Household food waste behavior in informal communities: a secondary analysis through the COM-B framework

Introduction

Food waste remains a major global challenge, occurring alongside persistent hunger and food insecurity. A significant proportion of wasted food remains suitable for human consumption (Girotto et al., 2015; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2019). In 2024, an estimated 673 million people experienced hunger, while 2.3 billion faced moderate to severe food insecurity (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2025). The World Health Organization (WHO) (2025) and United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) (2024) emphasize that reducing food waste is an environmental, public health and nutrition priority, as wasted food represents lost nutrients that could contribute to improved dietary intake and reduced nutritional imbalances. Food waste reduction is therefore increasingly recognized as important to global food security and nutrition strategies. In 2025, an estimated 2.1billion people representing 25.8% of the global population experienced moderate or severe food insecurity, a decrease from 28.7% in 2020. This reflects nearly 86 million fewer food insecure people than in 2024, and 135 million fewer than in 2020. Notably, Africa recorded progress in 2025 for the first time since the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Goals was adopted in 2015 (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2026).

Household food waste is particularly concerning in a context where food insecurity remains prevalent among both rural and urban populations (Madondo et al., 2026; Khofi et al., 2025), especially within the South African context. In 2018, approximately 12 million people (24.5% of the population) experienced hunger, while food losses and waste were estimated at approximately 10 million tons annually, representing nearly one-third of national food production and an economic loss of about R61.5 billion per year (Oelofse et al., 2018). More recent evidence indicates that approximately 10 million tons of food are still wasted annually, while 19.7% of households experience moderate to severe food insecurity (Statistics South Africa, 2025). Although these indicators are showing a gradual decline, the continued coexistence of food waste and food insecurity highlights an unresolved concern regarding food availability and access. This represents an important public health nutrition concern, as considerable quantities of edible food are lost while many households struggle to meet their nutritional needs. Food waste also imposes an economic burden, with South African households potentially able to save approximately R1 200 per month through reduced food waste (End Food Waste, 2025).

Although food waste occurs throughout the entire food supply chain, household consumers are recognized as major contributors (Schanes et al., 2018: 978), with behavioral and management factors within the home having a significant impact on waste generation. Household food waste refers to the portion of food waste generated at the consumer level and is linked to routine practices, such as over-purchasing, over-preparing food, and inadequate utilization of leftovers (Cicatiello et al., 2016; Boulet et al., 2021). In addition, inadequate food management practices, including poor meal planning, limited cooking skills, poor shopping habits, overcooking and inappropriate food storage practices that result in spoilage, contribute to household food waste (Cronjé et al., 2018:1). Research also reflects that food waste is influenced by individuals‘ emotional states and feelings (Madondo et al., 2026). Similarly, Petrescu-Mag et al. (2025) highlighted that behavior is influenced by external factors, and that feelings of regret or guilt can affect food waste behavior. Miti et al. (2025) also reported that even participants in the control group exhibited reductions in food waste behaviors, which may have resulted from heightened self-awareness generated through participation in the study itself. Exposure to questions concerning food waste appeared to encourage reflection on personal practices, leading participants to acknowledge their own food waste behaviors despite not being exposed to the intervention. Additionally, an individual's educational status may shape personal values and attitudes, which in turn influence food waste behavior. Media, social networks, personal research, and generational gaps may also influence behavior. The socioeconomic and infrastructural limitations common to informal communities greatly influence how household food waste manifests in similar communities. By examining how individuals' function in situations within structurally constrained environments, this research contributes to the growing body of literature on household food waste.

The present study represents a secondary analysis of data originally collected as part of a master's dissertation by Ebuzeme (2025) examining household food waste within informal communities in the Fezile Dabi District. Findings from the original study were subsequently published by Ebuzeme et al. (2025). The original study and publication primarily examined the types of food wasted and descriptive factors associated with household food-waste practices. The present manuscript does not report a new sample or new data collection. Instead, it revisits the existing dataset from a behavioral-theoretical perspective by organizing previously collected factors according to the Capability, Opportunity and Motivation components of the COM-B framework. Although previous research has identified knowledge, food-management practices, household preferences and infrastructural conditions as factors associated with household food waste, these factors are often considered independently. The COM-B framework provides an opportunity to interpret these factors collectively by considering how capability, opportunity and motivation interact to shape behavior (Michie et al., 2011).

