KHOA HOC CONG N G H l
L A M G P H i THLTC PHAIVI CLIA CAC H O G I A D I I M H T A I THAIXIH P H O CAIXI T H Q
Tdng Thi Anh Nggc'
T6MTAT
Lang phi thuc pham la mot vin de dang rat diroc quan tam vi anh huong cua no den kinh te. nioi tnnmg. xd hpi.... Muc dich ciia nghien cuu nay nham tim hieu mirc do lang phi, loai thuc pham Uiuong Ituig phi va li do dan den lang phi thuc pham. Nghien cuu thuc hien thong qua di^u fra 307 ho gia dinh lai quan Ninh Ki^u, thanh phd Can Tha. Ket qua cho tiiay phan dong (93%) sd h6 co chi phi mua thyc phSm <l-2 trieu dong va 76% so ho co chi phi lang phi thuc pham <100-300 nghin dong mpt hjan. Cac loai thgc pham lang phi dugc xep theo thir tu tu cao den thap, gom: nhom tinh bot, ngii cdc; rau cii. thit (gia sue. gia cam), thuy hai san va trai cay. Trong cac biia an thi an chieu-tdi duoc cho la bua an cd nhieu thiic an thita nhat (77,4%).
Li do lang phi thuc pham tir cac ho gia dinh do mot trong nhirng nguyen nhan, nhir nau qua nhieu so vdi nhu cau (76,9%), hay do de danh thuc pham cho cac thanh vien vSng mat (51.5%), do d^ quen frong tu Ignh (41%). Day la nghien cuu ddu tien cung cap cac thdng tin ve ISng phi Ihuc pham frong cac ho gia dinh tgi quan Ninh Kieu, tiianh phd Can Tho nham gdp phan nang cao nhdn thirc ve lang phi thuc pham cua cac hd gia dinh cung nhu ngtrdi IJCU diing noi chung.
Tiikhda: Cin Tha. liing phi thuc pham. bo gia dinh.
I.MffBAU
Lang phi thuc pham la mdt van de rat duoe quan ldm frong cac Uidp ki gan day. Lang phi thue pham cd nghia Id viec bd di, khdng sir dung bat cu loai do dn, tinic udng nao dii cdn sdng hay da nau chin mdt each vd tinh hay cd y (()slergren, 2014). Luong thuc pham bi that thoat bay Idng phi xay ra li'ong loan bg chudi cung img thtrc pham tir giai doan san xual, thu hoach, bao quan, ddng gdi, vdn chuydn, phan phdi.
ban le den giai doan tieu thu (Buchner et al., 2012).
Qua ti'inh san xudt vd phdn phdi thue pham tieu ton nhieu ndng lugng va edc tai nguyen. \'i vdy, thuc phdm bi lang phi ddng nghia vdi lang phi tdi nguydn, anh htrdng den indi tnrdng va ca chi phi cho viec xii h chat tiiai thuc phdm (\ViUiams et al., 2012). Hon nira, lang phi tiiuc pham cung la van dd dang quan lam ve dao due vi ude tinh cd 25.000 ngudi chet vi ddi nidi ngdy (FAO. 2010). Vi vdy, thach thiic frong viec giam lugng chat thai tir viec lang phi thgc pham la mot van de cd lien quan xa hdi, kuih le va mdi trudng (Ponise/a/.2017).
Luong tiitrc phdm duge san xual bi hao hut hodc hi lang phi trdc tmh len tdi khoang 1,3 ty tan mdi nam (Guslavsson et al. 2011) vd tdn thdt len Idi 750 ty dd
' Bd mon Cong nghe Thuc pham. Khoa Xung nghiep.
Trudng Dai hgc Can Tho Email: ttungoc'H'ciu.edii.vn 126
la frong nam 2007 (Quested etal, 2013). Do dd, Uy ban chdu Au da ddt muc tieu giam mpt mia lugng chat thai thuc pham dn dugc vao nam 2020 (European Commission, 2011). Theo Kalajajuuri et al., (2014), lugng thuc pham bi lang phi cd the ban che duoc tir eac hg gia dinh chiem khoang 35% long lugng chat thai thuc pham. Mgl khao sat do Elecfrolux thuc hien fren 4.000 hd gia dinh tai 8 qudc gia chau A - Thai Binh Duong cho thay Vidt Nam dimg thu' 2 ve chi sd lang phi thuc pham, xep sau Trung Qudc (Elecfrolux, 2016).
