The New Nordic Diet: A sociological study of the ...

The New Nordic Diet: A sociological study of the acceptance and appropriation of a dietary regime Arun Micheelsen

2013 / 10

IFRO PhD Thesis 2013 / 10 The New Nordic Diet: A sociological study of the acceptance and appropriation of a dietary regime Author: Arun Micheelsen Academic supervisors: Professor Lotte Holm and associate professor emeritus Katherine O’Doherty Jensen, University of Copenhagen Assessment committee: Senior researcher Tove Christensen, University of Copenhagen (chairman), professor Bente Halkier, Roskilde University, professor Johanna Mäkelä, Helsinki University Subject description: This PhD thesis is part of the OPUS research project (2009–2013). The overall aim of the OPUS Research Centre is to improve public health in Denmark by renewing Danish culinary culture through the development, testing, and dissemination of a tasty, healthy, sustainable and acceptable New Nordic Diet (NND) to the Danish public. The main objective of this PhD thesis is to evaluate whether OPUS has achieved its aim of producing an acceptable diet. To this end, the thesis presents three studies focusing on adult consumers’ acceptance, and intervention-participants’ acceptance and appropriation, of the NND. Submitted: 4 February 2013 Defended: 16 August 2013 ISBN: 978-87-92591-38-8

Department of Food and Resource Economics Faculty of Science University of Copenhagen Rolighedsvej 25 DK 1958 Frederiksberg Denmark www.ifro.ku.dk

An apple (Danish org ganic?) and d a lemon ( Spanish organic?)

Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................................................................... 5 Abstract ............................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Dansk sammenfatning [Danish summary] ..................................................................................................................... 9 English summary ............................................................................................................................................................ 13

PART I ............................................................................................................................... 17 1

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 17

1.1

Background............................................................................................................................................................ 18

1.2

The OPUS Research Centre ................................................................................................................................. 21

1.3

The New Nordic Diet ............................................................................................................................................. 25

1.4

The point of departure of the present study ....................................................................................................... 28

2

ANALYTICAL APPROACH AND CENTRAL CONCEPTS ........................................ 29

2.1 Practice theory....................................................................................................................................................... 29 2.1.1 Food practices ................................................................................................................................................ 31 2.2 Food acceptance and appropriation of food ....................................................................................................... 32 2.2.1 Food acceptance ............................................................................................................................................ 33 2.2.2 Appropriation of food .................................................................................................................................... 34

3

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGICAL LIMITATIONS ............................. 36

3.1 Design of the studies .............................................................................................................................................. 37 3.1.1 Testing the acceptance of NND prototype meals by consumers .................................................................... 37 3.1.2 Acceptance of the NND by intervention participants .................................................................................... 40 3.1.3 Appropriation of the NND by intervention participants ................................................................................ 42 3.2 Methodological limitations ................................................................................................................................... 45 3.2.1 Acceptance study of consumers ..................................................................................................................... 45 3.2.2 Acceptance and appropriation study of intervention participants .................................................................. 46

4

MAIN FINDINGS ........................................................................................................ 51

4.1

Acceptance of the NND by consumers ................................................................................................................. 51

4.2

Acceptance and appropriation of the NND by intervention participants ........................................................ 53

4.3

Discussion of main findings .................................................................................................................................. 55

3

5

CONCLUSIONS: THE FUTURE OF THE NND.......................................................... 61

5.1

Disseminating the NND to Danish consumers .................................................................................................... 61

5.2

Improving public health ....................................................................................................................................... 63

5.3

Renewing culinary culture.................................................................................................................................... 65

5.4

Considerations of importance in future studies .................................................................................................. 67

REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 70 PART II .............................................................................................................................. 81 ARTICLE 1: ....................................................................................................................... 81 Consumer acceptance of the New Nordic Diet: An exploratory study ....................................................................... 81

ARTICLE 2: ..................................................................................................................... 114 The acceptability of the New Nordic Diet by participants in a controlled six-month dietary intervention .......... 114

ARTICLE 3: ..................................................................................................................... 142 Living with the New Nordic Diet ................................................................................................................................. 142

EPILOGUE ...................................................................................................................... 163 APPENDIX: ..................................................................................................................... 166 A. Exploratory study of Danish consumers’ acceptance of the NND ....................................................................... 166 Focus group schedule ................................................................................................................................................. 166 Description of the New Nordic Diet .......................................................................................................................... 172 Pictures for exercise ................................................................................................................................................... 174 Instructions for photo-diary ....................................................................................................................................... 177 Seven day dinner-meal questionnaire ........................................................................................................................ 181 New Nordic Diet meal questionnaire ......................................................................................................................... 183 Interview guide: Personal interview........................................................................................................................... 186 B. A quantitative study of intervention-participants’ acceptance of the NND ........................................................ 190 Baseline questionnaire ............................................................................................................................................... 190 Concluding questionnaire .......................................................................................................................................... 224 C. A qualitative study of the intervention participants’ appropriation of the NND ............................................... 279 Focus groups schedule ............................................................................................................................................... 279 In-depth interviews with intervention personnel: Interview guide ............................................................................ 284 Drop-out interviews: Interview guide ........................................................................................................................ 287

4

Acknowledgments It has not been an easy task to conduct my PhD project at the OPUS Research Centre. The enormity of the OPUS project, my reluctance to contribute to OPUS’ aim of renewing Danish culinary culture on the basis of the NND, and the many roles I have had to play in the Centre (e.g. Project manager, Research consultant, PhD student, and Ethnographic observer) made my PhD project hard to complete. And parallel to this, “stuff” has happened in my private life too. Lene and I became parents to William and Sebastian, and – somewhat more unfortunately – I was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes in 2012. Yet, conducting my PhD study has been immensely interesting and rewarding, since I have worked with and been surrounded by so many good people. I owe thanks to all of them. First, and foremost, I thank all my informants, who have been so kind as to share their private reflections and opinions with me, and who have spent their time and energy answering my many questions. Equally, I wish to thank the staff at the OPUS Research Centre, many of whom I have worked with, and who have helped me in my research. In particular, I thank Sanne Kellebjerg Poulsen and Thomas Meinert Larsen, who are co-authors of one of my articles and whose help has been vital for my PhD study. I also thank the OPUS Management Team for commenting on and approving my articles prior to their submission. Most importantly, I thank my supervisor Professor Lotte Holm for helping me with her vast knowledge, and for keeping me focused on the tasks at hand. Equally, and with the same gratitude, I wish to thank my co-supervisor Associate Professor emeritus Katherine O’Doherty Jensen for helping me find my ‘conceptual hooks’ and for being so patient with me. Both Lotte and Katherine have helped me tremendously as co-authors and as supervisors. Also, I thank my coauthor and office-mate Louis Havn whose systematic thinking and quantitative analysis have been essential for the completion of my thesis. Likewise, I thank Bue Thastum, Sara Jin Smidt, Louise Bagger Iversen, and Vinni Dahl Steffensen for their help. They have all contributed greatly to the making of this thesis. I have been fortunate to be employed at the Sociological Research Unit at the Department of Food and Resource Economics. My thesis has benefitted greatly from my colleagues’ comments and kind critique. In particular, and in alphabetical order, I would like to thank Sidse Schoubye Andersen, Bodil Just Christensen, Kia Ditlevsen, Lennart Dam Heerwagen, Line Hillersdal, Christian Jais Jensen, Sara Korzen, Jesper Lassen, Henrik Mielby, Annemette Nielsen, Nina Konstantin Nielsen, Naja Buono Stamer, Cecilie Thorslund and Ditte Vassard.

5

I would also like to thank the Food Observatory in Barcelona for letting me visit and present my project. In particular, I wish to thank Professor Jesús Contreras Hernández and Barbara Guidalli for all their help and hospitality. Finally, I must thank my family and friends for all their help and patience. Especially my mum for all her love and support, and Ulla for the help she has given me and my family. Also, I thank Kurt from Bispebjerg Hospital for being my “rock” when most needed.

Above all, I thank you, Lene. The strength and love you give me is beyond words.

Arun Micheelsen, April 2013

6

To BM

7

Abstract This PhD project is part of the research programme at the OPUS Research Centre (2009-2013) at the University of Copenhagen. The aim of the Centre is to improve public health in Denmark by developing, testing and disseminating the New Nordic Diet (NND). Combining the gastronomic ideals of the New Nordic Cuisine movement with eating habits that accord with Nordic dietary recommendations, the NND is designed to be a healthy, Nordic, seasonal and organic diet that will be acceptable to Danish consumers. This PhD study has four objectives: (i) to explore the acceptance of the NND among Danish consumers, (ii) to measure the acceptance of the NND among participants in a controlled dietary intervention trial conducted by OPUS, and (iii) to explore intervention participants’ appropriation the NND. These objectives have been pursued in three empirical studies. On this basis, a further objective was: (iv) to assess which social and cultural factors are likely to impact upon the achievement of the aim of OPUS. The NND concept was found to be well accepted, although some consumers viewed it as being an elitist diet. Also, the taste of the NND was very well accepted. The practical challenges and time-consuming process of preparing NND meals, and the perceived price and poor availability of NND food products, were identified as central barriers to acceptance. Intervention participants appropriated the NND by tailoring a new form of NND that better accorded with their individual preferences and the everyday demands of their lives. Cultural factors associated with acceptance of the NND were interest in cooking, eating habits that embrace ‘feminine’ tastes, ‘modern’ dishes and healthy foods, as well as preferences for consuming organic and seasonal foods. Social factors were high level of urbanisation and gender (women are more accepting than men). Higher levels of education and income also appeared to be relevant factors. In contrast, men, those living in less urbanised and rural areas, those with preferences for ‘traditional’ dishes, and those not inclined to consume seasonal, organic food or healthy foods such as fish and vegetables, had a lower level of acceptance of the NND than others. Thus, the NND appears to have a low level of acceptance among those consumers who are known to have less healthy eating habits. It is concluded that the NND is unlikely to be successful in reaching its objective to improve public health. It is strongly recommended that in-depth studies of existing food practices among the target population should be the point of departure for future attempts to develop new diets with the intent of improving public health.

