited time, inadequate return infrastructure, and minimal direct
economic benets - further reduce participation.
Economic and systemic analyses reveal additional constraints. In
South Korea, consumers expressed willingness to pay for reusable
options, and rms with sucient market share could achieve positive
returns within a year (Schuermann and Woo, 2022). e authors
advocate phased rollouts in densely populated areas, supported by
default-reuse policies and accessible drop-o stations. Conversely, Li
et al. (2023) showed that while Chinese campus users gain net benets
from reuse schemes, restaurants and platforms incur losses unless
pricing and logistics are optimized.
Large-scale implementation cases oer further insight. e
German startup Vytal processed over 6.2 million reusable container
checkouts between 2019 and 2023, demonstrating the potential for
integrating digital tracking with ecient oine logistics (Recker et al.,
2024). Nonetheless, high return rates remain essential to ensure
environmental benets.
From a macro perspective, Tenhunen-Lunkka et al. (2024)
estimated that a 10% global increase in reusable packaging by 2030
could eliminate over one trillion single-use plastic bottles and cups.
is underscores the urgent need to transition from linear to circular
packaging systems, supported by technological innovation,
stakeholder collaboration, and behavioral change. e study also
advocated for integrated models that assess not only environmental
sustainability but also technical feasibility, consumer desirability, and
business viability. Focusing on the determinants of adoption, Li et al.
(2024) demonstrated that perceived green attributes substantially
enhance students’ intention to use Reusable Takeaway Food
Containers (RTFCs), especially when reinforced by strong perceptions
of value. However, concerns about hygiene and inconvenience related
to returning containers can undermine this intention. Notably,
publicity activities had the strongest inuence on student willingness
to adopt RTFCs, suggesting that targeted communication and
awareness campaigns may be pivotal to foster behavior change.
4.4 Packaging materials and innovative
solutions
A subset of studies (Gallego-Schmid et al., 2019; Zhang and Wen,
2022; Jang et al., 2023; Sha, 2023; Ma et al., 2023; Tang et al., 2023)
examines the material composition of OFD packaging, its life cycle
impacts, and the potential for more sustainable substitutions.
Collectively, these studies demonstrate how material choices shape the
environmental footprint of food delivery and inform pathways toward
circular packaging redesign.
One of the most comprehensive assessments is the comparative
LCA conducted by Gallego-Schmid et al. (2019), which evaluates
polypropylene (PP), aluminum, and extruded polystyrene (EPS). PP
containers showed the highest impacts in seven of 12 categories,
including global warming potential, followed by aluminum due to its
energy intensity and toxicity-related burdens. EPS exhibited the lowest
impacts owing to minimal material and energy inputs, though its
non-recyclability limits long-term sustainability. e authors emphasize
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 13 frontiersin.org
that improved recycling systems, aligned with EU 2025 packaging
directives, could reduce environmental impacts by up to 60%.
Corroborating these ndings, Jang et al. (2023) estimated that
OFD in Korea generated nearly 73,000 tonnes of plastic packaging in
2020, dominated by PP (66.07%) and PET (15.41%). While multi-use
containers performed best environmentally, they raised concerns
about ecotoxicity due to intensive cleaning requirements. Recycled-
content solutions and higher recycling rates oered modest
improvements, but operational challenges in sorting and recovery
highlight the trade-os embedded in circular packaging models.
Adding a spatial perspective, Tang et al. (2023) developed a
method to map Food Delivery Packaging Waste Generation (FDPWG)
in Dongguan, China. Plastic packaging accounted for 67.61% of OFD
waste, of which PP comprised 75.86%. Material composition shied
with urbanization: plastics decreased in less urbanized regions while
paper, wood, and aluminum increased. ese results show the
importance of localized waste-reduction strategies tailored to
demographic and economic contexts.
Zhang and Wen (2022) extended the analysis to the full industrial
chain, manufacturing, delivery, and disposal. eir ndings indicate
that waste disposal (especially landlling) accounts for about 50% of
environmental impacts, followed by manufacturing (45%) and
delivery (5%). Solid waste emerged as the most critical indicator,
underscoring the relevance of lightweight packaging design and
landll diversion, alongside coordinated action among manufacturers,
platforms, consumers, and policymakers.
From a governance perspective, Sha (2023) highlights insucient
governmental implementation and limited NGO engagement in OFD
packaging waste management. e study advocates a multilevel
governance approach and prioritizes recyclable and paper-based
packaging. It also challenges assumptions about biodegradable
materials, showing that many perform worse environmentally than
expected and require clearer, evidence-based sustainability denitions.
Finally, Ma et al. (2023) assessed innovative materials derived from
agricultural and cellulosic waste, emphasizing biopolymers - particularly
cellulose - as promising renewable alternatives to fossil-based plastics.
While advances in molded pulp and nanostructured cellulose lms
show technical potential, the authors identify major barriers to
scalability, including high production costs, inecient extraction
processes, and trade-os between antimicrobial function and
biodegradability. ey conclude that sustainable packaging innovation
must be paired with robust life cycle assessments and regulatory support.
4.5 Waste management and waste
measurement
Substantial increases in food and packaging waste have been
linked to online food delivery (OFD), posing complex challenges for
urban waste management. Evidence across multiple contexts
highlights persistent gaps in measurement, spatial analysis, and
behavioral dynamics (Bellows et al., 2024; Zhang et al., 2022; Jang et
al., 2023; Tang et al., 2023; Chu et al., 2021; Liao et al., 2018).
In Wuhan, China, Zhang et al. (2022) estimated that OFD
generated approximately 177.6 kilotons (kt) of food delivery waste
(FDW) in 2019, over 4% of the city’s total municipal solid waste.
Packaging represented 56.8 kt (32%) of FDW, with white-collar
consumers contributing the largest share (58%), followed by urban
residents (29%) and college students (13%). More than half of the
FDW was avoidable food waste, mainly from staple dishes, soups, and
meats. Per capita FDW signicantly exceeded national averages for
household and restaurant waste, underscoring the disproportionate
environmental burden of OFD in rapidly urbanizing regions.
In South Korea, Jang et al. (2023) found that OFD packaging
generated 72.93 kt of plastic waste in 2020, primarily polypropylene
(PP, 66.07%) and polyethylene terephthalate (PET, 15.41%). eir
model, integrating LCA and material-specic data, linked waste
generation to order frequency and food type, oering actionable
insights for targeted waste-reduction strategies.
Adding a spatial perspective, Tang et al. (2023) mapped food
delivery packaging waste in Dongguan, China, estimating 4,796.68
tonnes per month. Plastic dominated (67.61%), particularly PP
(75.86%) and polystyrene (6.74%). Waste generation correlated
strongly with population density and economic activity, indicating
that urbanization and economic development are key drivers of
OFD-related waste ows.
Behavioral analyses also shed light on waste management
challenges. In an urban Chinese context, Liao et al. (2018) used an
extended eory of Planned Behavior to examine waste-sorting
intentions among 487 residents. Attitudes, perceived behavioral
control, and facility availability signicantly increased sorting
intentions, whereas time pressure reduced them. ese ndings suggest
that fast-paced urban living can undermine pro-environmental actions
unless supported by accessible infrastructure and behavioral nudges.