Cdn Tho la mdt trong nam thanh phd fruc thugc Tnmg uong, la trung tam eiia viing kinh te trgng diem ddng bdng sdng Cun Long. Hien nay, thanh phd Can Tho cd 9 don vi hanh chinh gdm 5 qudn va 4 huyen vdi mat dp ddn sd khoang 877 ngudi/km^.
Trong do, quan Ninh Kidu la qudn Irung tam cua thanh phd vdi tdc dd phat trien nhanh va loan didn nhat vimg ddng bdng sdng Ciiu Long, vdi mat do dan sd ddng. khoang 9.024 nguoi/km- (Cue Thdng ke thanh phd Can Tho, 2017). Nhung nam gan day, n^n kinh te eua thanh phd Can Tho ed nhidu chuydn bien, loi sdng hien dai cung miic sdng cao hon lam tiiay doi thdi quen tieu dung thue pham cua nhidu ngudi, y thiie va frach nhiem chdng lang phi thue pham ed le ddn lang qudn. Yi vdy, khao sat muc dd vd loai thuc pham thudng xuydn bi lang phi tat cac hd nhu tim hieu b' do tiiuc pham bi lang phi ' 'ing cap N O N G NGHIEP VA PHAT TRIEN NONG THON - KY 1 - THANG 9/2019
them c a c t h d n g tin h u u ich g d p p h d n vdo viec n a n g cao nhdn t h u e ve vi^c lang p h i thtrc p h a m tai c a e h d gia dinh d Can T h a ndi r i e n g va d Viet N a m n d i chung.
2. PHUDNG PHAP NGHBV CUU 2.1. Ddi t u g n g
Ddi ttrgng nghidn ciiu Id cdc h d gia d i n h d a n g c u frii tai qudn Ninh Kieu. t h d n h p h d Cdn T h o .
Thdi gian tiiuc hien: tii t h a n g 1 2 / 2 0 1 8 d e n t h a n g 4/2019.
2.2. P h u o n g p h d p
Phi^u k h a o sdt d u g e t h i e t k d g d m 3 frang vdi 26 cdu hdi, g d m b a p h a n chinh: iJ t h d n g tin c h u n g ( g d m gidi tinh, hioi, tinh frang h d n n h d n , viec l a m , t h u nh^p) vd cd lidn q u a n d d n gia d i n h ( g d m thdi gian dn t?i gia dinh, t d n g sd t h a n h vidn c u a g i a d i n h ) , ii) sd lugng vd chi phi m u a t h u c p h a m ( g o m n g u d i chiu trach nhi^m m u a t h u e p h a m , t a n suat vd chi p h i m u a thi;e pham, l u g n g I h u e p h ^ n i sir d u n g mdi n g a y , mtic do thirdng xuydn sir d u n g c a e loai thtrc p h a m ) vd iii) Idng phi tiiuc p h a m (bira dn c d nhi^u thiic a n thira, ldn sudt, chi phi lang phi, loai t h u c p h a m hi lang p h i va li do lang phi). Cac c d u hdi c u n g cd t h e b a o g d m nhi^u p h u o n g a n ti'a loi b d n g e a c h c h g n v a o c a e d dupe chuan bi sdn frong d a n h s a c h t r a Idi h o d c n g u d i h'a Idi t u didn t h d n g tin c h i tiet v a o d " K h a c " (neu cd).
Cac hd gia dinh t h a m gia t r a Idi t r o n g n g h i e n cuu la lu n g u y e n va d u g c lua c h g n ngdu n h i d n t r o n g khu vue q u a n Ninh K d u . T d n g s d cd 307 h d gia dinh dd tham gia frong k h a o sat.
2.3. T h u tii$p vd xtr li s d lidu
Danh gid miic d p t h u d n g x u y e n s t i d u n g v a l a n g phi cdc loai t h u e p h a m tai bd gia d i n h , n g h i e n ciiu sir dung tiiang do Likert 5 d i d m U o s h i etal., 2015) u n g vdi cac mirc dp t h u d n g x u y e n l a n g d d n tir 1 ( k h d n g bao gid) d e n 5 Oudn l u d n ) .
Cich tinh diem sd tiung binh vay nghia Diem t r u n g b i n h = ( l * s d m d u lira c h g n k h d n g bao g i d + 2*sd m d u lira c h g n tliinh t h o a n g + 3*s6 mdu lira c h g n t h u d n g x u y e n + 4*sd m d u lira c h g n r d t thudng x u y e n + 5*sd m d u lira c h g n luon l u d n ) / l d n g so mdu
Vdi gia tri k h o a n g e a c h - (Gid tri ldn nhdt-gid tri nhd n h a t ) / n = ( 5 - 1 ) / 5 = 0,8. Y n g h i a ciia c a c mirc diem d u g c t h e h i e n d b a n g 1.