8

Dansk sammenfatning [Danish summary] Dette ph.d.-projekt er gennemført som en del af forskningscenteret OPUS, der blev etableret i 2009 (-2013) ved Københavns Universitet i Danmark. Centerets overordnede mål er, at forbedre folkesundheden i Danmark ved at forny den danske madkultur igennem udviklingen, afprøvningen og udbredelsen af Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad (NNH). NNH søger at kombinere de gastronomiske idealer fra den Nye Nordiske Køkken bevægelse med sunde madvaner, der stemmer overens med De Nordiske Næringsstofanbefalinger. NNH er således designet af specialister ved OPUS centret til at være en sund, nordisk, sæsonbestemt og økologisk kosttype, der er acceptabel for de danske forbrugere. I forhold til accepten af NNH er det ambitionen, at den vil være en velsmagende kost, som vil overvinde den formodede barriere, i form af lav hedonisk værdi, som er forbundet med accept af andre anbefalede sunde kosttyper til forbrugere. Dette ph.d.-studie har fire målsætninger: (i) at undersøge accept af NNH blandt danske forbrugere, (ii) at måle accepten af NNH blandt deltagerne i et kontrolleret kostinterventionsforsøg gennemført af OPUS, og (iii) at afdække hvordan interventionsdeltagere har approprieret NNH. Disse tre målsætninger er blevet forfulgt i tre empiriske studier og er præsenteret i tre artikler. Artiklerne er indleveret til publicering og præsenteres i del II i ph.d.afhandling. På baggrund af disse empiriske studier er det endvidere en målsætning, (iv) at vurdere hvilke sociale og kulturelle faktorer, der kan antages at have indflydelse på, om OPUS opnår sit overordnede mål. I undersøgelsen af disse emner har ph.d.-studiet benyttet tre begreber inden for et praksisteoretisk perspektiv: madpraksisser, mad accept og appropriation af mad. Madpraksisser er forstået som de rutiniserede adfærdsmønstrer, der forbinder specifikke materialer, kompetencer og betydninger i forbindelse med indkøb, tilberedning og spisning af mad i hverdagen. Accept af NNH er empirisk undersøgt i forhold til forbrugernes/interventionsdeltagernes evaluering af NNH som begreb samt deres erfaringer med at købe, tilberede og spise NNH – herunder erfaringer i forhold til kostens spisekvalitet og de praktiske konsekvenser ved at efterleve den i hverdagen. Appropriation af NNH er undersøgt som den proces, hvormed nye materialer, kompetencer og betydninger i relation til NNH bliver brugt, indtil de er blevet en integreret del af deltagernes madpraksisser. For at undersøge forbrugernes accept af NNH blev der gennemført fire fokusgrupper med forbrugere i land- og byområder med særlig fokus på deltagerens opfattelse af NNH som begreb samt deres evaluering af dens smag og udseende. Derefter tilberedte deltagerne to NNH

9

prototypemåltider i deres eget hjem, som de dokumenterede i en foto-dagbog og evaluerede på baggrund af spørgeskemaer. For at indsamle detaljerede beskrivelser af tilberedningen og spisningen af de to NNH måltider blev der til sidst gennemført seks dybde-interviews blandt informanter, som enten var villige eller uvillige med hensyn til at lave NNH retter i fremtiden. Blandt de 147 deltagere som havde afsluttet interventionsforsøget, blev en kvantitativ undersøgelse gennemført. Undersøgelsens formål var at måle deltagernes accept af NNH sammenlignet med accepten af en såkaldt ’Gennemsnitlige Danske Hverdagsmad’ (GDH) hos kontrolgruppen. Dataindsamlingen inkluderede et spørgeskema besvaret af deltagerne før intervention og efter interventionen. Accept blev målt ved hjælp af et ’spise accept indeks’, som udtrykker kostens spisekvaliteter, samt et ’praktisk accept indeks’, der afspejler praktiske implikationer forbundet med at efterleve kosten i hverdagen. Variation i accept blev undersøgt i henhold til køn, uddannelsesniveau, husstandens sammensætning, forbrug på mad om måneden samt holdninger relateret til madforbrug og madvaner. Endeligt blev processen for, hvordan interventionsdeltagerne approprierede NNH madpraksisser i løbet af interventionen undersøgt. Denne undersøgelse benyttede fire metoder: observationer og uformelle interviews med interventions personale og interventions deltagere, fire dybdeinterviews blandt interventionspersonale, fire fokusgrupper med GDH og NNH interventionsdeltagere og 14 semi-strukturerede telefoninterviews blandt frafaldne deltagere fra NNH kostgruppen. Resultaterne viser, at NNH som begreb blev generelt vel modtaget, omend nogle forbrugere opfattede NNH som en elitær og eksklusiv kost udtænkt af gastronomer og eksperter, der forsøger at påtvinge befolkningen deres madpræferencer. Ligeledes mente nogle af interventionsdeltagerne, at NNH er mindre bæredygtigt end først antaget, da tilberedningen af den indebar et for stort forbrug af fossilenergi. Smagen af NNH blev dog modtaget meget positivt af både forbrugere og interventionsdeltagere, selvom nogle fandt, at den karakteristiske smag af æble var for dominerende. Med hensyn til tilberedning og indkøb af NNH viser undersøgelserne, at de praktiske udfordringer forbundet med at tilberede NNH måltider, tilberedelses tiden, samt den formodede pris og tilgængelighed af NNH fødevareprodukter, er centrale barrierer for accept af NNH. Faktisk ændrede en række forbrugere og interventions deltagere NNH, så den stemte overens med deres individuelle madvaner og krav i forhold til hverdagen. Nogle forbrugere ændrede måltidsformatet i overensstemmelse med deres opfattelse af et ’rigtigt måltid’ – som for eksempel ved at tilsætte kød til NNH vegetarretten. Interventionsdeltagerne approprierede NNH ved at

10

skræddersy en ny NNH i overensstemmelse med deres individuelle præferencer og hverdag, og ændrede ligeledes deres madpraksisser, så de stemte overens med de praktiske krav NNH stillede. Undersøgelsen fandt også, at de nye NNH madpraksisser blev opretholdt af interventionsforsøgets kontrollerede forhold, hvilket indikerer, at de nye NNH madpraksisser ikke kan overleve uden for interventionen. De kulturelle faktorer associeret med accept af NNH var prioriteringen af tid til og interesse i madlavning, madvaner der favner ’feminine’ smage, ’moderne’ retter og sunde fødevarer samt præferencer for at forbruge økologiske og sæsonbestemte fødevarer. De sociale faktorer forbundet med accept af NNH er højt urbaniseringsniveau og køn (kvinder har højere accept end mænd). Det er skal bemærkes, at der blandt de selv-rekrutterede interventionsdeltagere er en markant overrepræsentation af deltagere med højere uddannelse- og indkomstniveau sammenlignet den danske befolkning, hvilket er en stærk indikation på, at disse faktorer også er relevante i forhold til accept af NNH. Sammenlignet med tidligere undersøgelser af danskernes kostvaner viser de samlede resultater, at den befolkningsgruppe som er mest tilbøjelige til at acceptere NNH, er de urbane, veluddannede og velstillede forbrugere, som er interesseret i ’nye’ kulinariske tendenser, som spiser økologiske og sæsonbestemte fødevarer og som allerede spiser forholdsvist sundt. I modsætning til dette viser resultaterne også, at mænd, dem der lever i mindre urbaniserede områder og landdistrikter, dem med præferencer for ’traditionelle’ retter og dem, der ikke er tilbøjelige til at forbruge sæsonbestemte fødevarer, økologiske fødevarer eller sunde fødevarer såsom fisk og grøntsager, har en lavere accept af NNH end andre. På disse punkter synes NNH at have en lav grad af accept blandt de forbrugere, som er kendetegnet ved at spise usundt. Resultaterne i forhold til accepten af NNH baserer sig muligvis på en skævhed i form af en overestimering af accepten. Den belastning som OPUS interventionen og NNH prototypetesten udsatte interventionsdeltagere og forbrugere for, antyder, at begge grupper havde motiver for at deltage i disse undersøgelser, som favoriserer accepten af NNH, såsom en særlig interesse i mad og/eller en interesse i at tabe sig. I forhold til den danske befolkning er interventionsdeltagernes sociale karakteristika sammenfaldende med dem, der tilhører det befolkningssegment, som er tilbøjelige til at have præferencer for sunde fødevarer. Interventionsdeltagerne kan derfor have evalueret NNH mere positivt, end andre forbrugere ville have gjort. Idet NNH primært ser ud til at være acceptabel for de forbrugere, der har sunde madvaner, konkluderer ph.d.-afhandlingen, at NNH ikke vil være succesfuld i forhold til at nå målet

11

om at forbedre folkesundheden generelt. Ydermere har NNH et lavt acceptniveau blandt de segmenter i befolkningen, som tidligere undersøgelser viser har usunde spisevaner. Det forekommer således også at være meget usandsynligt, at NNH vil forbedre folkesundheden blandt de forbrugere, hvor behovet er størst. Med hensyn til den nationale appropriation af NNH, viser det sig også, at NNH, som den er designet af OPUS, er for krævende en kosttype for forbrugerne med hensyn til tilberedning, tilgængelighed af NNH fødevarer i almindelige indkøbssteder samt opfattelsen af høje priser på NNH fødevarer. Derved ser det ud til, at NNH madpraksisser ikke er ’lade-sig-gørlige’ i forbrugernes hverdagsliv. Selvom NNH måske ikke vil forbedre folkesundheden, tyder resultaterne fra dette Ph.d.-studiet på, at udbredelsen af NNH kan biddrage til at styrke produktionen, distribution og forbrug af lokale fødevarer i Danmark samt medvirke til at vitalisere den danske madkultur – særligt blandt de forbrugere som dette ph.d.-studie har identificeret som potentielle modtagere af NNH. Afsluttende anbefales det kraftigt, at introduktionen af nye kostprincipper baserer sig på dybdegående vurderinger af allerede eksisterende madpraksisser og problemstillinger blandt de borgere, som principperne vedrører. Fremtidige undersøgelser bør som udgangspunkt have dette som fokus i udviklingen af nye kosttyper, der har til formål at forbedre folkesundheden. I betragtning af OPUS’ eksplicitte målsætning om at inddrage videnskaben i fornyelsen af den danske madkultur, i henhold til NNH, præsenterer OPUS tillige et relevant casestudie for videnskabssociologi og studier af videnskab og teknologi. Sådanne undersøgelser kunne tjene som anledning til at undersøge og reflektere over vores egen rolle, forpligtelser og interesser, når vi ’praktiserer’ madsociologi inden for rammer, som i OPUS.

12

English summary This PhD project is part of the research programme at the OPUS Research Centre, which was established in Denmark in 2009 (-2013) at the University of Copenhagen. The over-arching aim of the Centre is to improve public health in Denmark by renewing Danish culinary culture though the development, testing and dissemination of the New Nordic Diet (NND). The NND seeks to combine the gastronomic ideals of the New Nordic Cuisine movement with healthy eating habits that accord with Nordic dietary recommendations. The diet is thus designed by specialists at the OPUS Centre to be a healthy, Nordic, seasonal and organic diet that will be acceptable to Danish consumers. In terms of dietary acceptance, it is the ambition that the NND will be a tasty diet which can overcome the assumed barrier of low hedonic value that is associated with other diets recommended to consumers on health grounds. This PhD study has four objectives: (i) to explore the acceptance of the NND among Danish consumers, (ii) to measure the acceptance of the NND among participants in a controlled dietary intervention trial conducted by OPUS, and (iii) to explore how intervention participants have appropriated the NND. These objectives have been pursued in three empirical studies, and are presented in three articles which have been submitted for publication and are included in Part II of this PhD thesis. On the basis of these empirical studies, a further objective of this PhD study was: (iv) to assess which social and cultural factors are likely to impact upon the achievement of the overall aim of OPUS. In exploring these issues, three concepts within a practice theoretical perspective have been employed, namely: food practices, food acceptance and appropriation of food. Food practices are conceptualised as the routinized patterns of behaviour that interlink specific materials, competences and meanings regarding the procurement, preparation and consumption of food in everyday life. Acceptance of the NND is empirically investigated as the consumers’/intervention participants’ evaluation of the diet as a concept and of their experience of procuring, preparing and consuming this diet, including the experienced eating qualities of the NND and the practical implications of adhering to this diet in everyday life. Appropriation of the NND is explored as the process of employing novel materials, competences and meanings related to the NND until these novelties have become integral parts of the participants’ food practices. To explore consumers’ acceptance of the NND, a total of four focus groups among rural and urban consumers were conducted, focusing on perceptions of the NND as a concept as