In resource-constrained informal communities, however, the relationship between these behavioral components may differ from that observed in more resource-adequate settings. For example, possessing food-management knowledge may not necessarily result in corresponding waste-reduction practices when households experience infrastructural constraints such as unreliable electricity or inadequate storage. Similarly, planned intentions may be disrupted by household preferences, purchasing decisions and established food-preparation routines. Applying COM-B to the existing dataset therefore provides a theoretically informed interpretation of how behavioral capability, environmental opportunity and motivational processes may interact within a resource-constrained household context. Therefore, this study aimed to provide a COM-B-informed interpretation of household food-waste behavior in informal communities in the Fezile Dabi District of South Africa using a secondary analysis of an existing household food-waste dataset.

Methodology

A quantitative descriptive research approach was employed during the main study to examine household food waste within informal community contexts (Ebuzeme, 2025; Ebuzeme et al., 2025). The existing questionnaire data were analyzed descriptively using frequencies and percentages. For this study, relevant questions were conceptually mapped to the Capability, Opportunity and Motivation components of COM-B. The descriptive findings within each domain were subsequently interpreted in relation to household food-waste behavior. The factors available for secondary analysis included individual behavioral, household and infrastructural indicators measured using different response formats (Michie et al., 2011; Social Change UK, 2019). Using the COM-B framework, capability factors included participants' food-related knowledge, cooking skills and awareness of waste management practices. Opportunity factors focused on environmental and structural conditions that enabled or constrained food management practices, such as storage facilities, electricity availability, public transport reliance, family members wanting another meal and access to food retail outlets. Motivation factors included shopping list use, in-store deviation, member preferences and over-preparation.

Fezile Dabi District is a major economic and agricultural region, contributing approximately 66.4% of the district's Gross Value Added. The area also serves as an important grain- and maize-producing region. The focus on informal communities was motivated by challenges related to illegal dumping, expanding community, and their implications for public health, waste management, municipal services, food expenditure, and food waste, compounded by the effects of severe droughts experienced between 2015 and 2018 (Fezile Dabi District Municipality, 2016: 23; Orimoloye, 2022: 3). The research was conducted in four communities in the Fezile Dabi District, SA. These areas were selected due to their varying socio-economic conditions, high unemployment and informal community conditions, providing a relevant context for examining household food-related practices and behaviors. The target population consisted of adult residents (18 years and older) who were actively involved in food purchasing and/or preparation within their households. An initial sample size of 400 participants was determined based on the sampling guideline of Gay et al. (2009), which recommends a minimum sample of 400 in populations larger than 5,000. However, 440 individuals were approached to account for potential non-response or dropouts. A total of 433 completed questionnaires made up the final dataset. Participant distribution across the study sites was proportionate to community size: Area 1 (n = 341), Area 2 (n = 59), Area 3 (n = 21) and Area 4 (n = 12).

Ethical approval was granted by the Vaal University of Technology Ethics Committee (FREC/HS/26/08/2021/6.1.1), with additional permissions obtained from municipal authorities and community leaders. Participation during the original study was voluntary, and informed consent was obtained from all respondents. Anonymity and confidentiality were maintained throughout the study. Data collection was conducted between June and August 2023 by the researcher and trained fieldworkers. The original data collection followed a systematic sampling approach within the selected communities. The dataset generated from the original study was used for the present secondary analysis.