B a n g 1. Q u i ddi mtic dd t h e o t h a n g d o U k e r t (5 Mm)
Khoang gia tii ctia diem tmngbinh 1,0-1,8
>l,8-2,6
>2,6-3,4
>3,44,2
>4,2-5,0
Muc dd tbtrdng xuyen Khdng bao gid Thinh thoang Thudng xuydn Rat thudng xuyen Ludn ludn
Dir lieu duoc thu thap, xii U vd the hi^n dtrdi dang tan sual hay ti le phan frdm. Thdng ke md la thdng qua chuong tiinh SPSS 20.0 (SPSS b i c . Chicago, My) vd ve dd thi bdng phdn mem Microsoft Excel 2013.
3. KET QUii VA THAO LUAN 3.1. D d c d i ^ m n h d n k h d u h g c
B a n g 2. D $ c d i & n c u a h g gia d m h k h d o sdt t?ii qudn N m h Kidu (n=307)
D a c d i e m Gidi tinh Nam Nil
Tudi (39±10,1871)
<30 30-50
>50
Tinh trang hon nhim D o c than
Da k e t h o n va chira co con Da k(:t h o n va co con K h a c
Thanh vien
<3 ngiroi 3-6 n g u o i
>6 n g u o i Thu nhap
<6 tneu ddng/thang 7-14 trieu d6ng/thang 15-20 trieu d6ng/thang
>20 trieu dong/thang Chiu trach nhiem mua thucpham
Co Khong
Tan suat 79 228 54 201 52 51 26 227 3 38 254 15 92 181 26 8
277 30
Tyle(%) 25,7 74.3 17,6 65,5 16.9 16,6 8,5 73,9 1,0 12,4 82,7 4,9 30,0 59.0 8.5 2.6
90,2 J l U l l g I «>" , ;__ 9,8
D a c didm n h a n k h a u h g c c u a ngudi bdn t h e hien d b a n g 2. B a n g 2 e h o thay d a sd ngtrdi tiiam g i a fra Idi d c a c h d gia dinh la nir (chiem 74,3%) v a sd d d n g ' . ' C r i G THON - KY 1 - THANG 9/2019
KHOA HOC CONG NGHfi (65.5%) ngudi trd Idi cd dp tudi tu 30-50. Nghien eiiu
ndy cimg tuong ddng vdi Parizeau et al., (2015) nghidn ciiu ve lang phi thuc pham d Guelph. Ontario vd Di Taha et al., (2019) a cac vung ndng thdn cua Campania cung eho thay khoang 70% ngudi tra Idi la nirvd phdn ldn cd do tuoi fren 30 tudi (>80%).
Nhirng bg gia dinh da cd con chiem 73,9%. Chi 2,3% hd gia dinh chi cd mgt ngudi frong khi da sd cdc ho gia dinh cd tir 3 den 6 ngudi (82,7%). Hon mgt niia sd hg gia dinh duoe khao sat cd long thu nhap a mtic tir 7 den 14 trieu ddng/thdng frong khi chi cd khodng 11% hd gia dinh cd thu nhap frdn 15 trieu dong/thang. Ddc bi?t, khoang 90% ngudi ti-a Idi frong nghien cuu nay Id thanh vien chiu trdch nhiem mua thuc pham frong gia dinh.
3.2. Chi phi mua thuc p h i n
Chi phi mua thue pham cua cdc hg gia dinh frong mdt tuan dugc the hien d hinh 1. Ket qua cho thay cd 93% hd gia dinb a qudn Ninh Kidu, Cdn Tho cd chi phi mua thuc pham tir <l-2 trieu dong/tuan.
_ UllJU
Hinh 1. Chi phi mua thyc p h ^ (trong tudn) Trong dd, 52,8% hg gia dinh cho bidt hg mua thuc pham mdi ngay, frong khi 39,4% mua nhieu lan frong tuan va 7,8% chi mua mdt lan frong tuan (sd beu khdng trinh bay). Didu ndy cho thay cdc hg gia dinh lai quan Ninh Kidu cd thdi quen mua sdm thuc pham nhidu lan frong tuan, cd le thdi quen dn udng, ua thich cac loai thuc pham tuoi sdng vd da dang frong chgn lua. Tuong ttr vdi ket qua cua Parizeau et al., (2015) khi nghien ciiu d Ontario cd 39% hg gia dinh mua thuc pham nhieu ldn frong tuan, tuy nhien cd ddn 53% chi mua thuc pham mgt ldn frong tuan.