Complementing this, Chu et al. (2021) demonstrated that
environmental conditions inuence OFD demand: higher air pollution
levels increased the likelihood of ordering food online, indirectly
amplifying plastic packaging waste. Using platform data and photographic
evidence, they argue that air quality improvements may yield co-benets
by reducing OFD reliance and associated single-use waste.
Together, these studies reveal how material ows, spatial factors,
behavioral determinants, and environmental conditions jointly shape
OFD waste generation. ey highlight the need for integrated policies
that connect digital consumption patterns with urban sustainability
planning.
4.6 Food waste behavior: the role of the
apps and over-ordering behavior
Consumer behavior is a central determinant of food waste in
online food delivery (OFD) systems. Across the reviewed literature
(Islam et al., 2024; Sharma et al., 2021; Shankar et al., 2022; Wei et al.,
2023; Kristia et al., 2023; Trivedi et al., 2023; Talwar et al., 2023; Li et
al., 2024), food waste emerges from a complex interaction of user
attitudes, behavioral intentions, interface design, promotional cues,
and demographic characteristics.
Over-ordering is one of the most prominent behaviors linked to
food waste, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. Trust and
perceived convenience consistently predict excessive ordering by
strengthening favorable attitudes toward food delivery platforms
(Islam et al., 2024; Sharma et al., 2021). Although perceived price
advantage shapes attitudes, it does not directly increase over-ordering.
Hygiene consciousness, heightened during health crises, further
encouraged stockpiling behaviors, contributing to avoidable waste
(Sharma et al., 2021).
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 14 frontiersin.org
Attitudinal and social inuences also shape over-ordering.
Favorable attitudes, subjective norms, and leover reuse intentions are
associated with higher ordering volumes (Shankar et al., 2022; Talwar
et al., 2023). Habitual patterns (e.g., years of app use) and environmental
values, such as willingness to pay for eco-friendly packaging, moderate
these eects, either amplifying or discouraging excess (Shankar et al.,
2022). Demographic moderations, especially gender and age, further
aect how subjective norms drive behavior, indicating the need for
segmented sustainability messaging (Talwar et al., 2023).
Digital interface design also contributes to wasteful behavior.
Trivedi et al. (2023) showed that ambiguous portion-size information
triggers anticipated food shortages, prompting consumers to order
more than necessary. is psychological mechanism demonstrates
that platform design is behaviorally consequential rather than neutral.
Contrasting these ndings, research during the COVID-19
lockdown in China suggests that OFD usage does not always escalate
waste. Wei et al. (2023) found that reduced appetite, smaller portion
preferences, and more deliberate consumption led to declines in food
waste, indicating that crises may produce both mitigating and
amplifying eects depending on user adaptation.
Beyond the specic construct of over-ordering, recent work
integrates broader behavioral determinants. Kristia et al. (2023),
applying an extended eory of Planned Behavior (TPB) to
Indonesian Generation Z, found that subjective norms and food waste
knowledge increased sustainable intentions, whereas platform
promotions encouraged excessive purchases. Food waste awareness
moderated these eects, strengthening reduction intentions among
informed consumers.
Similarly, Li et al. (2024) extended the TPB by incorporating food-
related factors such as portion size, temperature, visual appeal, and
disliked ingredients. Across seven Chinese cities, attitudes and
perceived behavioral control signicantly reduced waste generation,
while subjective norms remained inconsistent predictors. Although
food-related factors negatively aected intentions to avoid waste, they
did not directly increase disposal behavior, suggesting a disconnect
between dissatisfaction and actual waste outcomes.
Beyond consumer-level determinants, recent research underscores
the inuence of regulatory and structural factors on food waste in
food delivery systems. Xu et al. (2024) adopt a supply-chain
perspective and show that anti-food-waste regulations can eectively
reduce waste in Online-to-Oine (O2O) food delivery, particularly
under platform-charge logistics strategies. eir ndings indicate that
logistics strategy choices are contingent on market size, relative
logistics costs, and regulatory stringency. Although analytically
distinct from behavioral studies, this evidence reinforces the view that
food waste in OFD systems results from interactions between
consumer behavior, platform operations, and institutional governance.
4.7 Integrated perspectives on food and
packaging waste management
Research across dierent regions highlights important insights
into the scale, composition, and behavioral dynamics associated with
food and packaging waste in online food delivery (OFD) systems,
particularly as consumption patterns intensied during and aer the
COVID-19 pandemic (Zhang et al., 2022; Liboredo et al., 2023; Liu et
al., 2021; Liao et al., 2018).
One of the most comprehensive assessments of food delivery
waste was carried out in Wuhan, China, where Zhang et al. (2022)
estimated a total of 177.6 kilotons in 2019, with packaging accounting
for 32% of the total. Notably, 55% of the food waste was classied as
avoidable, underscoring signicant behavioral ineciencies. e
analysis also identied strong variations across consumer proles,
with white-collar workers generating the highest per capita food
waste, followed by college students and urban residents. ese ndings
highlight how consumer characteristics and fast-paced urban lifestyles
directly shape OFD-related waste patterns.
e impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on food and packaging
waste was further examined in Brazil and Bangkok. In the Brazilian
case study, Liboredo et al. (2023) found that fear of virus transmission
inuenced consumer behavior, leading to changes in ordering
frequency, payment preferences, and food-handling practices. In
Bangkok, Liu et al. (2021) reported a marked increase in household
food and plastic waste associated with heightened reliance on delivery
services. Over-ordering, unappetizing meals, expiration, and spoilage
were cited as primary contributors to food waste, while single-use
plastic containers and bags signicantly increased packaging waste.
ese ndings underscore the need for improved consumer education,
better meal planning, and localized circular economy strategies.
Complementing these perspectives, Liao et al. (2018) investigated
waste-sorting intentions among oce workers in Chengdu, China,
where OFD consumption is also widespread. Attitude and perceived
behavioral control strongly predicted the intention to separate food
and packaging waste, whereas subjective norms had no signicant
inuence - suggesting a weak social or cultural mandate for proper
waste practices in workplace settings. Infrastructure conditions,
particularly the availability and clarity of sorting facilities, emerged as
decisive factors, while time pressure during short lunch breaks
reduced the likelihood of proper disposal. Although environmental
concern did not directly drive behavior, it positively inuenced the
motivational constructs underlying waste separation, emphasizing the
value of awareness-building interventions.
Together, these studies demonstrate that eective OFD-related
waste management must address both food and packaging waste
streams while considering the behavioral, infrastructural, and
contextual conditions that shape disposal practices. Strategies that
integrate behavioral insights - such as attitudes, habits, and
motivational drivers - with structural improvements, including
accessible sorting facilities and targeted educational initiatives, are
essential to advancing sustainability in food delivery systems.