13

well as evaluation of the taste and appearance of the NND. Then, participants prepared two NND prototype meals at home, which they documented by making a photo-diary and evaluated by completing questionnaires. Finally, six in-depth interviews among informants willing and not willing to prepare NND in the future were conducted in order to obtain detailed descriptions of preparing and eating these NND meals. The intervention participants’ acceptance of the NND, as compared with acceptance of a so-called ‘Average Danish Diet’ (ADD) among the control group, was explored in a quantitative study among the 147 participants who had participated in the intervention trial until its conclusion. Data collection was by means of questionnaires administered to participants before the intervention and after the intervention. Acceptance was measured by an ‘eating acceptance index’, expressing the eating qualities of the diet, and by a ‘practical acceptance index’, which regarded the practical implications of adhering to the diet in everyday life. Variations in dietary acceptance according to gender, level of education, household composition, and money spent on food per month, as well as attitudes related to food consumption and food habits, were investigated. Finally, the process of how intervention participants appropriated NND food practices in the course of the intervention was explored. This study utilised four methods which included observations and informal interviews with intervention personnel and intervention participants, four in-depth interviews among intervention personnel, four focus groups with ADD and NND intervention participants, and 14 semi-structured telephone interviews among drop-outs from the NND dietary group. It was found that the NND as a concept was generally well accepted, although some consumers did find the NND to be an elitist and up-market diet concocted by gourmets and experts, who are seeking to impose their food preferences on the population. Also, some intervention participants perceived the NND as being less sustainable than initially assumed since its preparation consumed too much fuel energy. The taste of the NND was, however, very well accepted among consumers and intervention participants alike, although the characteristic taste of apple was found to be too dominating for some. In terms of preparing and procuring the NND, the studies found that the practical challenges of preparing NND meals and the time this takes, as well as perceived price and availability of NND food products, are central barriers to the acceptance of this diet. Indeed, a number of consumers and intervention participants changed the NND to accord with their individual dietary preferences and with the demands of everyday life. Some consumers changed the meals formats to accord with their conception of a ‘proper meal’ such as adding meat to a

14

vegetarian NND meal. Intervention participants, on the other hand, appropriated the NND by tailoring a new NND in accordance with their individual preferences and everyday lives as well as changing their food practices to accord to the practical demands of the NND. It was found that these new NND food practices were sustained by the controlled conditions of the intervention trial, which suggests that they may not survive outside of the intervention. Cultural factors associated with acceptance of the NND were the prioritisation of time devoted to and interest in cooking food, eating habits that embrace ‘feminine’ tastes, ‘modern’ dishes and healthy foods, as well as preferences for consuming organic and seasonal foods. Social factors associated with acceptance of the NND are found to be high level of urbanisation and gender (women are more accepting than men). It is noteworthy that self-recruited participants in this dietary intervention have markedly higher levels of education and income as compared to the Danish population, strongly suggesting that these factors are also implicated in acceptance of the NND. These results indicate, when compared with earlier studies of dietary habits among Danes, that the population group most likely to accept the NND are urban, educated and well-off consumers who are interested in ‘new’ culinary tends, who consume organic and seasonal foods and already eat relatively healthily. In contrast, results also suggests that men, those living in less urbanised and rural areas, those with preferences for ‘traditional’ dishes, and those not inclined to consume seasonal, organic food or healthy foods such as fish and vegetables, have a lower acceptance of the NND than others. On these points, the NND appears to have a low level of acceptance among those consumers who are known to eat unhealthily. The results of these studies regarding acceptance of the NND may be biased towards an over-estimation of dietary acceptance. The strain which the OPUS intervention trial and the NND prototype meals test placed on participants and consumers suggests that both groups had motives for taking part in these studies which favour acceptance of the NND, such as having a special interest in food and/or an interest in losing weight. Also, compared to the Danish population, the social characteristics of participants who concluded the intervention trial closely resemble those of that segment of the population which is prone to have preferences for healthy food and may therefore evaluate the NND more positively than would other consumers. Since the NND primarily appears to be acceptable to those consumers who have healthy eating habits, the PhD thesis concludes that the NND will not be successful in reaching its objective to improve public health in general. Furthermore, since the NND has a low level of acceptance among those segments of the population identified in other studies as having unhealthy

15

eating habits, it would seem to be very unlikely that the NND will improve public health among those consumers most in need. In terms of national appropriation of the NND, the NND as designed by OPUS is seen to be too demanding a diet to consume in terms of preparation, availability of NND foods in normal shopping venues and perceived high prices. Thus, NND food practices appear not to be “doable” in the everyday life of consumers. However, even if the NND may not improve public health, results of this PhD study suggest that the dissemination of the NND may, on the one hand, serve to intensify the production, distribution and consumption of local foods in Denmark and, on the other hand, contribute to vitalising Danish culinary culture, specifically among those consumers identified in this PhD study as potential recipients of the NND. Finally, it is strongly recommended that when seeking to introduce new dietary principles it is necessary to base this ambition on in-depth consideration of already existing food practices and concerns among the population at issue. Future studies should focus on these topics as the point of departure for the process of developing new diets with the intent of improving public health. In addition to this, given OPUS explicit aim of enrolling science in the renewal of Danish culinary culture on the basis of the NND, OPUS also presents a case study relevant for sociology of science and science and technology studies. Such studies could serve as an opportunity to explore and reflect upon our own role, obligations and interests when ‘doing’ sociology of food in a setting such as OPUS.

16

Part I 1 Introduction The OPUS Research Centre is a multidisciplinary and inter-institutional collaboration (the title being a loose acronym capturing the goal of fostering ‘optimal well‐being, development and health for Danish children through a healthy New Nordic Diet’.) It was established in Denmark in 2009 (– 2013) at the University of Copenhagen. The over-arching aim of the Centre is to improve public health in Denmark by renewing Danish culinary culture though the development, testing and dissemination of the New Nordic Diet (NND) (OPUS, 2012a). To do this, the Centre has sought to combine gastronomy, as represented by New Nordic Cuisine, with healthy dieting according with Nordic dietary recommendations. This has involved the co-operation of nutritionists and other scientists, including sociologists and communication specialists, as well as gastronomic experts associated with New Nordic Cuisine. To investigate whether the NND is an acceptable diet for adult Danes, sociological studies were included in the OPUS project – first, during the development of the NND, to gain consumer input for the on-going development of the diet, and second, during the clinical testing of the diet, to determine its acceptance. This thesis is based on these studies. It presents the first sociological investigation of how the NND was received by a selected group of Danish consumers, and whether and how intervention-participants, after a prolonged period of consuming the NND, came to accept and appropriate it. The following three articles have been submitted for publication (see Part II): 1. Arun Micheelsen, Lotte Holm, and Katherine O'Doherty Jensen. “Consumer acceptance of the New Nordic Diet: An exploratory study”, submitted to Appetite

2. Arun Micheelsen, Louis Havn, Sanne Kellebjerg Poulsen, Thomas Meinert Larsen, and Lotte Holm. “The acceptability of the New Nordic Diet by participants in a controlled sixmonth dietary intervention”, submitted to Food, Quality and Preference 3. Arun Micheelsen, Lotte Holm, and Katherine O'Doherty Jensen. “Living with the New Nordic Diet”, submitted to British Food Journal

17

Based on these studies, and in accordance with the aim of OPUS to develop an acceptable diet for all Danes, this thesis aims to elucidate and discuss the key social and cultural factors that influence consumers’ acceptance and appropriation of the NND.

1.1 Background The NND from the OPUS Research Centre represents an attempt to develop a novel cuisine that will enliven Danish culinary culture (OPUS, 2009a). Historically, the launching and consolidation of a national cuisine has accompanied the task of nation-building (Appadurai, 2009). While cookbooks during most of the 20th century have generally paid little attention to the symbolic associations between food and nation, it has recently become clear that during the 1980s and 1990s some German and British cookbooks, among others, did begin to promote national cuisine (Möhring, 2008; Panayi, 2008; Warde, 2009). From the beginning of the twenty-first century, and inspired by processes of globalisation, the launching of national and regional cuisines appears to have become a new pattern in many countries (Warde, 2009). At the same time, an upsurge of interest in local foods and local diets has been noted in many parts of the western world (Duruz, 2004). This is often accompanied by non-commercialised means of promotion – for example, blogs and web-pages (ex. Maiser, n.d.; Smith & MacKinnon, n.d.). These developments do not openly refer to national identity or nationbuilding, but they do often emphasise the importance of regional values, products and traditions, the local economy and self-sufficiency, as well as local and global sustainability and biodiversity. This also holds true for the New Nordic Cuisine, which includes a focus upon modern values such as health, environmental sustainability and animal welfare (Meyer, 2012). However, unlike the abovementioned developments, New Nordic Cuisine has an explicitly gastronomic origin which takes its point of departure in the notion of Nordic terroir, and the promotion of its agenda has been pursued by means of political and commercial stakeholder alliances (Byrkjeflot, Pedersen, & Svejenova, 2013). New Nordic Cuisine is a gastronomic invention promoted by gourmet chefs as an haute cuisine (Meyer, 2012). Its history suggests that it originated from different gastronomic milieus in Scandinavia, and in particular Denmark. In 2003–2004 the Norwegian chef Andreas

18

Viestad introduced New Scandinavian Cooking in a TV series by the same name promoting Nordic foods and meals as tasty and trendy food from the wild Nordic land (Scandinavian Cooking AS, n.d.). The Danish chef and entrepreneur Claus Meyer, who is also co-owner of the movement’s flagship Michelin-starred restaurant noma (noma is an abbreviation of the Danish word for Nordic Food, i.e. ‘Nordisk Mad’), participated in the TV show. Together with the head-chef at noma, Rene Redzepi, Claus Meyer organised ‘The Nordic Cuisine Symposium’ in Denmark in 2004. The importance of this symposium appears to have made it the official birthplace of New Nordic Cuisine as such. In preparation for the symposium, a group of gourmet chefs from Finland, Åland, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, the Faroe Islands, Iceland, and Greenland formulated ‘the New Nordic Kitchen Manifesto’ in collaboration with Claus Meyer and the president of the Danish gourmet academy Jan Krag Jacobsen (Meyer, 2012). The ‘New Nordic Kitchen Manifesto’ was inaugurated at the symposium as a collaborative declaration of the New Nordic Cuisine, and from that point on it has acted as guiding principle for the gastronomic movement. The Manifesto comprises 10 purposes relating to New Nordic Cuisine’s culinary, regional, ethical, cultural, commercial, and collaborative dimensions. In short, it stresses that the ‘New Nordic Kitchen’ is based on Nordic, seasonal, and ethical (e.g. animal welfare friendly and non-GM) foods. Furthermore, the Manifesto expresses the intention that those involved in New Nordic Cuisine will seek collaboration with nutritional scientists and “representatives of consumers, other cooking craftsmen, agriculture, fishing industry, food industry, retail and wholesale industry, researchers, teachers, politicians and authorities on this joint project to the benefit and advantage of all in the Nordic countries” (ibid.). As such, the Manifesto expresses a specific outlook on food which combines an aestheticized perception of the wild Nordic nature with ideals of local production methods, regional foods, gastronomic ambitions, and an ethical take on food production – all of which are to be promoted as a Nordic cuisine through collaboration with relevant stakeholders. In the summer of 2005, the Nordic Council of Ministers, who financially backed ‘The Nordic Cuisine Symposium’ in 2004, embraced the Manifesto and presented ‘The Aarhus Declaration’, which states that “the Council of Ministers decide[d] to initiate a prospective work on new Nordic food in order to promote Nordic awareness of Nordic food and increase shared identity and quality of life as well as mark out the Nordic region internationally” (Nordisk Ministerråd, 2005, p. 2, author’s translation and editing). This led to the establishment of the Nordic Council of Ministers’ three-year ‘New Nordic Food’ programme, which was launched by 2006. The programme was “…designed to help to project and brand Nordic values by interlinking the