2A Hinh 2. Mirc d
Mtic do thudng xuydn mua thuc pham cua cac hd gia dinh lai quan Ninh Kieu, Can Tho dugc trinh bdy d hinh 2A va 2B. Theo ket qua b hinh 2A, cdc nhdm thuc pham nhu tinh hot, ngu cdc; thit gia siic, gia cam vd thuy, hai san la cac nhdm thue pham duge sii dung thudng xuyen (ehiem 45-48%). Co 50% bd gia dinh ludn ludn sir dung nhdm tinh hot, ngu cdc. 66- 74% hg gia dinh mua thuc pham nhdm rau cii va frai cay d muc do tiiudng xuydn vd rat thudng xuydn (Hinh 2A). Theo tiiang do Likert (Hinh 2B) khi ddnh gia ve mtic do thirdng xuydn sii dung cdc nhdm thuc pham thi ngoai tni nhdm linh bdt ngu cdc duoe sir dung rat thudng xuyen (4 diem) hau het cac nhdm d^u duge sir dung a mirc do tiiudng xuydn frong bua an (2,8-3,3 diem), theo thu tir tiiit gia sue gia cdm (3,3 didm). rau cu (3.2 didm), ti'di cay (3,1 diem), do udng (2,9 diem) vd thuy hai san (2.8 didm). Nhom 12S
2B I thudng xuydn mua thuc ph&n ciia cdc hd gia dinh
cdc loai thuc pham khac (bo, tning, mudi chua,...) dugc thinh tiioing su dung. Cac loai rau qua ndi chung dugc xem la nhimg thuc pham lot cho siic khde, chung chiia it calo, giau cdc loai vitamin vd khoang chat (dd tieu hda, giam nguy co m^c cac benh tieu dudng, tim mach, huyel dp cao,...) do do ma rau qua duge mua rat thudng xuydn trong hau bet cac hd gia dinh. Trong khi dd, phdn ldn nhdm dd udng duge mua b muc dp tir thinh thoang ddn tiiudng xuyen (chiem 72% sd hd).
3.3. Lang phi thuc p h i n
Hinh 3A vd 3B the hien miic dd lang phi thuc pham lai cac hd gia dinh d quan Ninh Kieu. thanh phd Can Tho. Ket qua cho thay 54-72% (hay i &.2 2 diem theo thang do Likert d hmh 3B) cdc hg gia'dmh lang phi tiiuc pham d miic do thinh ihoang, irong dd NONG NGHIEP VA PHAT TRIEN NONG THON - KY 1 - THANG 9/2019
nhdm rau cu chi^m ti Ig cao nhat (72% sd hd).
Nghidn ciiu ciia Aschemaim-Witzel et al., (2019) cho thdy cdc loai thuc pham bi lang phi nhieu nhat dtrgc d^ cap la cac loai rau do dac tinh de hu hdng, tidp d6n Id gao, pasta, trai cdy vd cac san pham banh frong khi cdc san pham sira va thit it bi lang phi hon, cd thd do chung ddt tien va cd the giu lanh (hoac trir ddng) dugc lau hon. Trong nghien ciiu nay miic do
lang phi nhdm tmh bdt. ngii edc (2,2 didm), rau cu (2,1 diem), tiiit (2.0 diem). Ket qua nay cung tuong ddng vdi nghien ctru eua Elecfrolux (2016) khi nhdm thue pham tmh hot, ngu cdc (com, bun, phd. mi,...) (68%) ke den la thit ca dd ndu chin (53%) va rau cii (44%) la nhiing nhdm thtrc an thudng xuydn bi lang phi tai Viet Nam.
a Tiiili bijl, ngil t o
•Th;l gm tuc, ^m
3A
Hinh 3. Miic dO lang phi thuc phim tgi c^c hO gia dinh 3B
Bing 3. T ^ su^t thira tiiirc an theo cdc biia an Thoi diem an udng
Khong CO Sang Trua Chi^u - toi Khac
Tan suat 9 10 32 278 30
Ty le (%) 2,5 2,8 8.9 77,4 8,4 Bang 3 phan loai thdi diem cdc bira an cd thiic an tiiira, theo ket qua didu tra bira an chidu (toi) cd thiic dn thira chidm ti le cao nhal (77,4% sd hd). Ngugc lai.
cd 2.5% sd hg khdng cd thiic an thira sau cac bira an.