5 Advancing the field: critical insights
and a systems-oriented research
agenda
is discussion section brings together the bibliometric patterns
and thematic insights of our review to critically interrogate how
OFD-related consumption and waste have been conceptualized, and
to articulate the theoretical and empirical implications that emerge
from this synthesis.
e bibliometric analysis reveals a marked and sustained rise in
academic interest in the sustainability impacts of OFD systems
beginning in 2021, coinciding with the rapid expansion of delivery
platforms during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although this surge was
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 15 frontiersin.org
initially crisis-driven, the persistence of OFD consumption patterns,
now embedded in everyday routines, suggests that research demand
will continue to grow as digital food environments become
normalized. e co-occurrence network identied ve thematic areas,
with the most inuential focused on consumer attitudes, behavioral
intentions, and psychological determinants. Keyword frequency
patterns reinforce this dominance: terms such as “attitude,” “intention,”
and “determinants” remain central, reecting the strong reliance on
behavioral theories, particularly the eory of Planned Behavior
(TPB) and its variations. Taken together, these patterns illustrate a
eld that has achieved conceptual concentration but remains
theoretically narrow, with limited capacity to capture emerging
complexities in OFD-mediated consumption.
However, the convergence of bibliometric evidence and thematic
analysis also underscores signicant limitations. Despite their
prevalence, consumer behavior theories struggle to adequately
describe the full complexity of OFD-related consumption and waste
practices. TPB and related models provide valuable predictive insights
but oen fall short in generalizing sustainability behavior across
groups or societies. eir linear structure and focus on individual
cognition make it dicult to account for dynamic, multilayered
interactions between psychological factors, context, digital platform
design, socio-demographic dierences, and infrastructural conditions.
In other words, while these models illuminate ‘why’ individuals intend
to act, they oer only partial visibility into ‘how’ actions unfold in real
consumption settings shaped by technologies, environments, and
routines. ese constraints mirror the shortcomings identied in the
broader discussion of food behavior: studies frequently isolate specic
determinants but struggle to integrate them into comprehensive
explanations.
e emphasis on individual-level predictors also obscures
structural and socio-material dimensions shaping food delivery
choices. e bibliometric patterns reveal a narrow theoretical
concentration that may inadvertently reinforce this limitation. While
a behavioral lens helps explain variation in intentions and attitudes, it
is not well-equipped to capture patterned routines, collective practices,
or the embedding of OFD consumption within broader rhythms of
work, mobility, and urban living. is gap is evident in the diculty
of predicting food-waste outcomes based solely on attitudes or
intentions, given that actual practices are oen shaped by time
pressure, convenience logics, cultural norms, and technology-
mediated habits. Such factors position OFD not merely as a site of
individual choice but as a socio-technical arrangement where
behavior, materiality, and infrastructures co-produce waste outcomes.
To address these blind spots, integrating complementary
frameworks, particularly Social Practice eory (SPT), may expand
the analytical capacity of the eld. SPT shis attention away from
isolated individual behaviors toward the interplay of meanings,
materials, and competences that constitute everyday practices.
Applying SPT to OFD waste would enable researchers to examine how
delivery usage becomes normalized within social routines; how
packaging types, platform interfaces, and household infrastructures
shape disposal behavior; and how environmental impacts emerge not
just from personal choices but from the alignment of broader socio-
technical systems. By foregrounding the relational and situated nature
of practices, SPT oers a powerful counterbalance to intention-based
models and opens pathways for understanding inconsistencies in
behavioral ndings, for example, why subjective norms vary across
contexts or why shis in attitudes do not consistently translate into
reduced waste.
5.1 Beyond silos: rethinking the separation
of packaging and food waste in OFD
studies
e thematic distribution of the 55 selected studies reveals
prevailing academic priorities, but also a persistent fragmentation in
how post-consumer waste is conceptualized within online food
delivery (OFD) systems. Most articles examine either packaging waste
or food waste in isolation, thereby addressing only one side of a dual
problem that emerges simultaneously from consumer behavior in
digitally mediated consumption contexts. Research focused exclusively
on packaging has deepened understanding of material attributes,
labeling, design elements, and their inuence on purchasing and
disposal decisions. Yet, by decoupling packaging from broader
consumption processes, such studies overlook how ordering patterns,
portion sizes, storage decisions, and leover management directly
contribute to organic waste generation, oen a larger waste fraction
and one that typically lacks structured pathways for reintegration
when compared to recyclable packaging.
is analytical separation is especially problematic because,
within OFD systems, organic and packaging waste arise from
interdependent consumer choices. When these waste streams are
examined separately, the literature risks obscuring how combined
decisions, such as order size, number of items, requests for extra
packaging, leover handling, and disposal practices, jointly shape the
environmental burden of the service. e limited recycling and
composting infrastructure for organic waste in many urban regions
further accentuates this imbalance, as focusing predominantly on
packaging may inadvertently downplay the substantial environmental
implications of food waste. e fact that only 4 of 55 studies (7.27%)
adopt an integrated perspective underscores the need for more holistic
research capable of analyzing the co-production of these waste
streams.
At the same time, the few integrated assessments identied tend
to emerge from highly specic or exceptional contexts, most notably
the COVID-19 pandemic. Pandemic-induced shis in hygiene
concerns, ordering routines, household connement, and waste
generation patterns oered a unique vantage point on how food and
packaging waste evolve together. Beyond the pandemic, several
contextual factors, urban density, climate-related inuences such as
air pollution driving OFD demand, cultural norms around leovers,
workplace consumption habits, and region-specic infrastructure for
waste segregation and recycling, shape both types of waste. ese
situational dynamics illustrate that waste generation in OFD systems
is embedded in broader socio-environmental conditions, yet the
literature lacks comprehensive frameworks capable of explaining how
these forces simultaneously inuence consumer behavior toward food
and packaging waste.
Taken together, the evidence points to a fragmented understanding
of OFD-related waste generation. Nonetheless, the reviewed studies
highlight post-consumption practices, such as portioning, storage,
cleaning, separation, and disposal, as critical leverage points. Because
these behaviors determine whether materials become recyclable,
compostable, contaminated, or simply discarded, they represent key
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 16 frontiersin.org
avenues for interventions aimed at improving sorting systems,
expanding infrastructure, and designing targeted educational
initiatives. Advancing research in this eld thus requires integrated
and cross-disciplinary approaches capable of linking behavioral
drivers, material ows, and system-level constraints to better inform
context-sensitive policies and business strategies.
A future-oriented research agenda must embrace an integrated
perspective that treats food waste and packaging waste not as separate
phenomena but as interconnected outcomes of consumer choices,
platform design, and infrastructural constraints in online food
delivery systems. Strengthening this agenda is essential to ensure that
future strategies for OFD waste management move beyond reactive,
single-stream solutions and instead address the full complexity of
waste generation and disposal in digitally mediated food systems.
ese interdependencies indicate that moving from single-stream
mitigation to circular transitions requires interventions that
coordinate consumer practices with platform and municipal
infrastructures. Before such coordinated interventions can be credibly
evaluated, the next subsection discusses why harmonized
measurement of food and packaging waste is a foundational enabling
condition for systems-level governance in OFD.
5.2 Can waste management systems
advance without waste measurement?