19

Region’s strengths in key areas like the culinary arts, food culture and health. The natural next step will be areas such as tourism and business development” (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2007). At the present time, the programme is expected to extend to 2014 (Nordisk Ministerråd, n.d.-a). Thus, as the Nordic Council of Ministers found the ideals of the New Nordic Cuisine in alignment with the Council’s ambition to strengthen Nordic culture, economy, and commercial interests at a global level, the Council and the New Nordic Cuisine have become close allies. This has in turn helped the New Nordic Cuisine to gain a significant position in formulating and promoting Nordic identity and culinary culture in public media within the Nordic region as well as abroad. Also central to New Nordic Cuisine is the concept of Nordic terroir. The concept of terroir, which associates products with a specific geographical and cultural–historical region from where they draw their distinctive qualities, is a noteworthy strategy used by some food producers to localize their products (Aurier, Fort, & Sirieix, 2005). It has a longstanding connection with gastronomy in southern Europe – for example, in French ‘nouvelle cuisine’ and the Italian ‘slow food’ movement (Miele & Murdoch, 2002). However, in Scandinavia, the concept of terroir is a relatively new concept and is generally not employed by larger food producers although some consumer segments perceive region of origin as an indicator of quality (Van der Lans, 2001). Among Danish consumers, organic foods are often perceived as products with added value (Hjelmar, 2011; Korzen, Sandøe, & Lassen, 2011; Lund, TB., Andersen, LM, & Jensen, 2012), but this relates to imported as well as domestic products. The introduction of a Nordic terroir by New Nordic Cuisine, on the other hand, seems more likely to feed into commercial attempts to increase the consumption of local Danish foods, as represented by Denmark’s largest retail company Coop’s promotion of Nordic foods (Coop, 2011). It also lends itself to a new vision of Denmark as an exporter of high-end Nordic food products (Meyer, 2012). Moreover, in accordance with the ‘New Nordic Kitchen Manifesto’, New Nordic Cuisine attempts to link Nordic terroir with healthy eating, local food production, and sustainable food consumption within this cuisine (ibid.). This is also a novelty in the Nordic region (Bere & Brug, 2009), since interest in healthy eating, local food production, and sustainable food consumption has mainly centred on the ‘Mediterranean diet’ (Bere & Brug, 2009; Serra-Majem, Bach-Faig, Miranda, & Clapes-Badrinas, 2011). Finally, New Nordic Cuisine is a culinary movement which seeks to gain eaters through commercial channels. The predominant figure of the gastronomic movement, the restaurant noma in Denmark, opened in 2004. By 2010 noma had achieved two stars in the Michelin Guide in addition to having been proclaimed ‘The World’s Best Restaurant’ and ‘Best Restaurant in Europe’

20

(Gaston, Arpege, Roux, Roux, & Amis, 2011; Mithril et al., 2012), and it is today a beacon of New Nordic Cuisine conceived as haute cuisine in the global media. Other restaurants in Denmark have followed the trend and success of noma, serving food according with the ideals of New Nordic Cuisine (TV2 Danmark, 2012). As mentioned, the gastronomic movement was also promoted by the Nordic TV cooking show ‘New Scandinavian Cooking’ from 2003–2004. In this show Nordic chefs prepared meals in accordance with the ideals of New Nordic Cuisine. The chefs visit different locations in their countries, displaying the local scenery, producers, and products whilst preparing Nordic meals. The preparation of local foods occurs outdoors, visually and symbolically linking the Nordic scenery with the meals prepared in keeping with the ideals of the movement (Scandinavian Cooking AS, n.d.). Various linked DVDs and cookbooks can be purchased from the official ‘New Scandinavian cooking’ website (ibid.). In parallel with these developments, an array of ‘New Nordic Food’ cookbooks has surfaced on the market (e.g. Christensen, 2012; Hahnemann & Ranek, 2011; Hahnemann, 2009; Nordisk Ministerråd, n.d.-b; Plum, 2010; Viestad, 2007). The latest book in this genre of New Nordic Cuisine is in fact from OPUS. It was published in co-operation with the consumer membership organisation FDB, which owns Denmark’s largest consumer goods retailer, Coop (Meyer & Astrup, 2012). Thus, in hindsight, New Nordic Cuisine appears to have gained success by making key values in modern society – such as regionality, healthiness, and sustainability – consumable in the form of a Nordic cuisine. The cuisine was proliferated via commercialisation as well as in alliance with central stakeholders in the Nordic region and public media. This is the background against which OPUS’ NND should be understood, since OPUS adopted New Nordic Cuisine in its aim of renewing Danish culinary culture and improving public health by developing, testing and disseminating the NND as an acceptable diet for all Danes (Byrkjeflot et al., 2013; OPUS, 2009b). I return to this background to OPUS later (see Section 5).

1.2 The OPUS Research Centre OPUS was established in 2009 (–2013) with the aim of changing Danish culinary culture in order to improve public health (OPUS, 2009d). To this end, gastronomic experts from the New Nordic Cuisine movement designed the NND with a view to making it fit for everyday consumption, nutritional scientists have investigated the diet’s health potential via controlled dietary

21

interventions, and the Centre has disseminated the NND to consumers as well as stakeholders in the food and health sector with the aim of initiating public acceptance of the diet and renewing Danish culinary culture (OPUS, 2012a). The Centre was established by a 13.4 million EUR (100 million DKR in 2009) grant from the Nordea Foundation, a major independent Danish fund that supports a wide variety of projects within culture, health, and research (Nordea-fonden, n.d.). In alignment with the OPUS Research Centre’s purpose, the Nordea Foundation’s funding policy prioritises applied research, specifically about children’s health and life quality. OPUS is based at the Department of Human Nutrition in the Faculty of Science at Copenhagen University. The department was established in 1986 specifically to conduct scientific research into nutrition-related lifestyle diseases and health. Over the years, the department has distinguished itself through its strong ties to the private sector and its ability to conduct controlled dietary interventions. In particular, it has developed unique experience in conducting so-called supermarket intervention trials in which ‘free living subjects’ procure and consume a standardised diet (Skov, Toubro, Raben, & Astrup, 1997). Such studies specifically produce new knowledge relating to the physiological health properties of foods and dietary regimes. In order to ensure acceptance of OPUS’ diet by average consumers, the NND was designed in agreement with the principles of the New Nordic Cuisine movement. In Denmark, the gastronomic food entrepreneurial group Meyer’s House of Food in Copenhagen (Meyer’s House of Food, 2012), which is owned by the previously mentioned Claus Meyer, has spearheaded the New Nordic Cuisine alongside noma (Drew, 2012). Indeed, Meyer’s House of Food has created public interest in New Nordic Cuisine. It has developed a network of food producers and restaurants, as well as an array of gastronomic services, food products, and cookbooks in an extension of the New Nordic Cuisine manifesto. Prior to the establishment of the OPUS Research Centre, the Department of Human Nutrition and Meyer’s House of Food had worked together seeking, in different ways, to combine their knowledge and expertise in gastronomy and nutritional science. Central to these collaborations was the ambition to explore ways in which gastronomy and nutritional health could be bridged. These efforts produced, for example, the basis for developing the MSc programme in Gastronomy and Health at the Faculty of Science, research into the preventive effects of gastronomic skills in relation to weight-loss (Astrup & Nielsen, 2003), and a cookbook with healthy, palatable dishes (Meyer & Astrup, 2002). With the grant from the Nordea Foundation, the Department of Human Nutrition and Meyer’s House of Food came to work together again. According to OPUS’ website in 2009, the

22

Centre aims to create a diet which can overcome the assumed barrier of low hedonic value and gain consumers’ acceptance of a recommended diet (OPUS, 2009c). The ambition of the Centre is: “…to create the "New Nordic Diet"… [as] a "trendy", healthy diet based on regional food that bridges gastronomy, health, and sustainability, and that will also be available to those segments of the population who suffer most from nutritionally related lifestyle diseases, and who normally do not exhibit an interest in gastronomic cooking” (OPUS, 2009c, this author’s editing)

To ensure this, OPUS’ research programme presented three major tasks organised in seven individual work packages (WP) (see Figure 1).

Figure 1: Project schedule for the OPUS Research Centre = PhD sub-work packages

23

First, a new, Nordic, seasonal, organic, healthy, palatable, economically feasible and climate friendly diet fit for consumption by the average Danish consumer should be developed in alignment with the ideals of the ‘New Nordic Kitchen Manifesto’ (WP1). The development of the NND was to be conducted by the company Meyer’s House of Food utilising their gastronomic know-how and competences within the New Nordic Cuisine. Secondly, two intervention trials were to be conducted in order to determine the diet’s health potential in relation to obesity and nutritionrelated lifestyle diseases among overweight adults (WP3) and school children (WP5). The Department of Human Nutrition was to conduct both intervention studies. Building on the department’s experience in conducting controlled supermarket intervention trials, participants in OPUS were to procure and consume a standardised NND, and a control group was to consume a standardised ‘Average Danish Diet’ (ADD), for six months in such a setting. As an untried task for the department, the research proposal also included a controlled school intervention trial initially involving circa 1600 children in third and fourth grade classes recruited from 10 schools. Thirdly, to ensure that the OPUS project would have a societal impact, outcomes from OPUS as well as the NND itself were to be disseminated to the general public and stakeholders, and in particular those working with children and children’s health (WP7). The dissemination was to be managed by the Office for Faculty Communication at the Faculty of Science. According to the research proposal, the dissemination should raise awareness of children’s health in public discourse and promote interest among Danish school children in the Centre and the Faculty of Science in general. Also, an array of individual scientific teams investigating other aspects of the NND, such as sensory studies, economic feasibility studies, and sociological studies, were to be involved in the project. The studies included in this thesis were conducted within: the acceptability work package conducted in the development phase of the OPUS project (WP2C); and the clinical intervention trial involving adult participants (WP3B). Typically, for such a research proposal, the Centre was to be organised in work packages administered by a ‘Centre Secretariat’; and it was to be managed by an ‘Executive Committee’ led by a Centre Director and incorporating both a representative from the Faculty Management and a small group of Senior OPUS personnel. Also, a ‘Management Team’ comprising members of the OPUS Executive committee, WP-leaders, and project managers from selected sub-WPs, met once a month in order to approve all scientific manuscripts produced in OPUS before publication and to handle general matters related to research, public relations and project management.