Co the do thuc pham du thira Oi cdc bira an sang, ti'ua se dugc su dung lai cho bira chidu (tdi); day cd tiie id biia dn chinh frong ngdy cua cdc hg gia dinh sinh sdng lai trung lam cua cdc tiidnh pho ldn nhu Can Tho nen cd lugng tiiuc an thiia nhieu nhdt. Mat khac, do bira an ehinh la cudi ngdy nen cac gia dinh
Bang 4. Miic dp thudng xuyen va chJ phi lang phi thuc pham (tudn)
thudng chuan bi nhieu thiic dn hon cdc bda dn khac nen lugng tinic dn thira cung nhidu hon. Bdn canh dd, cd nhimg b do dot xual nhu cdc Ihdnh vien frong gia dinh duoc mdi di an tdt hoac dot xual hen hd vdi ban be hay ngudi thdn vao buoi tdi cung Id li do ddn den biia dn chieu (tdi) tai gia dinh cd thiie an thira chiem ti le cao nhal (Waitt and Phillips, 2016).
Miie do tiiudng xuyen vd chi phi lang phi thuc pham theo tudn dugc the hidn d bang 4. Trong dd, 71% hd gia dinh bd thuc pham 1-2 lan/tudn vd 20% tii hd gia dinh bd thuc pham 3-4 lan/luan. Kel qua eho thay tdn sual bd thuc pham cang cao thi chi phi lang phi cdng ldn. Trong nghien ciiu nay, 76% hd gia dinh cd chi phi cho viec bd thuc pham <100 - <300 nghin ddng/tuan trong khi cd 22% hg gia dinh khdng tiie udc tinh chi phi Idng phi nay.
Muc dp lang phi
Oan/tuan)
Kliong bao gid 1-2 34 5-6
Tan suat 5 218
62 22
Tyle
(%)
1,6 71,0 20,2 7.2
Chi phi lang phi (nghin ddng/tuan) Khdng th^ udc tinh
<100 100-<300 300-500
Tan suat 67 173 61 6
Tyle 1
(%)
21,8 56.4 19,9 1,9 Mdi khdc, ket qua nghien cuu ciing cho thay chi
phi mua tiiuc pham cung nhu tdn suat lang phi thuc pham tirong quan tuyen tinh vdi thu nhap (luong img. 7-= 0,301, p = 0.0 vd r= 0.283, p = 0.0). nhung hd gia dinh cd thu nhap eao cd xu hudng lang phi thuc phdm nhieu hon vd chi phi lang phi cao hon. Kdl qua w A M r i M^HIFP VA PHAT TRIEN N O N G THON
nghien cuu a Dan Mach cung cho thay cdc hd gia dinb cd thu nhap cao thi co khuynh hudng lang phi Ihtrc pham nhidu {r= 0.14, p = 0.026) (Stancu et al, 2016). Mdt sd nghidn cuu frudc day cho thay eac mdi quan tam ve tai chinh nhu bi hao hut tai chinh do Idng phi thuc pham la mdi quan lam ldn khien cac ho
- K Y I - T H A N G 9/2019 129
KHOA HOC CONG NGHfi gia dinh giam lang phi thuc pham thay vi ede mdi
quan tam khde ve mdi tmong hay xa hgi (Graham- Rowe et al., 2014; Neff et al., 2015; Stancu et al..
2016). Cac ydu td thu nhap, trinh do hgc vdn, sd thdnh vien frong gia dinh, ke hoach mua sdm... cdng cd tac ddng den hdnh vi lang phi thue pham frong hd gia dinh (Bhehfeldt et al, 2015; Cecere et al., 2014;
Koivupuro et al., 2012; Qi va Roe, 2016; Quested et al, 2013; Silvennoinen et al., 2014; Tucker and
Bang 5. Li do lang phi thuc phdm
Fan-elly. 2016). Nhung hd gia dinh cd con nho cung cd xu hudng lang phi thuc pham nhieu lum so vdi eac gia dinh khac (Parizeau eta!., 2015. Visschers et al., 2016), cd tii^ do sd tiiich dn udng va chua ed y thue tdt cua fre Qdnssen et al., 2015). Mallinson et al. (2016) kdt ludn ring sd lugng va chi phi Idng phi cao la do mua sdm khdng cd ke hoaeh trude.
3.4. Li do Idng phi thuc phdm
Li do Chira phan cho cac thanh vien khac dang vang mat De quen trong tii lanh hoac vi tri khac Nau du hoac khdng an het
Bd bira/an ki^ng (1 hoac vai thanh vien trong gia dinh)
Tliuc pham bao quan lai thi khong an toan va/hoac khong chat luong Li do khac Chu hdng....)