Despite the valuable empirical advances presented across the
studies in waste measurement and waste management, a fundamental
and persistent challenge remains largely unresolved: the lack of a
unied methodological framework for quantifying post-consumer
waste generated by online food delivery, whether in the form of
packaging, organic residues, or avoidable food waste. Current
approaches dier widely in how they dene system boundaries,
categorize waste types, select indicators, and collect data. Some rely on
platform-level estimations, others on life cycle assessments, household
surveys, observational audits, or spatialized modeling, each producing
results that are not directly comparable. Units of analysis vary from
kilograms per order to tonnes per month or per capita indicators,
while categories such as “food waste,” “avoidable waste,” “leovers,” or
“delivery packaging waste” are operationalized inconsistently. is
methodological heterogeneity constrains the ability of scholars to
synthesize ndings, assess temporal trends, or evaluate the relative
magnitude of OFD-related waste across regions and countries.
e absence of standardized measurement protocols has equally
signicant policy implications. Without methodological
harmonization, municipal and national authorities struggle to
establish credible baselines, monitor progress, or design targeted
policies capable of mitigating waste at the source. Divergent
estimations obscure the true scale of OFD-related waste dynamics,
undermining eorts to integrate behavioral insights, infrastructural
planning, and environmental data into coherent waste management
strategies. Moreover, the lack of cross-country comparability prevents
the development of international benchmarks or coordinated
regulatory responses, an increasingly critical issue given the global
expansion of OFD platforms. As the well-known management
principle asserts, we cannot manage what we do not measure; in the
case of OFD, the absence of robust, standardized, and transparent
measuring tools represents a central barrier to both scientic and
policy-oriented progress. Advancing the eld will therefore require
interdisciplinary eorts to establish shared denitions, metrics, and
methodological guidelines that enable consistent quantication and
support evidence-based interventions across diverse socio-economic
and urban contexts.
However, the value of harmonized metrics ultimately depends on
the quality and granularity of the underlying data used to populate
them. e following subsection therefore examines the limits of
prevailing observational and self-reported approaches and claries
how these constraints aect what can be inferred—and governed—
within a systems framework.
5.3 The limits of observation and
prediction: rethinking food waste behavior
in OFD ecosystems
e reviewed literature demonstrates that food waste in OFD
systems arises from a multifaceted interplay of psychological, social,
contextual, and demographic determinants. Although individual
studies identify relevant predictors – such as trust in platforms,
perceived convenience, favorable attitudes, hygiene concerns, and
habitual use– the eld still lacks a coherent theoretical framework
capable of explaining how these variables function together. A major
diculty is disentangling how these determinants interact. Attitudes
and perceived behavioral control consistently predict food-waste-
related behaviors, yet subjective norms remain inconsistent across
cultural and demographic contexts.
A further limitation stems from the predominant reliance on
cross-sectional, self-reported data, which constrains the capacity to
capture the dynamics of OFD consumption and food waste. Self-
report measures are highly vulnerable to recall bias, social desirability
eects, and misestimation of portion size or waste amount. As a result,
they oen fail to reect actual behavior and make it dicult to assess
causal relationships or temporal changes. is limitation is evident in
studies reporting both increases and decreases in food waste during
the COVID-19 lockdown, suggesting that self-reported intentions and
perceptions do not always correspond to observed consumption
patterns.
Recognizing these methodological constraints, a small but
growing number of studies and pilot initiatives are experimenting
with intelligent waste-monitoring technologies, such as smart bins
equipped with sensors, weight measurement, and image recognition
systems. ese tools aim to generate objective, real-time data on food
disposal, reducing the reliance on self-reports and enabling a more
accurate assessment of waste behaviors in domestic and commercial
settings. Although still in early stages, such technologies highlight
promising pathways for future research seeking to overcome current
measurement limitations and move toward more evidence-based,
behaviorally grounded analyses.
e heterogeneity of consumer groups - varying in age, gender,
environmental values, income levels, and digital habits - further
indicates that broad behavioral generalizations are insucient to
describe the complex, context-dependent mechanisms shaping OFD
behavior. ese analytical gaps help explain why many studies fail to
fully capture the nuances of food-related practices in digital
environments. Advancing the eld requires mixed methods,
longitudinal designs, direct behavioral observation, and integrative
theoretical approaches capable of addressing the intertwined
psychological and contextual determinants of food waste.
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 17 frontiersin.org
ese methodological challenges also reect deeper theoretical
constraints. e predominant behavioral models mobilized in the
literature, especially the eory of Planned Behavior (TPB), provide
structured lenses for examining attitudes, subjective norms, and
perceived behavioral control. However, their variable-centered and
individually focused orientation oers only a partial representation of
the dynamic and situational nature of food waste behavior in digitally
mediated contexts. Because TPB was not designed to capture socio-
material, infrastructural, and temporal dimensions, studies relying
exclusively on it struggle to integrate diverse determinants into a
unied explanation. is reinforces the conceptual fragmentation
observed across empirical research.
Consequently, advancing research on OFD-related food waste
requires extending TPB-based approaches and combining them with
complementary perspectives capable of capturing broader socio-
environmental inuences, everyday practices, platform aordances,
and the material infrastructures that shape consumption and disposal.
Integrating frameworks may provide the conceptual scope needed to
understand how individual motivations interact with digital design,
household structures, and local waste-management systems. Without
such theoretical and methodological integration – including the
adoption of new observational tools such as intelligent bins– the eld
will continue to accumulate valuable but fragmented insights, lacking
the coherence necessary for explaining food-waste behavior in a
comprehensive and systemic manner.
ese methodological constraints are not merely technical: they
determine which behavioral levers, feedback loops, and rebound
eects become visible in OFD waste research. e next subsection
applies this systems lens to reusability, illustrating how the
performance of reusable packaging depends on measurable ows and
sustained behavioral compliance across multiple actors.
5.4 Reusability as a multilayered system:
behavioral, logistical, and structural
constraints
Although research on reuse-oriented packaging has become
increasingly sophisticated, the evidence consistently shows that
reusability operates as a multilayered system, one shaped simultaneously
by behavioral, material, logistical, economic, and regulatory dynamics
rather than by any single intervention or discipline. Designing,
implementing, and scaling reuse systems requires integrating insights
from environmental science, behavioral psychology, operations and
logistics, business model innovation, and human–computer interaction,
as well as public policy and food safety regulation.
Taken together, the barriers identied in the literature– ranging
from consumer aversion to wear and hygiene concerns (Collis et al.,
2023) and premature disposal that prevents environmental breakeven
(Hoseini et al., 2024), to limited cleaning and return infrastructure (Sia
et al., 2024), economic misalignment among stakeholders (Schuermann
and Woo, 2022; Li et al., 2023), and logistical dependence on high return
and reuse rates (Recker et al., 2024)– demonstrate that reuse systems
operate across multiple layers of decision-making and structural
constraints. As a result, isolated interventions tend to have limited impact
unless they are embedded within coordinated, system-wide strategies.