24

1.3 The New Nordic Diet The NND is presented as a diet designed in accordance with the ideals of promoting wild and seasonal food, Nordic terroir, healthy eating and sustainable food consumption (Mithril et al., 2012). Led by Claus Meyer, the development of the NND at the company Meyer’s House of Food was conducted in collaboration with rest of the OPUS Research Centre, and with three advisory boards with a broad range of researchers, specialists, and gourmet chefs – one of whom was Rene Redzepi from noma. Throughout the development of the NND, key stakeholders in the food and health sector, food specialists, and researchers collaborated in symposiums, public hearings and informal dialogue (OPUS, 2012a). In August 2010 the OPUS Research Centre presented the definition of the NND as a coherent food system defined by a number of principles to the Danish public (Meyer, Mithril, Blauert, & Holt, 2010). In 2012 this was followed by the first scientific publication to emerge from OPUS, in which the diet was described (Mithril et al., 2012). Briefly, only seasonal, Nordic foods are included in the NND. This ensures that foods express qualities pertaining to Nordic terroir, which is central to the gastronomic ambitions of the diet (Meyer et al., 2010). Approximately 75% of the foodstuffs are organic in order to promote an animal friendly diet free of pesticides (Mithril et al., 2012). Also, in the development of the NND recipes it was ensured that these adhered to Nordic health recommendations, thus including less meat and more vegetables than the common Danish diet (Becker et al., 2004; Meyer et al., 2010; Pedersen et al., 2010). Arguably, the use of local, seasonal food and the small amount of meat help to ensure that the NND is climate friendly (Saxe, Larsen, & Mogensen, 2012). Since the NND also seeks to promote social aspects of mealtimes, it is designed to follow a seasonal menu-plan (summer, fall, winter and spring) in which all dinners consists of a two course meal each weekday (one of which is usually leftovers from the day before) and a three course dinner on Saturdays (Meyer et al., 2010, p. 60). All meals must be made from scratch using non-processed food. Examples of NND foodstuffs are: wild game, free-range meat products, fish, seafood and seaweed from Nordic coastal waters, barley, oats, rye, cabbage, apple cider vinegar, cold pressed rape oil, berries, and herbs (Meyer et al., 2010). Accordingly, in terms of its gastronomic ideals, healthiness, sustainability, the food products it includes, its taste components, and the composition of macronutrients it involves, the NND differs from the food commonly consumed by Danish consumers (Pedersen et al., 2010).

25

To identify which foods should be included in the NND, a heuristic model of Nordic foods’ regional identity was presented by the diet’s developers (see Figure 2) (Meyer et al., 2010, p. 11). Figure 2. Nordic foods’ regional identity Ptarmigan Means of production

External resources (fertilizers, pesticides, fuel)

Local resources (organic, biodynamic)

Wild

Place of origin

Svedje rye

Strong Local Identity

Cultural anchoring Conventional grown greenhouse tomatoes

Distinctive Characteristic Generic

Expresses Nordic terrior

Source: Meyer et al., 2010, p. 11, this authors translation

The model shows four dimensions to be considered when determining whether a specific food is eligible to be included in the NND: ‘Means of production’, which covers the impact on local environment, animal welfare and climate; ‘Place of origin’, focusing on whether or not the food in question is indigenous to the Nordic region; ‘Expression of Nordic terroir’, which focuses on whether or not the food expresses the climatic, seasonal, and geographical qualities of the Nordic region; and, finally, ‘Cultural anchoring’, which centres on whether or not the food is deeply integrated in Danish culture, and thus, according to the developers of the NND, has symbolic meaning (Meyer et al., 2010). In the report presenting the NND the developers give the following example of how to determine whether a tomato has Nordic regional identity and therefore should be included in, or excluded from, the NND:

26

“The tomato has been introduced [to the Nordic region]. If grown conventionally in a greenhouse, it uses large amounts of external resources. It has a loose cultural anchoring (the tomato was first accepted in Danish cuisine around the year 1900), and will taste pretty much the same when grown under these conditions. It will not express its terroir or have any Nordic character.” (Meyer et al., 2010, p. 12, this author’s translation)

However, one could question whether the tomato should be said to have loose cultural anchoring because of its mere 100 years of history in Danish culinary culture. Although this is not an exact estimate, Statistics Denmark calculated in 2003 that each Dane consumed on average 29.1 kg of tomatoes a year, of which 7.5 kg are fresh tomatoes (Hjulgaard, 2004). Moreover, the tomato, in comparison with other imported vegetables, seems to be the vegetable Denmark imports most (Jørgensen, 2012). To be sure, tomatoes are one of the main vegetables consumed in Denmark, but they are mostly consumed as canned goods, ketchup or components in other processed food products (Hjulgaard, 2004). The example is singled out as it illustrates that a specific understanding of ‘culture’ is imbedded in the design of the NND – which, in turn, emphasises divergence between the envisioned NND and the contemporary dietary habits of Danes. In defining the NND and its foods’ ‘cultural anchoring’, the concept of ‘culture’ only includes the cultural–historical heritage of the food in question, and does not take into account its significance within contemporary food habits in Danish society. Moreover, it entails the idea that a specific food can have a legitimate Nordic cultural heritage that makes it eligible for inclusion in the NND. The NND also seeks to introduce a 30% reduction in meat consumption in Denmark, which is one of the countries with the highest level of meat consumption in the world (Groth, Margit Velsing, & Fagt, 2001), and to change meat production to comprise only game and animals from free-range production systems. Thus, the envisioned NND, as defined by the dimensions for determining foods’ Nordic regional identity, stands in stark contrast with the contemporary consumption and production of food in Denmark. Rather than departing from contemporary food consumption and production in Denmark, the NND represents a vision of an alternative, future food culture in Denmark in which food production and food consumption are grounded in regionality, sustainability, cultural heritage, culinary ideals and nutritional health. This vision was materialised as a dietary regime (Fischler, 1980) in the adult clinical dietary trial conducted within OPUS (Meyer et al., 2010) and subsequently tested.

27

1.4 The point of departure of the present study Insofar as it was developed and disseminated by specialists the NND did not take, as its point of departure, Danes’ contemporary food habits. Initial questions to explore are, therefore, how such a diet developed by specialists is received by consumers, how it will perform in their everyday life, and whether consumers will find it acceptable. Will it contribute to improving public health? Since OPUS seeks to renew the culinary culture in Denmark by the dissemination of the NND, and consequently to ensure healthy eating as well as sustain local and climate friendly patterns of food consumption, consumers’ food practices will be subject to significant changes if the project is successful. Apart from being vital for the success of OPUS, the question of whether a new diet will be found acceptable, and the further question whether and how new food practices are appropriated, are relevant in terms of deepening our knowledge of the way sustainable food practices and dietary change may develop in our society. In addition to this, since OPUS’ aim of achieving dietary change toward healthier eating habits is based on the predicted good taste of the NND (OPUS, 2009c), whether consumers will (come to) appreciate the taste of NND, which excludes all nonNordic foods, is of some interest. Thus, additional issues are whether and how food practices specific to the consumption of the NND are appropriated, and whether such practices can be appropriated by consumers in Denmark.

28

2 Analytical approach and central concepts How will the NND fit into consumers’ everyday lives and existing eating habits, and will they find it acceptable? What kinds of food practices are needed in order to consume the NND, and can consumers appropriate these? In exploring these questions, I have found my main inspiration in practice theory, which specifically focuses on everyday practices. Within this general, analytical perspective, I have focused upon and utilised three central concepts – namely, food practices, food acceptance and appropriation of food.

2.1 Practice theory Broadly speaking, the sociology of consumption has moved through three dominant perspectives over the last four decades: (i) a critical perspective focusing on the logic of capitalist production in which consumers are more or less seen as victims of this logic; (ii) a perspective centring on the logic of consumption in which consumers are seen as players seeking to maintain their social distinction through their consumption practices; and, finally, (iii) a perspective, in line with postmodern approaches, which focuses on the conspicuous and symbolic aspects of consumption in which consumers are seen as self-reflective agents (Featherstone, 1990; Gronow & Warde, 2001). However, within the last two decades or so, practice theory has emerged as a fourth perspective, and this has shifted the centre of attention from the conspicuous and symbolic aspects of consumption towards the ordinary, mundane and routine aspects of consumption in everyday life (Gronow & Warde, 2001; Halkier, 2010). Departing mainly from Schatzki’s ‘Social Practices’ (1996), this perspective draws its theoretical inspiration from – among other sources – Giddens’ theory of structuration (1984) and Bourdieu’s theory of practice (1977), as well as science and technology studies (cf. Ingram, Shove, & Watson, 2007; Latour, 1992; Elisabeth Shove, 2003). It has now developed into an approach recognised in its own right within consumption studies (Halkier, 2010; Reckwitz, 2002; Elisabeth Shove, Watson, Hand, & Ingram, 2007; Elizabeth Shove, 2009; Warde, 2005). At the heart of practice theory is the concept of ‘routine’ (T. R. Schatzki, Cetina, & Savigny, 2001). Following Reckwitz’s 2002 description of social practices – which is widely quoted in the literature (e.g. Halkier, 2010; Elisabeth Shove et al., 2007; Warde, 2005) – ‘practice’ is understood as a “…routinized type of behaviour which consists of several elements,

29

interconnected to one another…” and as “…a two-sided block of patterns of bodily behaviour and patterns of knowledge and understanding” (Reckwitz, 2002, p. 249 and 254). Hence, practices comprise certain elements which both enable behaviour and are in themselves behavioural. Reckwitz identifies the following elements: ‘bodily activities’, ‘mental activities’, ‘things and their uses’ and ‘background knowledge’. The last of these includes ‘understandings’, ‘know-how’, ‘state of emotions’ and ‘motivational knowledge’. Other descriptions of these elements have been suggested (cf. Gram-Hanssen, 2011; T. R. Schatzki, 2002; Warde, 2005). However, a scheme easily employed in empirical analysis, and which I have adopted for this PhD study, has been suggested by Shove et al. (2012), who focus on three elements, ‘material’, ‘competence’ and ‘meaning’, as the central elements of practices. A common trait in practice theory is the effort to overcome structure–actor dualism by conceptualising practice as a routinized nexus of interconnected elements of doings and sayings carried and performed by practitioners, which in turn structures the social world in which the practitioners live (Gram-Hanssen, 2011; Reckwitz, 2002; Røpke, 2009; Elizabeth Shove et al., 2012). Thus, practice theory decentres the individual. It sees individuals as carriers of practices which they perform and, in their performance, sustain (cf. Reckwitz, 2002). Accordingly, the individual’s reasoning, wants, desires, motives, and so forth, are understood as qualities that pertain to particular practices rather than to the individual at issue (Reckwitz, 2002; Warde, 2005). In Reckwitz’s view, the social world is inhabited neither by the rational homo economicus nor the norm driven homo sociologicus. It is populated instead by diverse practices carried by practitioners (2002). Advocates of practice theory have thus criticised behaviour-change theories such as the theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen, 1991) and related social-psychological approaches (Armitage & Conner, 2001), which emphasise individual choice as the central object of investigation and the key to behavioural change (Evans, McMeekin, & Southerton, 2012; Elizabeth Shove et al., 2012; Elizabeth Shove, 2010). The process of changing one’s practices is no longer understood here to be merely a matter of choosing to do so. It has rather to do with the conditions that enable the exercise of agency in relation to practice-change. In practice theory, agency is conceived as being conditioned by practices, and practices, in turn, are regarded as patterns embedded in the macrostructures of society (cf. Evans et al., 2012). This might suggest that practice theory views the practitioner as a somewhat passive agent whose function is that of a vessel for practices. However, practice theorists are more inclined to view the consumer as homo creator, a being capable of changing practices as he or she appropriates new products and ways of consuming into everyday

30

life (e.g. Gram-Hanssen, 2011; Røpke, 2009) (see Section 2.2). Consequently, in pursuing the perspectives of practice theory, I have recognised that an analytical focus on the immediate choices made by individual consumers would represent a limited and unsatisfactory approach to these issues. Instead of focusing on individual choice in relation to behavioural change, I seek to employ a practice-theoretical perspective and explore the process of how the performance of new practices may come to sustain, and in turn be themselves sustained by, everyday life (cf. Elizabeth Shove et al., 2012).