Tan suat 158 126 236 44 92 14
Tv 14 (%) 51.5 41,0 76,9 14.3 30.0 4.6 Bdn canh tan sudt, muc dg, chi phi idng phi thuc
pham, nghien ciiu nay ciing tim bidu li do chinh md cae hg gia dinh Idng phi thuc pham. ket qua the hien d bang 5. Trong dd thue pham hi Idng phi do ndu du hodc dn khdng hdt ehi^m ti le cao nhal (77%), ke ddn Id do chira phan cho cae thdnh vien vdng mdt trong gia dinh hodc do de quen frong tii lanh hoac vi tn khac (41-52%) vd li do nghi ngd thuc pham khdng an todn hay giam chal lugng khi thuc pham du tiiira bao quan (30% sd hg). Khoang 14% bd gia dinh lang phi tiiuc pham vi li do bo bua/dn kidng. Tuy nhien.
nghidn cuu cua Parizeau et al. (2015) cho thay frong cdc gia dinh cd cac thdnh vidn sd hiiu che do dn udng ddc biet (chdng ban nhu ngudi an chay, an kidng) thi lugng thuc pham hi Idng phi ed xu hudng giam.
Tuong tu ket qua cua cac nghien ciiu khac cho thay li do ma eac hg gia dinh thudng xuyen bd thtrc phdm la nau qua nhidu so vdi lirgng can, thuc pham hi het ban, do de quen frong tu lanh. thuc phdm bi hu hdng do mui, vi bode cam quan hay do khdng mudn an thuc dn thira Qdrissen et al.. 2015; Katajajuun etal..
2014; Quested and Johnson. 2009; Williams et al..
2012). Khoang 20-25% luong tiiuc pham bi lang phi cd lien quan ddn kich thudc bao gdi thtrc pham ldn, lugng can sir dung thi it hon lugng thuc pham chtra dung frong bao gdi (WiUiams et al., 2012). Cac inrdng hop lang phi thtrc pham dugc phat hien la frong liic don dep tu lanh. chuan bi vd nau thue dn hodc giira cae biia dn (Aschemann-Witzel et al., 2019;
Williams e/a/, 2012).
Them vdo do. khi duoe hdi ve suy nghi khi bo thue pham thi da sd cac hd gia dinh tai Cdn Tho cd 130
nhidu suy nghi kbac nhau khi bd thuc pham nhu cam thdy Uec re (46,3%), hay cho rdng do la viee bd thuc pham la duong nhien va khdng the frdnh khdi (48,2%), hay tu nil kinh nghiem de lan sau khdng bd hodc bd il Uiue pham hon (56,7%) (sd lieu khdng trinh bay). Trong nghidn ctiu nay khdng cd didu fra ve eac bien phdp cd the giup han chd hodc ngdn ngira lang phi thuc pham. Theo cac nghien ciiu trudc ddy, de xuat cdc bien phdp chdng lang phi cua hd gia dinh bao gdm: tranh mua qua nhieu nhiing Ihuc pham khdng can thidt, ldn ke hoach mua sdm hodc chuan hi thuc pham, tdn tru thuc pham diing each (ki ndng) va ke ca viec dieu chtnh thai do ddi vdi van de lang phi thuc pham (Buckley etal., 2007; Farr Wharton et al., 2014; Jorissen et al, 2015; Parizeau et al, 2015;
Second! etal, 2015; Wilbams etal., 2012). Viee ngdn chan va giam thieu lang phi thuc pham can dugc phdt huy d mdi hd gia dinh va can tiiiet nhan rdng tai cae dia phuong va khu vuc nhdm gdp phan tiet kiem chi phi tieu dung ndi rieng va chi phi sinh hoal ndi chung; tu dd gdp phan phat trien kinh te, xa hdi va dac biet gdp phdn bao ve mdi truong.
4. K ^ LUAN
Phdn ldn hd gia dinh (76% sd hd) tai qudn Nmh Kidu, thdnh phd Can Tho lang phi thuc pham frong tudn la tir 1 den 2 lan va chi phi Idng phi udc linh dudi 100 den 300 nghin ddng. Mat khdc, muc thu nhap cd tuong quan tuyen tinh vdi vdi chi phi mua thuc pham va chi phi lang phi thuc pham. Cac loai ihuc jiham bi lang phi Uiudng xuydn nhat thudc nhfim Unh bdt ngu coc, cac loai rau cu, thit, thiiy hdi s;tii va frdi Biia an chieu-tdi duoc ude tinh la thucn cay.