Beyond these documented barriers, successful reuse schemes must
also conform to stringent food safety standards, sanitation protocols,
and traceability requirements, which vary across jurisdictions and
oen impose additional operational costs and responsibilities on
restaurants and delivery platforms. In many contexts, public policies
that explicitly authorize, incentivize, or regulate reusable container
schemes remain underdeveloped. Without appropriate regulatory
frameworks, covering issues such as liability in case of contamination,
standardized cleaning procedures, transportation hygiene, and
drop-o infrastructure, reuse solutions risk remaining fragmented,
dicult to scale, or conned to niche settings. is regulatory and
institutional dimension is largely absent from current OFD-focused
research, yet it is fundamental for bridging the gap between consumer-
level adoption and system-wide circularity. Consequently, advancing
reusable packaging in the food delivery sector requires not only
addressing behavioral and economic factors, but also developing
integrated policy mechanisms and safety standards that enable the
responsible and sustainable expansion of reuse practices.
A systems-based agenda for advancing reusability in OFD must
recognize that reusable packaging succeeds only when behavioral,
infrastructural, environmental, economic, food safety, and regulatory
dimensions operate coherently. Future research should examine how
everyday consumer practices, ordering, storing, cleaning, and returning
containers, align with the logistical demands of reuse cycles. Studies
must also clarify the environmental conditions under which reusable
systems outperform single-use alternatives, considering return rates,
container durability, washing eciency, and transportation loops.
Equally important is the assessment of infrastructural readiness, as
large-scale reuse depends on coordinated systems for collection,
sanitization, and redistribution. Economic viability requires
investigation into cost-sharing models, deposit–return schemes, and
incentives that enable participation by platforms, restaurants, and
consumers. Additionally, food safety requirements shape container
design and handling protocols, inuencing both feasibility and
acceptance. Finally, regulatory frameworks must be analyzed to identify
barriers and opportunities for governing reuse systems eectively.
Overall, reusability should be treated not as an isolated solution but
as a systemic transition that emerges from the alignment of multiple
interdependent components within digitally mediated food systems.
Taken together, the measurement and behavioral constraints
identied above indicate that reusability operates as a systems
intervention whose performance depends on coordinated alignment
across actors, infrastructures, incentives, and governance. is leads
directly to the nal subsection, which consolidates these insights into
a systems-based framework linking behavior, infrastructures,
incentives, safety, and regulation across the OFD value chain.
5.5 Toward a systems-based framework for
future OFD waste research
is subsection advances a systems-based framework for
understanding post-consumption food and packaging waste in online
food delivery (OFD) systems, building directly on the evidence
synthesized across the preceding discussion. A future-oriented
research agenda must adopt a genuine systems perspective—one that
integrates consumer behavior, environmental performance,
infrastructure demands, economic incentives, food safety
requirements, and regulatory frameworks—while situating OFD waste
outcomes within the broader value chain and stakeholder networks
that shape the ow of materials, decisions, and responsibilities. Moving
beyond isolated analyses of food or packaging waste is therefore
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 18 frontiersin.org
essential to capture how these dimensions interact dynamically across
the interconnected actors that constitute OFD ecosystems.
First, an integrated agenda should interrogate how consumer
decision-making and everyday practices co-evolve with the material,
organizational, and digital infrastructures that structure OFD services.
Ordering habits, portioning routines, storage practices, and disposal
choices are shaped not only by individual attitudes or perceptions, but
also by platform interfaces, restaurant workows, supplier packaging
decisions, delivery logistics, household constraints, and municipal
waste systems. A systems-level analysis thus requires explicitly
connecting these behavioral processes with their material
consequences, including contamination risks, sorting failures, and the
downstream fate of organic residues and packaging, while also
recognizing how each stakeholder in the value chain may either
amplify or mitigate these outcomes.
Second, the environmental performance of OFD systems cannot be
adequately evaluated without considering the infrastructural
dependencies distributed across the value chain. e relative maturity
of packaging recycling systems contrasts sharply with the oen-limited
availability of composting, biodigestion, or separate collection of organic
waste—gaps that constrain not only consumers, but also restaurants,
platforms, and waste-service providers. Future research should therefore
examine how investments in segregation infrastructure, reverse
logistics, reusable or modular packaging systems, and municipal
support mechanisms condition the environmental impacts of OFD
consumption and redistribute responsibilities among actors in the chain.
ird, economic incentives remain central to system functioning
across all nodes of the OFD value chain. Restaurants’ material
procurement choices, platform-level pricing and bundling strategies,
consumers’ willingness to pay for sustainable options, and the
operational models of waste-management companies jointly inuence
total waste generation. A systems-based research agenda should
explore how cost structures, subsidies, taxes, and incentive schemes
can be designed to better align economic interests across stakeholders
and drive reductions in both food and packaging waste, while also
accounting for feasibility constraints, distributional equity, and power
asymmetries within the chain.
Fourth, food safety requirements, shaped by regulators, restaurants,
and industry standards, play a pivotal role in determining packaging
formats, delivery logistics, and portioning practices. Safety protocols
introduced during and aer the COVID-19 pandemic illustrate how
microbial risk management can unintentionally increase packaging use
or limit the adoption of circular alternatives. An integrated agenda
should therefore investigate how food safety expectations can be met
without reinforcing linear packaging systems, and how coordinated
standards across stakeholders could support safer, yet more circular,
solutions.
Finally, regulatory frameworks fundamentally structure
stakeholder responsibilities and the points at which interventions are
possible. Regulations inuence packaging specications, labeling
requirements, liability regimes, compostable material approvals,
platform duties, restaurant obligations, and municipal waste-
management mandates. However, regulatory environments remain
fragmented and uneven across regions. Future research should thus
analyze the coherence and alignment of regulations across the OFD
value chain, identifying opportunities for harmonization that
strengthen stakeholder cooperation and support the integrated
management of both food and packaging waste.
Taken together, these considerations underscore the need for
analytical frameworks grounded in value-chain analysis and
stakeholder network mapping, capable of capturing how decisions
made at one node reverberate throughout the system. Figure 5
synthesizes these interdependencies into an integrated systems-based
framework, illustrating how behavioral, infrastructural, economic, food
safety, and regulatory dimensions interact and where governance-
relevant leverage points may enable coordinated interventions across
the OFD ecosystem. By making these interconnections explicit, the
proposed framework claries how future scholarship can progress from
documenting determinants to testing coordinated interventions and
governance arrangements. e conclusion that follows distills these
insights into actionable scientic, managerial, and policy priorities.
6 Conclusion
e rapid expansion of online food delivery (OFD) services has
intensied environmental concerns related to post-consumption waste,
particularly food and packaging waste generated at the consumer level.
is systematic literature review contributes to the eld by
consolidating and critically synthesizing a fragmented body of research
on consumer behavior in OFD systems. By combining bibliometric
mapping with in-depth thematic analysis, the review provides a
structured overview of the literature while clarifying how waste-related
behaviors, impacts, and solutions have been conceptualized in relation
to sustainability and circular economy objectives.
A key contribution of this review is the identication of analytical
limitations in the existing literature. Although empirical evidence on
consumer behavior in OFD systems is substantial, current studies
remain largely focused on individual-level determinants and oen
overlook the broader conditions under which consumption and
disposal occur. e ndings indicate that food and packaging waste
in OFD systems emerge from the interaction of ordering routines,
platform design features, material choices, household practices, waste
management infrastructure, and regulatory environments. is
highlights the need for research approaches that situate consumer
behavior within wider socio-technical and institutional systems.
e review also reveals a persistent fragmentation in how post-
consumption waste is addressed, particularly the separation of food
waste and packaging waste into distinct analytical streams. Given that
both forms of waste originate from the same ordering and
consumption processes, this separation limits the capacity of existing
research to capture their interdependencies and cumulative
environmental impacts. Integrated perspectives that examine post-
consumption waste holistically remain scarce and represent an
important direction for future research.