Results

The findings are presented within these behavioral domains to provide a basic understanding of the factors contributing to household food waste in informal community contexts. The findings in Table 1 indicate that a high proportion of participants (83.8%) reported having cooking knowledge, while only 21.5% indicated that they always used or applied food-waste management strategies. The findings suggest that participants generally possessed the psychological and physical capabilities required to prepare and manage food within the household; these capabilities may not be sufficient to support consistent household food waste behaviors without complementary opportunities and motivation. Furthermore, only 35.1% of participants reported having experience in a commercial kitchen. While this may reflect limited exposure to specialized food preparation environments, participants may be in a position to demonstrate sufficient practical skills to manage food within household settings. More than half of participants (54.0%) reported awareness of waste management strategies; however, implementation remained limited.

Table 1. Skill acquisition and waste management awareness.

The results of Tables 2 extbfand 3 present the motivational factors of household food waste by comparing planning intentions with actual behavior. The findings highlight the tension between reflective motivation (planning) and automatic motivation (impulse). The intention to stick to a shopping list was evident; however, a gap remains, as 39.5% reported deviating from a shopping list. Additionally, 22.6% of participants made purchases without any lists, and 37.8% knowingly made a list and expected to make changes when in store. The results further identify the specific stages of food waste and a lack of food monitoring by the participants, as 23.1% of participants reported realizing food would be wasted only when spoilage was visible. Additionally, food waste also occurred when excess food was dished up and not consumed (16.4%), both relating to post-consumption practices. In addition, 12.2% of participants indicated incorrect storage practices as a driver of food waste. These findings point to motivational challenges related to planning and purchasing behavior. Although participants engaged in routine food preparation and purchasing practices, limited meal planning, spontaneous purchasing decisions and bulk buying behavior may have contributed to excess food acquisition and subsequent food waste.

Table 2. Planning and purchasing habits.

Table 3. Preparation and preference barriers.

As shown in Table 3, the results indicate a combination of social and routine factors influencing household food waste behavior. The findings show how automatic motivation, which is driven by habitual portioning and immediate family preferences, often interact with reflective intentions to reduce waste. Food waste was influenced by several preference-related factors, such as half of the participants (50.8%) reported that family members wanted to eat a different meal from what had been prepared, while 29.3% indicated that different cooking methods contributed to food waste. These findings highlight the role of social opportunity, where the preferences and expectations of others influence food waste. Although 60.5% reported preparing meals according to household needs, 57.0% reported preparing more food than required for a single meal. Preference-related factors demonstrate the combined influence of reflective intentions and automatic habits on food waste behavior. Household members' changing preferences, intentional over-preparation of food and taste-related considerations appear to influence food disposal decisions despite participants reporting that food waste is an important concern. Additionally, the interaction of family preferences and social dynamics can influence decisions that would otherwise minimize food waste.

The results presented in Table 4 highlight the role of physical opportunity in relation to household food waste. A substantial proportion of participants (84.3%) reported an unreliable electricity supply, indicating a prominent infrastructural constraint. Nearly half of the participants (49.4%) indicated that the type and availability of food storage influenced the volume of food waste generated. Although most participants (91.7%) reported having access to refrigeration, limitations in storage capacity and adequacy may have continued to influence household food waste generation.

Table 4. Structural and material constraints.

Discussion

This study examined household food waste in informal communities in the Fezile Dabi District, a context characterized by food insecurity, economic precarity and infrastructural limitations. The findings indicate that household food waste is not solely a consequence of individual decision-making, but reflects the interaction between capability, opportunity and motivation. This interpretation is consistent with research describing food waste as a multidimensional behavior shaped by psychological, social and contextual factors (Stancu et al., 2016; Russell et al., 2017). It also supports the COM-B perspective that behavior is more effectively understood by considering the interaction of behavioral components rather than examining individual factors in isolation (Michie et al., 2011; Stancu et al., 2016).