'J yen du N O N G NGHIEP VA PHAT TRIEN N O N G THON - KY 1 - THANG 9/2019
thua nhdt frong cac bira dn. Li do chinh thue pham hi Idng phi Id do nau du thira, de danh thiic an cho cac tiianh vien khdc hay do de quen frong qua trinh bao quan. Tu cac b do ehinh ddn den lang phi tiiue pham nghidn eim nay cung tiiao ludn ve thai do va de xual cac bipn phap chdng Idng phi cua hd gia dinh nhdm nop phan nang cao nhdn thtrc frong viec han che Idng phi thue pham, gdp phan phdt trien kinh te. xa hOi ddc biet la tiet kiem smh boat phi cbo ngudi dan.
Vi vay. vide ngdn chan va giam tiiieu lang phi tiiuc pham ludn Id mgt frong nhirng van dd cap thie't ddi VOI mdi dia phuong, mdi khu virc vd mdi gia dinh b Vi?t Nam.
i n CAM ON
Nghidn cuu nay xin cam on Phan Ngoc Hoai Ngan, sinh vien khda 41, nganh Cdng nghe Thuc phim da bd ti(r thuc hien didu tra.
TIU UEU THAM KHAO
1. Aschemann-Witzel, J., Gimenez, A., and Ares, G., 2019. Household food waste in an emerging countiy and the reasons why: Consumer' s own accounts and how il differs for target groups.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling 145,332-338.
2. Blichfeldt, B.S., Mikkelsen, M., and Gram, M., 2015. When il stops being food: The edibility, ideology, procrastination, objecttfication and internalization of household food waste. Food, Culhire & Society 18,89-105.
3. Buchner, B.. Fiscbler, C , Reilly, J., Riccardi, G., Ricordi, C, and Veronesi, U., 2012. Food waste:
causes, impacts and proposals.[Barilla center for food and nutrition document]. Codiee Edizioni, Parma, Italy.
4. Buckley, M., Cowan, C , and McCarthy, M., 2007. The convenience food market in Great Britain:
Convenience food lifestyle (CFL) segments. Appetite 49,600^17.
5. Cecere, G.. ManeinelU, S., and Mazzanti, M., 2014. Waste prevention and social preferences: the role of intrinsic and exfrinsic motivations. Ecological Economics 107,163-176.
6. Cue Tlidng ke tiianh phd Cdn Tho, 2017. Nien giam Thdng ke tiianh phd Can Tha 2016. Nha xudt ban Thdng ke. Ha Ndi.
7. Di Taba, E., Simeone, M., and Scarpato, D..
2019. Consumer behaviour types in household food waste. Journal of Cleaner Production 214,166-172.
M A M < : I M C H I F P V A P H A T TRIEN N O N G THON
8. Elecfrolux, 2016. Chung ta dang lang phi thgc phdm nhu the nao. Elecfrolux. www. facebook.
com/ElecfroluxVietnam (truy cap ngay 23.04.2019).
9. European Commission, 2011. Roadmap to a Resource EfBcient Europe; COM(2011)571, Communication from the Comnussion to the European Parbament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions; European Commission: Brussel, Belgium. 2011.
10. FAO. 2010. The state of food insecurity m tiie world, Food and Agriculture organization of the United Nations. Rome. Italy. ISBN 978-92-5-106610-2.
11. Farr Wharton, G., Fotii, M.. and Choi, J. H. J..
2014. Identifying factors that promote consumer behaviours causing expired domestic food waste.
Journal of Consumer Behaviour 13,393402.
12. Graham-Rowe, E., Jessop, D. C . and Sparks, P.. 2014. Identifying motivations and barriers to minimising household food waste. Resources, conservation and recycling 84,15-23.
13. Guslavsson, J.. Cederberg, C, Sonesson, U., Otterdijk, R., and Meybeck, A., 2011. Global Food Losses and Food Waste. FAO. Rome, Italy.
14. Jorissen, J., Pnefer, C, and Brautigam, K. R., 2015. Food waste generation al household level:
results of a survey among employees of two European research centers in Italy and Germany.
Suslamability 7,2695-2715.
15. Joshi, A., Kale, S., Chandel, S., and Pal, D..
2015. Likert scale: Explored and explained. British Journal of Apphed Science & Technology 7,396.
16. Kalajajuuri, J. M., Silvennoinen, K., Hartikainen, H., Heikkila, L., and Reinikainen, A., 2014. Food waste m the Finnish food chain. Journal of Cleaner Production 73,322-329.
