Author ORCID Identifier
0009-0002-1217-6508
Abstract
Consumer uptake of a sustainable diet is critical for addressing environmental challenges and promoting public health. Understanding why consumers resist adopting sustainable eating habits can inform targeted interventions and policies. This pilot study examines whether a newly developed scale can effectively detect consumer resistance to a sustainable diet. Currently, there is a lack of research on a tool to measure consumer resistance to a sustainable diet, highlighting the need for a reliable instrument.
The aim of this study is to develop a scale, based on existing literature, to measure consumer resistance to a sustainable diet. Additionally, the study aims to test the Sustainable Dietary Resistance Scale (SDRS) in a pilot study as the first step in the validation process, specifically by examining differences in age, gender, and education levels. This cross-sectional study included the development of the Sustainable Dietary Resistance Scale based on the literature; 26 statements were created in total from each theory to develop the SDRS. The SDRS was distributed to participants aged ≥18 years, with two age cohorts: those under 50 years and those aged 50 and above, in both Ireland and the Netherlands. A total of 105 valid responses were collected.
Descriptive statistics were used to determine frequencies and percentages for each demographic characteristic. Independent t-tests were used to compare the mean resistance in the 50- and 50+ age groups, gender (female and male), and education levels (higher and lower). The SDRS was able to pick up differences in resistance between the groups, with the 50+ group showing more resistance than the 50-. Female participants (n=76) showed less resistance in response to the statements, with men (n=26) exhibiting more resistance, demonstrating a strong relationship between gender and resistance to a sustainable diet. The SDRS picked up differences between education levels, with lower-educated individuals exhibiting more resistance than higher-educated individuals. The results from this study suggest that age, gender, and education levels are correlated with resistance to a sustainable diet.
The findings of this study indicate that the SDRS was able to detect differences between groups; however, further refinement of the scale is needed. This study had several limitations, including a small sample size and an uneven gender distribution, with the majority of participants being female, leading to unbalanced data. Additionally, there is a potential for significant self-selection bias, as over half of the participants (55%) reported following flexitarian, vegan, or vegetarian diets. Future improvements to the scale should focus on achieving greater demographic accuracy, ensuring consistency in language and interpretation, clarifying item statements, and testing the SDRS in a larger, more diverse sample to detect more subtle differences between groups.
Recommended Citation
Flanagan, Kate; Sinteur, Bart; Bulsing, Patricia J.; and Kearney, John M.
(2025)
"Developing a Tool to Measure Resistance to Sustainable Food Choices: A Pilot Study in Ireland and the Netherlands,"
SURE Journal: Science Undergraduate Research Experience Journal:
Vol. 7:
Iss.
2, Article 2.
Available at:
https://arrow.tudublin.ie/sure_j/vol7/iss2/2
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License.
Included in
Agriculture Commons, Alternative and Complementary Medicine Commons, Animal Sciences Commons, Biochemistry, Biophysics, and Structural Biology Commons, Biology Commons, Cell and Developmental Biology Commons, Chemicals and Drugs Commons, Diseases Commons, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, Food Science Commons, Forest Sciences Commons, Genetics and Genomics Commons, Immunology and Infectious Disease Commons, Medical Education Commons, Nutrition Commons, Other Public Health Commons, Pharmacology, Toxicology and Environmental Health Commons, Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences Commons, Physical Sciences and Mathematics Commons, Physiology Commons, Plant Sciences Commons, Rehabilitation and Therapy Commons, Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons, Veterinary Medicine Commons