From a methodological standpoint, the synthesis points to
substantial heterogeneity in waste measurement practices and a strong
reliance on self-reported data, constraining cross-study comparability
and limiting the assessment of real-world impacts. Future research
would benet from clearer system boundaries, harmonized indicators,
and data collection strategies capable of capturing observed behaviors
and material ows across diverse socio-economic and infrastructural
contexts.
ese insights carry relevant scientic, managerial, and policy
implications. Scientically, they support the need for more system-
oriented and interdisciplinary research designs capable of addressing
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 19 frontiersin.org
the complexity of OFD ecosystems. From a managerial perspective,
the ndings suggest that eective waste reduction strategies should
extend beyond individual consumer nudges to include platform
interface design, reusable packaging logistics, alignment of economic
incentives across actors, and greater transparency regarding portion
sizes and packaging options. At the policy level, the review highlights
opportunities for policymakers and municipal waste managers to
strengthen regulatory instruments, expand composting and
recycling infrastructure, and develop standards that support reuse
systems and sustainable packaging innovation.
Overall, this review claries the current state of knowledge while
identifying key conceptual and methodological gaps that shape the
research agenda on OFD-related waste. By promoting more
integrated and system-sensitive analytical approaches, the ndings
provide a foundation for future empirical research and for the
development of coordinated managerial and policy interventions
aimed at reducing post-consumption waste and supporting more
sustainable online food delivery systems.
Data availability statement
e original contributions presented in the study are included in
the article/Supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed
to the corresponding author/s.
Author contributions
AC: Funding acquisition, Writing– review & editing, Validation,
Investigation, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Soware, Data curation,
Writing– original dra, Conceptualization, Project administration.
MF: Writing– review & editing, Writing– original dra, Visualization,
Conceptualization, Investigation, Validation, Funding acquisition,
Supervision. GP: Funding acquisition, Writing– review & editing,
Data curation, Validation, Writing – original dra, Supervision,
Visualization, Investigation, Conceptualization. VS: Project
administration, Methodology, Supervision, Validation,
Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Writing– review & editing,
Resources, Writing– original dra.
Funding
e author(s) declared that nancial support was received for this
work and/or its publication. is study was funded, in part, by the São
Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP), Brazil, under Grant numbers
#2023/13997-5 and #2021/11977-6, as part of the activities of the
Center of Science for the Development of Solutions for Post-
Consumer Waste: Packaging and Products (CCD Circula), wich also
receives nancial support from the following companies: Ambev,
Braskem, Grupo Boticário, Natura, Sonoco, and Tetra Pak.
FIGURE 5
Systems-based framework linking consumer behavior, value-chain coordination, and governance in post-consumption waste generation in online
food delivery systems. Source: Generated by the authors with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools (OpenAI, 2025).
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 20 frontiersin.org
Acknowledgments
e authors acknowledge the valuable contributions of
undergraduate students from the Food Engineering program at
FZEA/USP, iemi Watanabe, Victoria Zutin, and aina Muoio,
who were engaged in scientic initiation activities and provided
essential support in data organization, preliminary analyses, and
research assistance throughout the project. e authors also thank
the reviewers for their constructive and insightful comments, which
substantially strengthened the integration and critical discussion
presented in this review. In addition, the authors acknowledge the
All4Food Network for fostering a collaborative and transdisciplinary
research environment dedicated to advancing sustainable food
systems. is research was supported by the National Council for
Scientic and Technological Development (CNPq) through projects
no. 446825/2024-7 and no. 402188/2023-3, as well as through the
Innovative University Extension Program (Extensão Inovadora)
(grant no. 304283/2024-0), which promotes the integration of
research, education, and societal engagement and underpins the
extension-driven agenda of the All4Food Network.
Conflict of interest
e author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the
absence of any commercial or nancial relationships that could be
construed as a potential conict of interest.
Generative AI statement
e author(s) declared that Generative AI was not used in the
creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside gures in this
article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of articial
intelligence and reasonable eorts have been made to ensure accuracy,
including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any
issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors
and do not necessarily represent those of their aliated organizations,
or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product
that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its
manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Supplementary material
e Supplementary material for this article can be found online
at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028/
full#supplementary-material
References
Ali, S., Khalid, N., Javed, H. M. U., and Islam, D. M. Z. (2021). Consumer adoption of
online food delivery ordering (OFDO) services in Pakistan: the impact of the COVID-19
pandemic situation. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex 7:10. doi: 10.3390/joitmc7010010
Ambad, S. N. A., Haron, H., and Mohd Ishar, N. I. (2022). Determinants of consumers’
purchase behaviour towards online food delivery ordering (OFDO). Pertanika J Soc Sci
Humanit 30, 1071–1094. doi: 10.47836/pjssh.30.3.08
Amicarelli, V., and Bux, C. (2021). Food waste in Italian households during the Covid-19
pandemic: a self-reporting approach. Food Secur. 13, 25–37. doi: 10.1007/s12571-020-01121-z
Amicarelli, V., Lagioia, G., Sampietro, S., and Bux, C. (2022). Has the COVID-19
pandemic changed food waste perception and behavior? Evidence from Italian
consumers. Socio Econ. Plan. Sci. 82:101095. doi: 10.1016/j.seps.2021.101095
Armstrong, J. H., and Kamieniecki, S. (2019). Sustainability policy research: a review
and synthesis. Policy Stud. J. 47. doi: 10.1111/psj.12320
Bellows, A. L., Ganpule, A., Raza, A., Kapoor, D., Musicus, A., Spiker, M. L., et al.
(2024). Environmental sustainability of food environments: development and
application of a framework in 4 cities in South Asia. Curr. Develop. Nutr. 8:103791. doi:
10.1016/j.cdnut.2024.103791
Borghesi, G., and Morone, P. (2023). A review of the eects of COVID-19 on food
waste. Food Secur. 15, 261–280. doi: 10.1007/s12571-022-01311-x
Caspers, J., Süßbauer, E., Coroama, V. C., and Finkbeiner, M. (2023). Life cycle
assessments of takeaway food and beverage packaging: the role of consumer behavior.
Sustainability 15:4315. doi: 10.3390/su15054315
Chen, X., and Lee, T. J. (2022). Potential eects of green brand legitimacy and the
biospheric value of eco-friendly behavior on online food delivery: a mediation approach.
Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 34, 4080–4102. doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-07-2021-0892
Chiu, T.-P., Yang, D. J., and Ma, M.-Y. (2023). e intertwining eect of visual
perception of the reusable packaging and type of logo simplication on consumers’
sustainable awareness. Sustainability 15:13115. doi: 10.3390/su151713115
Chu, J., Liu, H., and Salvo, A. (2021). Air pollution as a determinant of food delivery and
related plastic waste. Nat. Hum. Behav. 5, 212–220. doi: 10.1038/s41562-020-00961-1
Coelho, P. F. D. C., and Leocádio, Á. L. (2022). O alimento para viagem é sustentável?