17. Koivupuro, H. K., Hartikainen. H..
Silvennoinen, K., Kalajajuuri, J. M., Heikintalo, N., Reinikainen, A., and Jalkanen, L, 2012. hifluence of socio-demographical, behavioural and atfrtudinal factors on the amount of avoidable food waste generated m Finnish households. International journal of consumer studies 36,183-191.
18. Malbnson, L. J., Russell, J. M., and Barker, M. E., 2016. Attitudes and behaviour towards convenience food and food waste m the United Kingdom. Appetite 103,17-28.
K Y I - T H A N G 9/2019 131
KHOA HOC CONG NGHl 19. Neff, R. A.. Spiker. M. L. and Truant. P. L,
2015. Wasted food: US consumers' reported awareness, attitudes, and behaviors. PloS one 10.e012788L
20. Ostergren. K., 2014. FUSIONS definitional frameword for food waste (FP7-rapport). SDC Institutet for Uvsmedel och bioteknik.
21. Parizeau, K., von Massow, M., and Martin.
R., 2015. Household-level dynamics of food waste production and related bebefs, attitijdes, and behaviours in Guelph, Ontario. \\^aste Management 35,207-217.
22. Ponis, S. T., Papanikolaou, P. A., Katimertzoglou, P., Ntalla. A. C, and Xenos, K. I., 2017. Household food waste in Greece: A questionnaire survey. Journal of cleaner production 149,1268-1277.
23. Qi, D. and Roe, B. E., 2016. Household food waste: Multivariate regression and principal components analyses of awareness and attitudes among US consumers. PloS one ll,e0159250.
24. Quested, T. and Johnson. H., 2009.
Household food and drink waste in the UK. wrap.
Banbury UK. 2009. lSBN:l-84405-430^.
25. Quested, T. E.. Marsh. E., Stunell, D., and Parry, A. D., 2013. Spaghetti soup; The complex world of food waste behaviours. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 79,43-51.
FOOD WASTE OF HOUSEHOLD LEVEL IN CANTHO CITY, VIETNAM Tong Thi Anh Ngoc^
'Department of Food Technology, Can Tho University Summary
Food waste has received growing concerns due to a broad range of economic, environmental and social impacts. The purpose of this study is to survey die status of food waste of households (n = 307) in Can Tho city, Viemam. The results obtained reveal a major proportion (93%) of households sampled paid up to 2 million VND for buying food whereas that lose up to 3 thousand VND for food waste each week. Types of foods and their products are ordered from high to low proportion of wastage as follows: cereals, vegetables meats, seafoods, and fruits. Among meals, dinner had the highest food waste (77.4%). The identified reasons for food waste included cooking more food than needed or intended (76.9%), leaving food for other absent relative members (5L5%) and forgetting food during storage (41%). This is tiie first paper in which provided the status of food waste at the household level. It can contribute to improvmg the awareness of food waste in households and consumers as well.
Keywords: Can Tho. food ivaste. households.
Ngudi phan bi§n: TS. Cao Tmdng Scm Ngdy nhdn bdi: 28/6/2019 Ngdy tiidng qua phan bi$n: 29/7/2019 Ngdy duyet ddng: 5/8/2019
26. Secondi, L-, Principato. L. and Luireti. T..
2015. Household food waste bebavuuir in EU-27 countiies: A multilevel analysis. Food Vohcy 56,2540.
27. Silvennoinen. K., Kalajajuuri. J. M..
Hartikainen, H., Heikkila. L. and Reinikainen, A., 2014. Food waste volume and composition in Finnish households. British Food Journal 116.1058-1068.
28. Stancu, V., Haugaard. P.. and LShteenmaki, L, 2016. Determmants of consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste. Appetite 96,7- 17.
29. Tucker, C. and Farrelly. T., 2016. Household food waste: the implications of consumer choice in food from purchase to disposal. Local Environment 21,682-706.
30. Visschers, V. H., WickU, N., and Siegnst, M., 2016. Sorting out food waste behaviour: A survey on the motivators and bamers of self-reported amounts of food waste in households. Journal of Environmental Psychology 45,66-78.
31. Waitt, G. and Phillips, C, 2016. Food waste and domestic refrigeration: a visceral and material approach. Social & Cultural Geography 17,359-379.
32. Williams, H., Wiksfrdm, P., Otterbring, T..
Ldfgren, M., and Gustafsson, A., 2012. Reasons for household food waste with special attention to packaging. Journal of cleaner production 24,141-148.
NONG NGHIEP VA PHAT TRIEN NONG THON - KY 1 - THANG 9/2019