In-depth User-experience of the 66 Homes in 66 Days Kerbside Food Waste Trial

(Rathmines)

Research output: Book/ReportCommissioned report

Abstract

This research found that kerbside food waste trial participants were overwhelmingly positive about their experiences with food waste separation and collection. All 11 households described the information provided as simple to follow and saw the process of disposal and waste collection as efficient. Being part of the trial did not require any significant alterations to normal kitchen behaviours, nor was it viewed as an impost on time. The specific domestic infrastructure, namely the kitchen caddy and the compostable caddy bags, were universally liked and identified as enablers of the process. This specifically related to approval of the size, shape and design of the caddy and the pictorial information provided on the sticker mounted on the caddy’s exterior. The caddy bags were found to make removal of the food waste from the home relatively mess-free and simple. Most interviewees indicated that they would be less likely to use the caddy without the bags, however, some were unsure about how well the bags decomposed. Participants also expressed concerns about where the caddy bags would be able to be purchased, and how much they would cost, post-trial. The cost of purchasing the compostable bags and replacement caddies was viewed as a potential barrier to other households separating their waste, particularly for low-income households
Original languageEnglish
PublisherUniversity of Canberra
Commissioning bodyLake Macquarie City Council
Number of pages23
Publication statusPublished - May 2017

Fingerprint

food
household income
cost
replacement
infrastructure
trial
household
approval
waste collection
removal

Cite this

@book{f5f27189247a449ab77b21d9497a5f44,
title = "In-depth User-experience of the 66 Homes in 66 Days Kerbside Food Waste Trial: (Rathmines)",
abstract = "This research found that kerbside food waste trial participants were overwhelmingly positive about their experiences with food waste separation and collection. All 11 households described the information provided as simple to follow and saw the process of disposal and waste collection as efficient. Being part of the trial did not require any significant alterations to normal kitchen behaviours, nor was it viewed as an impost on time. The specific domestic infrastructure, namely the kitchen caddy and the compostable caddy bags, were universally liked and identified as enablers of the process. This specifically related to approval of the size, shape and design of the caddy and the pictorial information provided on the sticker mounted on the caddy’s exterior. The caddy bags were found to make removal of the food waste from the home relatively mess-free and simple. Most interviewees indicated that they would be less likely to use the caddy without the bags, however, some were unsure about how well the bags decomposed. Participants also expressed concerns about where the caddy bags would be able to be purchased, and how much they would cost, post-trial. The cost of purchasing the compostable bags and replacement caddies was viewed as a potential barrier to other households separating their waste, particularly for low-income households",
keywords = "food waste, sustainable urban living, compost",
author = "Bethaney TURNER",
year = "2017",
month = "5",
language = "English",
publisher = "University of Canberra",

}

In-depth User-experience of the 66 Homes in 66 Days Kerbside Food Waste Trial : (Rathmines). / TURNER, Bethaney.

University of Canberra, 2017. 23 p.

Research output: Book/ReportCommissioned report

TY - BOOK

T1 - In-depth User-experience of the 66 Homes in 66 Days Kerbside Food Waste Trial

T2 - (Rathmines)

AU - TURNER, Bethaney

PY - 2017/5

Y1 - 2017/5

N2 - This research found that kerbside food waste trial participants were overwhelmingly positive about their experiences with food waste separation and collection. All 11 households described the information provided as simple to follow and saw the process of disposal and waste collection as efficient. Being part of the trial did not require any significant alterations to normal kitchen behaviours, nor was it viewed as an impost on time. The specific domestic infrastructure, namely the kitchen caddy and the compostable caddy bags, were universally liked and identified as enablers of the process. This specifically related to approval of the size, shape and design of the caddy and the pictorial information provided on the sticker mounted on the caddy’s exterior. The caddy bags were found to make removal of the food waste from the home relatively mess-free and simple. Most interviewees indicated that they would be less likely to use the caddy without the bags, however, some were unsure about how well the bags decomposed. Participants also expressed concerns about where the caddy bags would be able to be purchased, and how much they would cost, post-trial. The cost of purchasing the compostable bags and replacement caddies was viewed as a potential barrier to other households separating their waste, particularly for low-income households

AB - This research found that kerbside food waste trial participants were overwhelmingly positive about their experiences with food waste separation and collection. All 11 households described the information provided as simple to follow and saw the process of disposal and waste collection as efficient. Being part of the trial did not require any significant alterations to normal kitchen behaviours, nor was it viewed as an impost on time. The specific domestic infrastructure, namely the kitchen caddy and the compostable caddy bags, were universally liked and identified as enablers of the process. This specifically related to approval of the size, shape and design of the caddy and the pictorial information provided on the sticker mounted on the caddy’s exterior. The caddy bags were found to make removal of the food waste from the home relatively mess-free and simple. Most interviewees indicated that they would be less likely to use the caddy without the bags, however, some were unsure about how well the bags decomposed. Participants also expressed concerns about where the caddy bags would be able to be purchased, and how much they would cost, post-trial. The cost of purchasing the compostable bags and replacement caddies was viewed as a potential barrier to other households separating their waste, particularly for low-income households

KW - food waste, sustainable urban living, compost

M3 - Commissioned report

BT - In-depth User-experience of the 66 Homes in 66 Days Kerbside Food Waste Trial

PB - University of Canberra

ER -