Implicações ambientais e socioculturais do consumo de alimentos para viagem no Brasil
e na Alemanha. ReMark Rev. Bras. Market. 21, 1185–1243. doi: 10.5585/remark.
v21i4.19706
Collis, B., Baxter, W., Baird, H. M., Meade, K., and Webb, T. L. (2023). Signs of use
present a barrier to reusable packaging systems for takeaway food. Sustainability
15:8857. doi: 10.3390/su15118857
Dhir, A., Talwar, S., Kaur, P., and Malibari, A. (2020). Food waste in hospitality and
food services: a systematic literature review and framework development approach. J.
Clean. Prod. 270:122861. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122861
FAO (2019). Moving forward on food loss and waste reduction. Rome: Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (e state of food and
agriculture, 2019).
Filimonau, V., and De Coteau, D. A. (2019). Food waste management in hospitality
operations: a critical review. Tour. Manag. 71, 234–245. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.
2018.10.009
Filipová, A., Mokrejšová, V., Šulc, Z., and Zeman, J. (2017). Characteristics of food-
wasting consumers in the Czech Republic. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 41, 714–722. doi:
10.1111/ijcs.12384
Gallego-Schmid, A., Mendoza, J. M. F., and Azapagic, A. (2019). Environmental
impacts of takeaway food containers. J. Clean. Prod. 211, 417–427. doi: 10.1016/j.
jclepro.2018.11.220
Gu, C., Huang, T., Wei, W., Yang, C., Chen, J., Miao, W., et al. (2023). e eect of using
augmented reality technology in takeaway food packaging to improve
young consumers’ negative evaluations. Agriculture 13:335. doi: 10.3390/agriculture13020335
Gunden, N., Morosan, C., and DeFranco, A. (2020). Consumers’ intentions to use
online food delivery systems in the USA. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 32, 1325–1345.
doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-06-2019-0595
Hong, Q. N., and Pluye, P. (2018). “Systematic reviews: A brief historical overview,”
Education for Information, 34, 261–276. doi: 10.3233/EFI-180219
Hoseini, M., Greenwood, S. C., Eman, S., Mattinson, P., Baird, H. M., Beswick-Parsons, R.,
et al. (2024). Integrating behavioural, material and environmental science to inform the
design and evaluation of a reuse system for takeaway food. Resour. Conserv. Recycl.
209:107815. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2024.107815
Cunha et al. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1700028
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 21 frontiersin.org
Howard, J. A., and Sheth, J. N. (1969). e theory of buyer behavior. New York: John
Wiley & Sons.
Hu, X., Liu, C., Zhuo, Q., and Moon, D. (2023). Assessing CO2 emissions of online
food delivery in Japan. Sustainability 15:8084. doi: 10.3390/su15108084
Islam, S. A., Jones, R. P., Akhi, A. A., and Talukder, M. S. (2024). Do food delivery apps
inuence food waste generation? A stimulus-organism-behavior-consequence (SOBC)
exploration. Br. Food J. 126, 879–897. doi: 10.1108/BFJ-07-2023-0648
Jabeen, F., Dhir, A., Islam, N., Talwar, S., and Papa, A. (2023). Emotions and food
waste behavior: do habit and facilitating conditions matter? J. Bus. Res. 155:113356. doi:
10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113356
Jang, Y.-C., Lee, G., Kwon, Y., Lim, J.-h., and Jeong, J.-h. (2020). Recycling and
management practices of plastic packaging waste towards a circular economy in South
Korea. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 158:104798. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104798
Jang, Y., Nam Kim, K., and Woo, J. (2023). Post-consumer plastic packaging waste
from online food delivery services in South Korea. Waste Manag. 156, 177–186. doi:
10.1016/j.wasman.2022.11.036
Kasavan, S., Siron, R., Yuso, S., and Fakri, M. F. R. (2022). Drivers of food waste generation
and best practice towards sustainable food waste management in the hotel sector: a systematic
review. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 29, 48152–48167. doi: 10.1007/s11356-022-19984-4
Kristia, K., Kovács, S., and László, E. (2023). Food delivery platform and food waste:
deciphering the role of promotions, knowledge, and subjective norms among Indonesian
generation Z. Clean. Respons. Consum. 11:100152. doi: 10.1016/j.clrc.2023.100152
Leal Filho, W., Salvia, A. L., Paço, A., Dias-Ferreira, C., Neiva, S., Rampasso, I. S., et al.
(2022). Assessing the connections between COVID-19 and waste management in Brazil.
Sustainability 14:8083. doi: 10.3390/su14138083
Li, C., Bremer, P., Jowett, T., Lee, M. S. W., Parker, K., Gaugler, E. C., et al. (2024). What
inuences consumer food waste behaviour when ordering food online? An application
of the extended theory of planned behaviour. Cogent Food Agric. 10:2330728. doi:
10.1080/23311932.2024.2330728
Li, K., Chen, Y., Liu, J., Zhang, L., and Mu, X. (2021). Online food delivery platforms
and restaurants’ interactions in the context of the ban on using single-use plastics. IEEE
Access 9, 96210–96220. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3095296
Li, C., Mirosa, M., and Bremer, P. (2020). Review of online food delivery platforms
and their impacts on sustainability. Sustainability 12:5528. doi: 10.3390/su12145528
Li, R., Zhou, Y., Su, H., Wang, Q., and Wang, H. (2023). Cost–benet analysis of
reusable takeaway food containers usage: a case on campus in China. Environ. Sci. Pollut.
Res. 30, 50002–50012. doi: 10.1007/s11356-023-25884-y
Li, R., Zhou, Y., Wang, H., and Wang, Q. (2025). Study on university students’
intention to choose reusable takeaway food containers: evidence from China. Int. J.
Sustain. High. Educ. 26, 295–314. doi: 10.1108/IJSHE-08-2023-0363
Li, Z., Zhou, Y., Zhang, H., Cai, Y., and Yang, Z. (2022). Driving factors and their
interactions of takeaway packaging waste generation in China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl.
185:106467. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106467
Liao, C., Zhao, D., and Zhang, S. (2018). Psychological and conditional factors
inuencing sta’s takeaway waste separation intention: an application of the extended
theory of planned behavior. Sustain. Cities Soc. 41, 186–194. doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2018.05.046
Liboredo, J. C., Amaral, C. A. A., and Carvalho, N. C. (2023). Food delivery before
and during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil. Nutr. Food Sci. 53, 301–318. doi: 10.1108/
NFS-12-2021-0368
Liu, G., Agostinho, F., Duan, H., Song, G., Wang, X., Giannetti, B. F., et al. (2020).