2.1.1 Food practices Turning our attention to food practices in general, the focus in the sociology of food has mainly been placed on the tasks of procuring, preparing and consuming food (cf. Beardsworth & Keil, 1997; Mennell, Murcott, & van Otterloo, 1994). Accordingly, within the perspective of practice theory, food practices are conceptualised as routinized patterns of behaviour that interlink specific materials, competences and meanings (Shove et al., 2012) with specific regard to the procurement, preparation and consumption of food in everyday life (Halkier, 2010; Warde, 2005). Food practices may be seen as belonging to the category of ‘integrative’ practices “found in and constitutive of particular domains of social life” (T. Schatzki, 1996, p. 98)1. Within each domain, routinized performances interlink materials, competences and meanings that centre on the specific modality of that domain. For instance, a very wide variety of practices, performed in different ways, can recognisably be described as instances of ‘doing the shopping’, ‘cooking’ or ‘eating a meal’, because each of these constitute a particular domain of social life. This delineation of food practices is relevant as it helps to differentiate them from other practices, which, in turn, is necessary if an empirical investigation is to be undertaken. Thus, insofar as food is a central feature of the materials at issue in these practices of procurement, preparation and consumption, we can employ the term ‘food practices’ to refer to practices that occur within, and recognisably belong to, these domains. Food practices, alongside a small range of other practices such as smoking and tattooing, facilitate the physical mediation and integration of materials (foodstuffs, in this instance) into the practitioner’s body (cf. Fischler, 1988). This is noted here, since it points towards the fact

1

Schatzki also classifies a second category of practices, i.e. ‘dispersed’ practices (such as following rules, imagining, thinking) which are dispersed across any number of different domains (1996).

31

that the materials at issue in food practices – the food itself and its perceived qualities – have the potential to motivate changes in food practices insofar as they may provide the practitioner with experiences, and new bodily sensations, of among other things taste, stomach feel, fullness and satiety. As we have seen in the last chapter (see Section 1.2), one objective of the OPUS project is to promote nationwide acceptance of the NND by Danish consumers. Indeed, it would appear that the OPUS Research Centre seeks to ensure this by virtue of the excellent taste of this diet alone (OPUS, 2009c). However, when practices as conceptualised as routinized patterns of behaviour (Reckwitz, 2002) which interlink specific materials, competences and meanings (Shove et al., 2012), it is not only the materials that are in focus, i.e. the taste of the NND. The competences and meanings at issue in food practices are equally important, and insofar as the establishment of new practices is under investigation, the practitioner’s ability to perform these practices is also brought into focus. Thus, in an investigation of the introduction and reception of a new dietary regime like the NND, practice theory directs our attention to the ability to perform NND food practices in everyday life, and to the links between the new materials, new meanings and new competences that constitute those practices. I will discuss this issue further when I introduce the concept of food appropriation (see Section 2.2.2).

2.2 Food acceptance and appropriation of food Two conceptual tools are central to my empirical investigation of (1) the ways in which consumers evaluate the NND in the context of everyday life, and (2) the processes by which consumers adapt their existing food practices in order to consume the NND on a daily basis: the concept of ‘food acceptance’ and the concept of ‘appropriation of food’. On the surface, these concepts may appear to denote distinct phenomena, with consumers’ evaluation of the NND (i.e. acceptance), on the one hand, and the integration of the NND into their everyday eating practices (i.e. appropriation), on the other. However, depending on the definitions adopted, the concepts may indeed overlap. Thus, in the following section, these concepts and their disciplinary heritage are introduced and placed within the perspectives of practice theory. Then, the matter of their relationship is discussed.

32

2.2.1 Food acceptance Food acceptance is an ambiguous concept, predominately understood as a behavioural phenomenon with reference to the ingestion of food (McEwan & Thomson, 1988). It is most often measured as an evaluation of food eaten, based on attitudinal and behavioural variables (Cardello, Schutz, Snow, & Lesher, 2000). Accordingly, a common understanding of food acceptance refers to the hedonic eating qualities of consumed food as the primary indicator of food acceptance (McEwan & Thomson, 1988; H. L. Meiselman & MacFie, 1996). This usage of the term ‘food acceptance’ can be traced back to the work of Pilgrim (cf. Meiselman, 2003), who defined the criterion of food acceptance as “consumption with pleasure” (Pilgrim, 1957, p. 171). This approach to the measurement of food acceptance prioritises the individual consumer’s affective response to eating the food at issue (Cardello et al., 2000; Pilgrim, 1957), and consequently employs psychometric, psycho-physical and/or behavioural methods focused upon the declared responses of individual eaters (Meiselman & MacFie, 1996). As mentioned, this understanding of food acceptance is widely shared by members of the OPUS Research Centre (OPUS, 2009c), who are working towards the aim of gaining acceptance of the NND by consumers through its excellent taste. In contrast with this approach, when sociologists have been invited to investigate food acceptance with reference to a particular diet they have adopted a much broader definition and investigated a much wider range of factors affecting that acceptance (L. Holm, 1993; Nielsen, Korzen, & Holm, 2008; see also Sijtsema, Backus, Linnemann, & Jongen, 2004). They have included the practical performance of food practices within the social setting of everyday life, and they tend to expand the domain of investigation to include the tasks of procuring and preparing food, and sometimes the disposal of food waste following its consumption (cf. also: Beardsworth & Keil, 1997; Mennell, Murcott, & van Otterloo, 1994). Accordingly, when investigating food acceptance by those participating in a prolonged, controlled intervention trial, sociological studies have included social and cultural variables as well as practical factors related to ‘doing’ the diet (L Holm, 1993; Nielsen et al., 2008). They have found that an intervention diet can clash with social rules of interaction, and cultural norms governing meal structures, and can give rise to practical concerns or difficulties related to the procurement, preparation or consumption of the diet at issue (Lotte Holm et al., 2008; Nielsen et al., 2008). This broader conceptualisation of food acceptance, unlike a narrow focus on the evaluation of food events, is compatible with the perspectives of practice theory. The findings of these studies suggest that the diet consumed in the course of the OPUS trial may well be accepted in terms of taste, but not necessarily in regard to the practical and

33

social implications of this diet in the daily lives of intervention participants and other consumers. Thus, in planning my investigation of acceptance of the NND, I have included both the evaluation of eating qualities and an evaluation of the impact of NND on food practices in everyday life, as seen by practitioners.

2.2.2 Appropriation of food Apart from macro-sociological studies focusing on processes of appropriation at a national level and between cultures (cf. Hård & Jamison, 1998), the concept of appropriation has also been employed in science and technology studies, and in studies within the sociology of consumption examining micro-sociological processes (cf. Shove et al., 2007). Silverstone and colleagues introduce the concept of ‘appropriation’ in their studies of the processes by which households domesticate technologies (Silverstone & Hirsch, 1992; Silverstone, 1994). Appropriation is seen as a process in which technologies become “incorporated and redefined” into the “household’s own values and interests” – that is, within a particular domestic culture – thereby becoming domesticated (Silverstone & Hirsch, 1992, p. 16). The focus is thus on the process through which commodities from the market are transformed into objects used in domestic routines (Silverstone, 1994). This perspective is also employed by Lie and Sørensen, who stress that domestication is “…a process of appropriating an object to make it meaningful to one’s life” (1996, p. 17) as consumers engage in the work of integrating an object into their lives on practical and symbolic levels. More relevantly to food studies, Niva (2008) adopts a similar view in her investigation of the way Finns appropriate functional food into their everyday food practices. She defines appropriation as “[…] the conceptual and practical process of making functional foods ‘own’ among consumers” (Niva, 2008, p. 43). This, it should be emphasised, is a process that occurs over time. It is, moreover, a learning process, the contents of which may be implicit or explicit. Conceptual appropriation pertains to the domain of everyday thinking and interpretation. The understandings, meanings and classifications of the appropriated object are related to existing categories within everyday life as well as to specific characteristics of the object itself (Niva, 2008). Through the process of conceptual appropriation, new concepts become integrated within an existing conceptual frame, thereby allowing new interpretations and opinions to be formulated. Niva and colleagues have continued using this approach in their latest study of Finns’ use of foods in weight management (2013). Finally, Warde

34

explicitly locates the concept of appropriation as falling within the conceptual apparatus of practice theory, stressing that the process of appropriation is related to consumption in general (2005). Since items consumed are part of the performances of practices, they can affect understandings, procedures, and engagements in the process of becoming appropriated (Warde, 2005). Thus, in this view, appropriation occurs within practices and by means of the performances of these practices (see also Ilmonen, 2004; Warde, 2005). My work draws on these different understandings of appropriation while focusing on food practices. In it the appropriation of food is understood as the employment of novel material, competence and meaning (Elizabeth Shove et al., 2012) in food practices until these novelties have become integral parts of those practices. Appropriation is, therefore, firstly, a process that unfolds over time in the performances of practices (cf. Warde, 2005), a process sometimes described as entailing naturalisation by means of routinization, as noted by Halkier (2010) and Shove (2007; 2003). In this process, consumers often come to play creative roles as innovators of new practices (Gram-Hanssen, 2011; Røpke, 2009). Secondly, the “successful” end-product of appropriating new food products is conceived as the domestication of those products. That is to say, the food at issue has gained meaning and function within the routines of the consumer’s everyday life, such that he or she has developed consumption preferences that favour the appropriated food. At this point, it might be said that ‘food acceptance’ could be described as the result of a process of ‘appropriation’. In the present work, however, ‘acceptance’ and ‘appropriation’ of the NND have been distinguished, such that the former largely refers to declarations on the part of informants regarding their perception, experience or evaluation of the NND, and its place in their everyday food practices at a given point in time, while the latter refers to the implicit and explicit learning processes entailed in performing NND food practices over time. Thus, in appropriating the NND, consumers, as seen from the perspective of practice theory, may well have changed the NND as well as having changed their food practices in order to accommodate the NND within their everyday life. The issue here is whether NND food practices are in fact ‘doable’, that is to say, such that they can be performed within the restrictions and demands of everyday life. The ‘do-ability’ of practices, as Halkier terms it, “means what is possible to do and how it is possible to perform in the carrying out of practices” (2010, p. 36, note 3). Whether and how the NND is doable is central to the success of OPUS in seeking to introduce and disseminate new food practices to Danish consumers, and an empirical question which this PhD study seeks to pursue (see Section 4.3).

35

3 Research design and methodological limitations The objectives of this PhD project are: (i) to identify drivers and barriers regarding acceptance of the NND by Danish consumers, based on their assessments of NND prototype meals; (ii) to analyse the extent to which the NND is accepted by participants in the controlled dietary intervention trial conducted by OPUS, and (iii) to explore the ways in which intervention participants have appropriated this diet; and, finally, (iv) to assess, on the basis of these studies, which social and cultural factors are likely to have an impact on the achievement of the overall aim of OPUS, that is, to improve public health by means of disseminating the NND to Danish consumers.

Pursuit of the first objective was intended to contribute to the on-going development of the NND within the OPUS project (2009 and 2010) by illuminating consumer responses to NND prototype meals. Data collection relevant to the pursuit of the second and third objectives would necessarily take account of the period during which the OPUS dietary intervention was planned to take place (September 2010 to July 2011). Three empirical studies were undertaken, and the design of each study is presented here in the order in which they were prepared for publication (see Part II). These studies are:

i.

A qualitative study exploring Danish consumers’ acceptance of the New Nordic Diet (NND) with specific attention to their responses to two NND prototype meals;

ii.

A quantitative study of the acceptance of the NND by participants assigned to the NNDdietary group in the six-month OPUS intervention trial as compared with the acceptance of the ‘Average Danish Diet’ (ADD) by participants in the control group;

iii.

A qualitative study of intervention participants assigned to the NND dietary group focusing on the way they appropriated the NND during the course of the OPUS intervention.