Capability

The findings suggest a gap between psychological capability and consistent food-waste-reduction behavior. Although many participants reported having cooking knowledge, only a few indicated that they always used food-waste management strategies. Within the COM-B framework, psychological capability encompasses the knowledge and psychological processes required to perform a behavior (Michie et al., 2011). Thus, the findings indicate that knowledge and skills may provide an important foundation for food-waste reduction but may not, on their own, result in sustained behavioral change. This interpretation is consistent with Parfitt et al. (2010) and Quested et al. (2013), who found that knowledge does not automatically translate into behavior change. Petrescu-Mag et al. (2025) similarly reported that knowledge and skills, conceptualized as capability, significantly influence food-waste behavior. The present findings extend this understanding by demonstrating that the application of capability needs to be considered within the environmental and motivational conditions experienced by households in informal communities.

Opportunity

Opportunity-related conditions emerged as an important influence on household food-waste behavior. Many participants reported unreliable electricity, while storage conditions were also identified as relevant to food preservation. Inadequate storage facilities, transport limitations and economic instability may further restrict households' ability to store, preserve and use food effectively. These findings are consistent with research identifying infrastructure and resource limitations as important contributors to food spoilage and household food waste in developing contexts (Aktas et al., 2018; Principato et al., 2015; Boulet et al., 2021).

Within COM-B, physical opportunity refers to the environmental context and resources that enable or constrain behavior (Michie et al., 2011). The findings therefore suggest that households may possess relevant food-management knowledge and skills but face practical constraints that limit their ability to apply them consistently. In resource-constrained settings, opportunity may consequently influence whether psychological capability can be translated into everyday food-management practices. This suggests that interventions based solely on education and awareness may have limited effectiveness where households lack the physical conditions necessary to implement recommended practices (Quested et al., 2013; Filimonau and Gherbin, 2017).

Motivation

The findings further indicate that household food-waste behavior may reflect a tension between reflective intentions and automatic or socially influenced practices. Although shopping lists represent planned and reflective food-management behavior, just over one-third of the participants reported making purchasing decisions in-store that differed from their planned shopping lists. Similarly, just over half of the participants reported preparing more food than required for a single meal. Within COM-B, reflective motivation involves conscious intentions and plans, whereas automatic motivation includes habits, impulses and emotional responses (Michie et al., 2011). Household preferences and social influences may also shape food-related decisions through the social environment.

Changing food preferences, over-preparation and spontaneous purchasing may therefore contribute to food waste despite awareness of the issue. These findings are consistent with research identifying habits, preferences and social norms as important influences on household food waste (Montero et al., 2026; Porpino, 2016; Stefan et al., 2013; Graham-Rowe et al., 2014). Petrescu-Mag et al. (2025) similarly found that media, social networks and personal research influenced the amount of food wasted. The present findings therefore suggest that food-waste behavior cannot be explained solely by deliberate planning; planned intentions may be disrupted by established routines, spontaneous purchasing, changing preferences and household expectations.

Integrating the COM-B findings

Taken together, the findings demonstrate the value of applying COM-B to household food-waste behavior in resource-constrained informal communities. The results suggest that capability, opportunity and motivation are interconnected rather than independent influences. The observed difference between cooking knowledge and consistent use of food-waste management strategies highlights the limitations of capability when appropriate opportunities are unavailable. Similarly, unreliable electricity and storage constraints demonstrate how physical opportunity may restrict the application of existing knowledge and skills, while deviations from shopping plans and over-preparation illustrate how reflective intentions may be influenced by automatic routines and social factors.

This interpretation provides a context-specific application of COM-B by demonstrating that the behavioral capacity to reduce food waste must be considered alongside the material conditions in which household food-management decisions occur. This is particularly important in informal communities, where infrastructural and economic constraints may limit household agency. Consequently, food-waste interventions should address behavioral knowledge and motivation while simultaneously considering the physical and social environments that enable or constrain behavioral change.

Age should, however, be interpreted cautiously in relation to these findings. Although age may influence the amount and type of food waste, previous research suggests that differences between knowledge and behavior may also be shaped by generational, cultural and time-related factors. In the present study, participants' age was collected (Ebuzeme et al., 2025), but no direct association between age and food-waste behavior was assessed. Age-related explanations should therefore be regarded as an area for further investigation rather than as an established finding of the present analysis.