Environmental impacts characterization of packaging waste generated by urban food
delivery services. A big-data analysis in Jing-Jin-Ji region (China). Waste Manag. 117,
157–169. doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.2020.07.028
Liu, C., Bunditsakulchai, P., and Zhuo, Q. (2021). Impact of COVID-19 on food and
plastic waste generated by consumers in Bangkok. Sustainability 13:8988. doi: 10.3390/
su13168988
Ma, J., He, J., Kong, X., Zheng, J., Han, L., Liu, Y., et al. (2023). From agricultural
cellulosic waste to food delivery packaging: a mini-review. Chin. Chem. Lett. 34:107407.
doi: 10.1016/j.cclet.2022.04.005
Mahmood, H., Rehman, A. U., Sabir, I., Rauf, A., Ahanorhan, A., and Nawal, A.
(2022). Restaurant diners’ switching behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic:
protection motivation theory. Front. Psychol. 13:833627. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.
833627
Massari, S., et al. (2021). “Design thinking to engage consumers in achieving zero
waste food experiences: the CEASE framework” in Design thinking for food well-being.
ed. W. Batat (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 247–260.
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzla, J., and Altman, D. G.e PRISMA Group (2009).
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and Meta-analyses: the PRISMA
statement. PLoS Med. 6:e1000097. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
Naruetharadhol, P., Wongsaichia, S., Pienwisetkaew, T., Schrank, J., Chaiwongjarat, K.,
ippawong, P., et al. (2023). Consumer intention to utilize an E-commerce platform
for imperfect vegetables based on health-consciousness. Foods 12:1166. doi: 10.3390/
foods12061166
OpenAI(2025). ChatGPT (GPT-5 version) [Large language model]. Available at
online: https://chat.openai.com/
Page, M. J., Moher, D., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Homann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D.,
et al. (2021). PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and
exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ:n160. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n160
Pandey, S., Chawla, D., and Puri, S. (2022). Food delivery apps (FDAs) in Asia: an
exploratory study across India and the Philippines. Br. Food J. 124, 657–678. doi:
10.1108/BFJ-01-2020-0074
Pluye, P., and Hong, Q. N. (2014). Combining the power of stories and the power of
numbers: mixed methods research and mixed studies reviews. Annu. Rev. Public Health
35, 29–45. doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032013-182440
Recker, J., Bockelmann, T., and Barthel, F. (2024). Growing online-to-oine platform
businesses: how Vytal became the world-leading provider of smart reusable food
packaging. Inf. Syst. J. 34, 179–200. doi: 10.1111/isj.12474
R Core Team (2024). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R
Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available at online: https://
www.R-project.org/
Runhaar, H., Dieperink, C., and Driessen, P. (2006). Policy analysis for sustainable
development: the toolbox for the environmental social scientist. Int. J. Sustain. High.
Educ. 7, 34–56. doi: 10.1108/14676370610639236
Schuermann, H., and Woo, J. (2022). Estimating consumers’ willingness to pay for
reusable food containers when ordering delivery food: a contingent valuation approach.
J. Clean. Prod. 366:133012. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133012
Sha, W. (2023). Literature review on waste management of online food delivery industry
in China. Chin. J. Popul. Resour. Environ. 21, 197–202. doi: 10.1016/j.cjpre.2023.09.009
Shankar, A., Dhir, A., Talwar, S., Islam, N., and Sharma, P. (2022). Balancing food waste
and sustainability goals in online food delivery: towards a comprehensive conceptual
framework. Technovation 117:102606. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2022.102606
Sharma, R., Dhir, A., Talwar, S., and Kaur, P. (2021). Over-ordering and food waste:
the use of food delivery apps during a pandemic. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 96:102977. doi:
10.1016/j.ijhm.2021.102977
Sia, J. K.-M., Ho, J. M., and Hii, I. S. H. (2024). Green meets food delivery services:
consumers’ intention to reuse food delivery containers in the post-pandemic era. J. Hosp.
Tour. Insights 7, 541–561. doi: 10.1108/JHTI-10-2022-0483
Song, G., Zhang, H., Duan, H., and Xu, M. (2018). Packaging waste from food delivery in
China’s mega cities. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 130, 226–227. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.12.007
Statista (2025) Platform delivery worldwide. Available online at: https://www.statista.
com/outlook/emo/online-food-delivery/meal-delivery/platform-delivery/worldwide
(Accessed: 10 May 2025).
Talwar, S., Kaur, P., Ahmed, U., Bilgihan, A., and Dhir, A. (2023). e dark side of
convenience: how to reduce food waste induced by food delivery apps. Br. Food J. 125,
205–225. doi: 10.1108/BFJ-02-2021-0204
Tang, J., Tang, Y., Sun, Z., Lei, M., and Ma, X. (2023). Quantify the food delivery
package waste generation of Dongguan in grid level using empowerment calculation
method. Energ. Source Part A Recover. Util. Environ. E. 45, 940–951. doi:
10.1080/15567036.2023.2175936
Tao, Y. M., Quoquab, F., and Mohammad, J. (2024). ‘Why should I care about
pollution?’ e role of moral disengagement, guilt and plastic usage intention while
ordering food online. J. Soc. Market. 14, 432–458. doi: 10.1108/JSOCM-01-2024-0015
Tenhunen-Lunkka, A., Balatsas-Lekkas, A., Mouazan, E., Palola, S., Ngo, T., Salo, M.,
et al. (2024). Implementing a circular business model for reusable packaging:
multidisciplinary learnings from reusable pizza packaging. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 48,
62–83. doi: 10.1016/j.spc.2024.05.006
Trivedi, V., Trivedi, A., Pandey, K. K., and Chaurasia, S. S. (2023). Ordering the right
quantity? Examining the impact of plate size vagueness on food waste in an online
food delivery system. J. Clean. Prod. 391:136052. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136052
Varese, E., Cesarani, M. C., Kabaja, B., Sołtysik, M., and Wojnarowska, M. (2024). Online
food delivery habits and its environmental impact during the COVID-19 pandemic: an
Italian and polish study. Br. Food J. 126, 191–204. doi: 10.1108/BFJ-12-2022-1120
Wei, L., Prabhakar, G., and Duong, L. N. K. (2023). Usage of online food delivery in
food waste generation in China during the crisis of COVID -19. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol.
58, 5602–5608. doi: 10.1111/ijfs.16552
Wen, Z., Zhang, Y., and Fu, D. (2019). ‘e environmental impact assessment of a
takeaway food delivery order based on industry chain evaluation in China,’ China
Environ. Sci. 39, 4017–4024. Available at online: http://www.cnki.net
Xu, S., Du, Y., and Xu, G. (2024). Logistics strategies of food delivery O2O supply
chain with anti-food waste regulation. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 8:1320242. doi: 10.3389/
fsufs.2024.1320242
Yeo, S. F., Tan, C. L., Teo, S. L., and Tan, K. H. (2021). e role of food apps
servitization on repurchase intention: a study of FoodPanda. Int. J. Prod. Econ.
234:108063. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2021.108063
Zhang, Y., and Wen, Z. (2022). Mapping the environmental impacts and policy
eectiveness of takeaway food industry in China. Sci. Total Environ. 808:152023. doi:
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.152023
Zhang, H., Xue, L., Jiang, Y., Song, M., Wei, D., and Liu, G. (2022). Food delivery waste
in Wuhan, China: patterns, drivers, and implications. Resour. Conserv. Recycl.
177:105960. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105960