Following the presentation of these three studies, their methodological limitations and central findings, the fourth objective will be discussed in Section 5.

36

3.1 Design of the studies Table 1 presents an overview of the three studies conducted in this PhD project. It sets out research themes, selected methods, informants and the chronology of data collection. Table 1: Overview of research designs Study

Research themes

Methods

Informants (N)

Chronology of data collection

Acceptance of the NND among consumers

-Consumers’ acceptance of the NND concept, taste and appearance of sample meal

-Focus groups

-Danish consumers (38)

-Nov. 2009 - Jan. 2010

-Consumers’ evaluation and two NND prototype meals

-7 day photo diary -7 day self-administered dinner record -Self-administered NND prototype meal questionnaire -Personal interviews

-Danish consumers (33)

-Participants’ food preferences and dietary habits

-Baseline: Self-administered questionnaire

-Intervention participants (197)

-Sept. 2010 – Jan. 2011

-Participants’ food preferences and dietary habits, and acceptance of the intervention diet

-Post-intervention: Selfadministered questionnaire

-Intervention participants (147)

-April 2011 – July 2011

-Participants’ appropriation of the NND in relation to procuring, preparing and consuming the NND

-Focus groups

-Intervention participants (38)

-March 2010 – March 2011

-Personal interviews

-Intervention personnel (4)

-Observations

-Intervention participants and personnel

Acceptance of the NND among intervention participants

Appropriation of the NND by intervention participants

-Semi-structured telephone interviews

-Danish consumers (35)

-Danish consumers (33) -Danish consumers (6)

-Intervention drop-outs (27)

3.1.1 Testing the acceptance of NND prototype meals by consumers This study was included in the OPUS project in order to gauge initial reactions to, and opinions about, the NND that would be relevant for the on-going work of developing this diet, particularly where the experience of preparing and eating NND meals was concerned. To this end, two NND prototype meals exemplifying a typical main course on an NND dinner menu were designed by the developers of the NND. As the present study employs an understanding of food acceptance which takes consumers’ food practices as its point of departure, the initial concern when planning this study was to ensure that the research design would explore consumers’ perceptions of the NND concept – that is to say, the ideas underlying its development. A further aim was to obtain in-depth knowledge of

37

the way consumers experienced the preparation and consumption of NND meals in the context of their everyday eating habits. Consequently, it was decided that this qualitative study should utilise a series of methods in order to investigate consumers’ responses to (1) the ideas underlying the NND, (2) the taste of NND foods, and (3) the prospect of incorporating the NND into everyday eating habits as exemplified by their experience of two NND prototype meals (see Appendix A for related material). In order to explore consumers’ perceptions of the NND as a concept and to gain insights into their opinions about its taste and appearance, it was decided that the study should utilise focus group methodology. Among their other advantages, focus groups are particularly useful for exploring consumers’ opinions about, and interpretations of, otherwise unfamiliar topics – such as the NND – by providing a forum in which participants can engage in a moderated discussion of the topic in question (Brown, 1999; Morgan, 1996). In this focus group study, a written description of the NND and a small NND sample meal were used to explore consumers’ opinions about the NND concept as well as the taste and appearance of NND foods. Then, in order to explore how the NND would fit into everyday eating habits, each participant in the focus groups was given ingredients and recipes for two NND meals, and asked to prepare and consume these in their own households during the following week. They were also asked to complete a 7-day food record during this period, supplemented by a questionnaire on each of the NND meals consumed at home, and to make a photo-diary. The questions about NND meals concerned whether informants had changed the meal in any way, and whether the NND meal at issue was best suited to everyday consumption or a special occasion. They put 15 further questions, responses to which were ranged on five-point Likert scales. These explored informants’ evaluations of preparing and eating this NND meal as well as the prospect of making and consuming this meal again in the future. The 7day food record was included so that each dinner event during the test week would be documented. Specifically, the day and the place at which each dinner during that week had taken place were to be recorded, as was the time used to prepare the meal and to eat it, and with whom it had been prepared and eaten. To be able to observe and compare the outcome of NND meals prepared at home, and to compare these with their ordinary meals, a photo-diary was included in the study with a view to obtaining a visual record of all dinners consumed by informants during the test week. Finally, the design included follow-up personal interviews with a selected sub-sample of informants, focusing on their experience and assessment of these NND meals. Half of these interviewees would be selected from among those who had stated in their response to questionnaires

38

that they were interested in preparing NND meals in the future, and half would be selected from among those who had stated that they were not interested. It was planned that relevant photographs from the photo-diary would provide the point of departure for these follow-up interviews, which employed a narrative method. Informants would be asked to give a thorough account of how they had prepared and consumed the two NND meals they had made at home, and to offer their assessment of having done so. This interview-method was chosen because it enables a detailed account of a topic, picking up on what the informant finds memorable or remarkable (Hollway & Jefferson, 2008; Lindseth & Norberg, 2004). In order to obtain a varied corpus of data about consumers’ acceptance of the NND, recruitment criteria sought to maximise variation in factors known to determine eating habits among Danish consumers. Gender, age, household composition, as well as levels of urbanisation and education are factors known to influence dietary preferences as well as tendencies to eat more or less healthily (Kjærnes, 2001; Groth, Fagt, & Brøndsted, 2001; Groth & Fagt, 2001; Dynesen et al., 2003). In particular, level of urbanisation has been linked with preferences regarding ‘traditional’ as compared to ‘modern’ dishes, and specifically so where the consumption of organic foods is concerned (Lund, Andersen, & O'Doherty Jensen, 2012; Korzen, Sandøe, & Lassen, 2011). For this reason, it was decided that two focus groups would be recruited within the area of Copenhagen and its suburbs, while two would be recruited from the area surrounding a provincial town (population 20,000), including nearby villages and rural areas. Participants were then recruited using a quota sampling method designed to ensure maximal variation regarding other factors likely to influence dietary preferences (gender, age, household composition and educational level). The recruitment criteria specified that each focus group would comprise a minimum of two persons who had selected each of the following response categories when asked about their dietary preferences: ‘traditional’, ‘modern’ and ‘both traditional and modern’2. Vegetarians, persons suffering from food allergies and those in food-related occupations were excluded. Participants were recruited by a professional agency, using a structured screening instrument administered by telephone interview. The focus group interview schedule employed a funnel technique, beginning with an exploration of participants’ everyday eating habits in terms of procuring, preparing and eating food,

2

Preferences for modern and/or traditional dishes were established by the following question in the screening questionnaire: “I would like to hear whether you prefer traditional or modern dishes? Traditional dishes are, for example, roast pork and minced beef. Modern dishes are, for example, stir fry and pasta dishes”. This formulation was drawn from one employed in an earlier survey of dietary preferences among Danes (Korzen, Sandøe, & Lassen, 2011).

39

and then introducing the NND concept followed by the presentation of a sample meal3. To explore participants’ everyday food habits, participants were asked to recount, and then enter into a conversation about, what they had eaten for dinner the previous day. Then, participants’ opinion of the NND concept was explored by introducing a written description of the NND, which was read aloud and handed out. Participants were asked to note their immediate reactions on the notepads provided, after which opinions were discussed. Their opinions of the taste and appearance of the NND were then explored by serving an NND sample meal. Once again, participants noted their reactions before discussion began. In the course of these discussions, the moderator sought to probe the comments made in order to explore the range of reactions at issue. The description of the NND used in the focus groups had been commented on and approved by the OPUS Management Team, and the NND meal sample as well as the two prototype meals tested at home were designed by the developers of the NND in OPUS from Meyer’s House of Food. Together with initial findings from the focus groups and questionnaires, the photodiary was used to inform the design of the interview guide employed in follow-up personal interviews. Specifically, all photos were reviewed in order to gain a first-hand impression of differences and similarities between the everyday preparation and serving of dinner-meals in the informants’ homes as compared to the two NND meals. More importantly, the informants’ photographs would be used in the follow-up interviews to initiate in-depth and detailed accounts of each NND meal. The interview guide for these personal interviews began by asking the informant to describe what he or she had thought about participating in the focus group, and then to give a detailed account of the meals consumed during the test week. When talking about the NND meals, the informants’ photographs were introduced to encourage elaboration. The interview was concluded by asking the informant to reflect upon whether he or she would continue to prepare NND in the future.

3.1.2 Acceptance of the NND by intervention participants To determine the health benefits of the NND compared to a control diet labelled ‘ADD’ (Average Danish Diet), OPUS conducted a 6-month dietary intervention trial called ‘SHOPUS’

3

The test sample comprised a menu of roasted flank steak with pearl barley, kale salsa with apple, split pea purée and Oland wheat bun, followed by buttermilk mousse with sea buckthorn and sunflower croquante.

40

(ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01195610). The trial utilised a supermarket model (Skov et al., 1997) in which participants procured their foods at a supermarket set up next to the Department of Human Nutrition at Copenhagen University (OPUS, 2012b). Such a setting permits controlled monitoring of participants’ dietary compliance with guidelines on food categories and macronutrients by weighing and registering all foods procured by participants (ibid.). The SHOPUS supermarket was located in an 87 m2 room divided into two main sections. The entrance area displayed fresh vegetables, while the main area displayed a broad assortment of groceries and other food products on shelves and in refrigerators and chest freezers. Intervention personnel were present in the supermarket to register participants’ purchases. After an introductory ‘run-in week’ to the supermarket during which all participants ate a diet equivalent to the ADD and became acquainted with the process of procuring foods in SHOPUS, each participant was randomly assigned to the NND or ADD diet, although couples living together were in every case assigned to the same diet. Besides procuring and consuming the assigned diet for 6 months, participants had to participate in several medical examinations scheduled for the purpose of taking anthropometric measurements as well as blood, urine and tissue samples. Participants in the OPUS dietary intervention had been self-recruited in the first instance and then screened by OPUS personnel. Recruitment took place by means of online advertisement on websites, social media and news in newspapers, radio and Danish national TV, the incentive being, for example, to eat the NND from OPUS free of charge for six months as well as getting free dietary counselling (OPUS, 2010). Inclusion criteria defined by OPUS were: 18 to 65 years old, with a waist circumference ≥80 cm for women and ≥94 cm for men; approximately two in three participants were to exhibit one or more components of metabolic syndrome, and all were to be able to prepare and eat food at home for the duration of the intervention. In all 220 participants were recruited to the intervention (135 NND and 85 ADD), of whom 190 enrolled in the initial ‘run-in week’, while 147 participated in the intervention until its conclusion (91 NND and 56 ADD). Just 2 persons were excluded from the intervention, and 41 persons dropped out during the intervention (21 NND and 20 ADD). Recruited participants were enrolled into the intervention from late September 2010 to mid-January 2011, and the intervention ended in mid-July 2011, extending the intervention period to approximately 10 months in all. To investigate participants’ acceptance of their diet, a survey was conducted of recruited participants partaking in SHOPUS. The issue of sampling procedure did not arise since the survey involved a total population that embraced all participants in the SHOPUS intervention. This

41

population included two sub-groups: those assigned to the NND diet and those assigned to the ADD diet. The study aimed to measure and compare participants’ acceptance of the NND with their acceptance of ADD, and to investigate variations in dietary acceptance according to gender, level of education, household composition, and money spent on food per month, as well as attitudes relating to food consumption and food habits. Data was collected in two stages using a self-administered structured questionnaire in each instance – i.e. a baseline questionnaire presented to participants before the intervention and a second questionnaire administered after the intervention had ended (see Appendix B for related material). Modelled on earlier studies (Andersen, 2009; Korzen et al., 2011; Steptoe & Pollard, 1995), the baseline questionnaire sought to examine participants’ everyday eating habits and attitudes to food consumption, and specifically to organic, healthy and seasonal foods. Since these questions were designed to distinguish those intervention participants who were committed to procuring organic, healthy and seasonal foods from those who were not, response categories were given on four-point scales, designed to exclude ‘neither/nor’ responses. Also based on earlier studies, questions about food preferences and acceptance were formulated with response categories ranged on five-point Likert scales (L. Holm, 1993; Nielsen et al., 2008). The second questionnaire, administered at the end of the intervention, repeated these questions. In order to measure respective levels of acceptance respondents were now asked to evaluate the diet to which they had been assigned. Since these questions were designed at the time when interviews with drop-outs were taking place and after the qualitative data on participants’ appropriation of the NND had been collected, it was possible to formulate them in light of the preliminary findings of these studies. In particular, the experienced effects of the diet on physical well-being, its taste, the practical work of preparing it and the prospect of consuming the diet after the intervention had ended had emerged as central topics in the qualitative study. Questions on these points were consequently included in the second phase of data collection. Owing to non-response and some errors in the registration of both questionnaires, the acceptability survey is based on 127 participants’ responses (a response rate of 86.4%).