Implications for intervention

The findings highlight the importance of recognizing both individual agency and structural constraints when designing interventions to reduce household food waste and improve food security (Russell et al., 2017; Porpino, 2016). Increasing knowledge alone may be insufficient where households lack reliable electricity, suitable storage facilities or other resources required to apply food-management practices. Interventions should therefore combine behavioral strategies with contextually appropriate infrastructural and social support. Such an approach is consistent with broader recommendations that food-waste interventions should address the conditions within which household behaviors occur rather than focusing exclusively on awareness and individual responsibility (Quested et al., 2013; Filimonau and Gherbin, 2017).

Conclusion

This secondary analysis provides a COM-B-informed interpretation of household food-waste behavior in informal communities in South Africa. The findings demonstrate that food waste is influenced by the interaction of capability, opportunity and motivation within a resource-constrained environment. Although participants reported food-related knowledge, this did not consistently translate into food-waste-reduction practices. Unreliable electricity and storage limitations further constrained the practical application of food-management knowledge, while purchasing deviations, over-preparation, preferences and household routines influenced behavior.

The findings contribute to the application of COM-B by highlighting the importance of examining behavioral factors together with the physical and social conditions in which food-management decisions occur. This supports the development of integrated interventions that address knowledge and skills, environmental opportunities and motivational processes concurrently. While the analysis does not statistically validate COM-B variables, the framework provides a useful structure for interpreting behavioral evidence in resource-constrained household contexts. Addressing these interconnected factors may contribute to reduced household food waste, improved food security and progress toward Sustainable Development Goals 2 and 12 (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2019; United Nations Environment, 2021).

Recommendations

In the context of smart futures and sustainable human communities, future food-waste interventions should adopt integrated and contextually appropriate socio-technical approaches. Future research should empirically validate COM-B-based measures and evaluate interventions addressing capability, opportunity and motivation alongside the physical and social conditions influencing household food-management behavior.

Capability

Capability-focused interventions should strengthen household knowledge and practical food-management skills. These should include:

• Food literacy and skills development related to food storage, preservation and reuse.
• Training on appropriate food preparation and portioning to minimize surplus.
• Guidance on safe and creative management of leftovers, including storage, reheating and reuse.

Opportunity

Opportunity-focused interventions should address the physical and social constraints affecting food management. These should include:

• Supporting households to adapt food storage and handling practices under conditions of unreliable electricity and limited space.
• Promoting community-based solutions such as shared or decentralized cold-storage facilities and low-energy refrigeration technologies.
• Encouraging food-waste diversion and reuse practices, including composting and sustainable disposal of unavoidable food waste.

Motivation

Motivation-focused interventions should address planning, routines and purchasing decisions. These should include:

• Promoting consistent use of grocery lists and meal-planning tools.
• Encouraging monitoring of expiry dates, stock rotation and refrigerator contents.
• Using accessible digital tools, including mobile reminders and WhatsApp messaging, to reinforce positive food-management practices. Such tools could be localized through indigenous African languages and culturally relevant food content to improve accessibility and engagement.

Limitations

The study employed a descriptive quantitative design and focused on frequencies and percentages rather than causal relationships. The non-experimental design did not include focus groups or in-depth interviews, limiting the ability to explore participants' lived experiences and social contexts. Although common causes of food waste were identified, the study did not examine participants' underlying values, which may be important for understanding long-term behavioral change and reflective motivation. Consequently, the factors examined through the structured questionnaire were informed primarily by previously published literature. A further limitation is that the original questionnaire was not developed as a validated COM-B instrument.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declared that Generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts 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 affiliated 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

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsrma.2026.1921659/full#supplementary-material

Supplementary material Supplementary material at the source

Footnotes

Edited by: Sibongangani Khonelihle Mngomezulu, Central University of Technology, South Africa

Reviewed by: Stanley Chibuzor Onwubu, Durban University of Technology, South Africa

Liska Simamora, Diponegoro University, Indonesia