Roe Brian E, Diktas Hanim E, Qi Danyi, Martin Corby K, Apolzan John W
Dept. of Agricultural, Environmental & Development Economics, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210.
Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, 70808.
medRxiv. 2025 Apr 25:2025.04.23.25326258. doi: 10.1101/2025.04.23.25326258.
The study evaluated changes in household food intake, the waste of fruits and vegetables (FV), and FV inventories after supplemental produce was provided free of charge and in response to a smart coaching intervention to reduce food waste and replace less nutritious foods with FV.
Households measured food intake and waste for ≥3 days before and after intervention. Households were randomized to receive either an intervention to reduce food waste and replace less healthy foods with FV or a control intervention. Both groups received free FV and measured FV inventories before and after intervention.
Participants were from the Baton Rouge, Louisiana region and picked up FV at a central location.
46 adults and their household members.
Treatment participants increased intake of fruits (0.33 servings/day, p=0.09) and vegetables (0.50 servings/day, p=0.01) compared to the control group. All participants reported a decrease in daily total caloric intake (133 kcal/day, p=0.04), an increase in the number (9.5 events/period, p<0.001) and average magnitude (100.5 g/event, p=0.005) of FV waste events, and an increase in fresh FV inventories (4.1 kg/household, p=0.001) after receiving free FVs. Compared to the control group, treatment participants reported less FV waste during eating occasions (22.2 g/day, p=0.09) and an increase in frozen FV inventories (1.8 kg/household, p=0.04).
Providing free FVs without additional intervention does not increase FV intake but does lead to more and larger FV waste events. When coupled with targeted information to improve diet quality and reduce waste, free FV provision can lead to increased FV intake with no significant increase in energy intake or plate waste and smaller increases in the number and magnitude of FV waste events, suggesting that pairing intensive intervention efforts with free FV provision is critical to translate program resources into improved nutrition without increasing waste.
本研究评估了在免费提供补充农产品并针对减少食物浪费以及用水果和蔬菜（FV）替代营养较低食物的智能指导干预措施实施后，家庭食物摄入量、FV浪费情况以及FV库存的变化。
家庭在干预前后测量食物摄入量和浪费情况≥3天。家庭被随机分为接受减少食物浪费并用FV替代不健康食物的干预组或对照干预组。两组在干预前后均接受免费FV并测量FV库存。
参与者来自路易斯安那州巴吞鲁日地区，并在一个中心地点领取FV。
46名成年人及其家庭成员。
与对照组相比，接受治疗的参与者水果摄入量增加（0.33份/天，p = 0.09），蔬菜摄入量增加（0.50份/天，p = 0.01）。所有参与者报告每日总热量摄入减少（133千卡/天，p = 0.04），FV浪费事件的数量（9.5次/时间段，p < 0.001）和平均规模（100.5克/事件，p = 0.005）增加，以及在收到免费FV后新鲜FV库存增加（4.1千克/家庭，p = 0.001）。与对照组相比，接受治疗的参与者报告在就餐时FV浪费较少（22.2克/天，p = 0.09），冷冻FV库存增加（1.8千克/家庭，p = 0.04）。
在没有额外干预的情况下提供免费FV不会增加FV摄入量，但会导致更多且规模更大的FV浪费事件。当与旨在改善饮食质量和减少浪费的针对性信息相结合时，免费提供FV可导致FV摄入量增加，而能量摄入量或餐盘浪费没有显著增加，FV浪费事件的数量和规模增加较小，这表明将强化干预措施与免费提供FV相结合对于将项目资源转化为改善营养状况而不增加浪费至关重要。