3.1.3 Appropriation of the NND by intervention participants Finally, in order to explore which food practices underlie consumption of the NND and how these become established, this thesis included a qualitative study of the intervention participants’ 42

appropriation of the NND. Originally, this study had been conceived as a qualitative study of dietary acceptance that would identify dimensions relevant to participants’ acceptance of their assigned diet, and which would be used in planning the survey questionnaire (cf. Section 3.1.2). However, in the course of observing and contributing to the development of the NND, and having reflected on just how different the NND appeared to be, as compared with the contemporary dietary habits of Danish consumers (cf. Meyer et al. 2010), the question of whether and how consumers could and would adapt their existing food practices in order to accommodate this diet had become an increasingly important one. Also, as the intervention progressed, informal interviews with participants, as well as interviews with drop-outs, had highlighted practical difficulties involved in their adherence to the dietary principles of the NND. On this basis, I decided to shift the focus of this qualitative study and to investigate participants’ appropriation of the NND. As a consequence, data collected from both intervention participants and drop-outs who had been assigned to the ADD diet were subsequently excluded from my analysis. In exploring participants’ appropriation of the NND the study utilised methods that would help to identify how the NND was designed and implemented in the intervention, as well as to observe the process of participant-appropriation of the NND during the intervention and the participants’ experience of this process. Specifically, the study utilised four methods which included observations and informal interviews of intervention personnel and intervention participants, indepth interviews with intervention personnel, focus groups with intervention participants, and semistructured telephone interviews of drop-outs from the intervention (see Appendix C for related material). A number of observation studies of intervention participants and personnel were conducted in a variety of intervention settings with the overall aim of obtaining insights to be used in the development of a focus group study of intervention participants. In the observation of participants, interest focused on their perception of, and experiences with, their diet, their interaction with the personnel and their shopping routines. Observations among the intervention personnel focused on how they designed the diet and organised the intervention, as well as their interactions with participants in the supermarket. Informal interviews with both participants and intervention personnel regarding these issues were also conducted in the course of these observations. Furthermore, four in-depth personal interviews were conducted with key personnel in the intervention. These explored the experience of working in the intervention, and interacting with the participants, as well as opinions about the diets and the intervention study as such.

43

During the intervention, telephone interviews using a semi-structured questionnaire were conducted with drop-outs to throw light on their perception, and experience, of their diet, and their reasons for leaving the intervention before its conclusion. In order to obtain an overview of the informant’s experience of participating in the intervention, the interview guide began by asking the informant to tell his or her personal story, starting with the question how they had initially heard about the intervention and tracing developments though to the day they left it. On this basis, motives for participating in the intervention, the experience of participation, and reasons for dropping out were explored. Then, reasons for leaving the intervention were explored in more detail, with the informant being asked specifically to rank them. Finally, as a means of prompting additional reasons for leaving the intervention, the interviewer probed for other possible factors that had been recorded in previous interviews or noted in earlier studies of the subject (Andersson & Rössner, 1997; Bowen et al., 2000; Due et al., 2008; Inelmen et al., 2005; Messier et al., 2010). These were then discussed. Since two drop-outs declined to be interviewed and 12 had not been reached following three attempts, only 14 of the 21 NND drop-outs (66.7%) were interviewed4. Focus groups were conducted with participants to explore their experiences of dietary appropriation. The focus group schedule was designed on the basis of the insights gained from observations and informal interviews involving intervention participants and personnel as well as semi-structured interviews with drop-outs. Two focus groups with NDD-participants and two focus groups with ADD-participants (N=38) were conducted. Quota sampling was employed to maximise variation within each group in respect of gender, household composition, age, level of education, commuting distance to the intervention supermarket, and whether participants were participating in the intervention alone or with a partner. Only those who had partaken in the intervention for 30 days or more were included in the focus groups, while those in food-related occupations were excluded. Recruitment was undertaken by a member of the sociological research team, and any participant’s anonymity was assured. The focus group schedule was designed to explore how intervention participants evaluated their diet, and to look at the ways in which they had changed their eating practices in relation to procuring, preparing and eating food. The focus groups began by exploring why participants had enrolled in the intervention. Then, intervention participants were invited to discuss

4

Seven telephone interviews with people who had dropped out of the ADD diet, and six interviews with people who had dropped out of the intervention during the ‘run-in’ week, were also completed, but these were subsequently excluded from the analysis given its changed focus, as noted above.

44

how they experienced procuring, preparing and eating their intervention diet, as compared to their routines prior to the intervention. Participants were then invited to discuss their over-all opinion of their diet, and finally to elaborate on ways in which their eating habits and routines had changed in the course of the intervention.

3.2 Methodological limitations In the following sections, the methodological limitations of each study are addressed. First, the acceptance study of consumers is presented. This is followed by an appraisal of the acceptance and appropriation studies of intervention participants.

3.2.1 Acceptance study of consumers The exploratory study of consumers’ acceptance of the NND revolved around the testing of two NND prototype meals relevant the development of the NND. This is reflected in the research design which, as planned by OPUS, had to use the testing of meals as a point of entry for consumer evaluation of the NND in relation to everyday eating habits. From a sociological point of view, a study of consumers’ acceptance of the NND might more fruitfully have taken the form of an ethnographic study following informants while they were procuring, preparing and consuming their NND meals. Thus, instead of providing the participants in focus groups with recipes and all ingredients for making two meals, it could have been more illuminating to offer the recipes and some money for groceries to informants, and then to observe what ensued – i.e. whether and how they organised and conducted their procurement of the NND meals, how the recipe was (or was not) used in the process of procuring and preparing the meals, how they engaged in preparing the meals, and how they and their fellow household members reacted to eating the meals. In short, obtaining a more detailed description and a closer account of how consumers approached the tasks of procuring and preparing NND meals, and how they experienced this consumption in the context of everyday food practices, would have been preferable. Nevertheless, the test the NND prototype meals enabled the study to obtain both systematic and comparable observations of participants’ experiences of preparing and eating the same two NND-meals and a common basis for in-depth and detailed accounts of these experiences. 45

Consumers participating in the study were recruited so as to maximise variation in the socio-demographic background factors known to influence dietary habits. Though the study sought to include differences in food habits between consumers living in rural areas and highly urbanised areas, regional differences within Denmark were not included in the recruitment criteria of this study. Thus, whether and how regional culinary traditions and access to particular local foods may influence consumers’ perception of the NND, and their acceptance of it, is not charted in this study. In general, it should also be noted that one qualitative study necessarily provides a limited basis for generalisation to a nationwide population. Nevertheless, repeating the same study within each of the five regions of Denmark (i.e. 10 focus groups in rural areas and 10 in highly urbanised areas with circa 200 participants) might have produced more nuanced data on possible regional differences in consumer-acceptance of the NND. Similar limitations of this study can be noted in connection with other factors known to influence dietary habits: gender, age, household composition and level of education. Finally, the research design demanded that participants should, in addition to participating in a focus group, prepare two unknown meals, take photos of their meals for a week, and fill out several questionnaires. It seems likely that these demands discouraged participation in the study. In fact, among those who met all of the inclusion criteria approximately half of those living in an urban area and three quarters of those in rural areas declined to join the study. This suggests that those who agreed to participate in this study may have had more time at their disposal and/or may have had a greater interest in food and cooking than other consumers. In either case, these factors indicate a bias in the selected sample implying that the participants recruited to focus groups would be more inclined to evaluate the NND more positively than other consumers. Results from this study should therefore be assessed in this light.

3.2.2 Acceptance and appropriation study of intervention participants A similar critique seems to apply to the qualitative study of intervention participants’ appropriation of the NND. Since this sociological study had to fit the design of the OPUS intervention, with diets and the measurement of food intake carefully controlled, the strategy of requiring participants buy NND foods for six months at their local food store and then, by ethnographic methods, following their everyday lives was not possible. However, not including prolonged observations in the homes

46

of participants remains an obvious limitation of this study, since this was a significant site for the appropriation of the NND. More general limitations arising from the design of the OPUS intervention should also be noted here. The consumption of the NND occurred in a strictly controlled setting in which dietary compliance was assured by monitoring dietary intake, by registering procured foods, and by means of consultations with the intervention dietician. The setting, therefore, deviated significantly from the everyday lives of participants and from usual contexts in which food is procured. Also, participants were self-recruited and given the incentive that food, possibly including new Nordic products, could be procured free of charge for six months. Since all potential participants prior to enrolling in the trial were well informed about the NND and the aim of determining the health benefits of the NND, participants included in the intervention may have had specific motives for participating in the study – such as to learn more about the NND and cooking, to lose weight, to improve personal health, and/or to get free food for six months. Indeed all of these reasons are presented as possible incentives in the SHOPUS recruitment material (OPUS, 2010). Furthermore, participants were recruited with the intent of investigating the health benefits of the NND, and screening ensured that recruited participants were overweight. In addition to this, they had to live within commuting distance of the intervention supermarket, i.e. within the area of Copenhagen and its suburbs. Thus, the participants in this dietary trial represent a limited geographical region of Denmark, appear to have been motivated to enrol in the intervention either for health reasons or by reason of being attracted to the possibility of eating the NND or another free diet, and were willing to consume their diet within the conditions of the intervention. Given the number of respects in which this sample is potentially biased, we examined some points on which participants in the OPUS dietary intervention resemble or deviate from the Danish population (see Table 2)5.

5

For the purpose of the survey of intervention participants, it was necessary to assess whether participants assigned to the NND dietary group differed significantly from those assigned to the ADD group in respect of a number of background variables. This is not the issue focused upon in the present context.

47

Table 2: Study population completing the intervention and answering both questionnaires versus total Danish population

NND (N=91) 67

ADD (N=56) 71

NND (N=79) 70

ADD (N=48) 71

Total Danish population# 52

Children living at home

27

30

25

28

27

Single person household

34

38

30

40

39

Education: 15–20y^

60

60

59

58

21>

Personal income exceeds 400,000 DKR. p.a. before tax deduction

33

27

35

25

19

Household income exceeds 600,000 DKR. p.a. before tax deduction

35

28

39

22

12

64~

67~

64~

63~

94¤

43 (12.9)

39 (13.1)

43 (13.6)

39 (13.2)

40¬

31 (4.6)

31 (5.8)

31 (4.5)

31 (5.2)

Male 26! Female 25!

%

Women

Employed Means (standard deviation) Age T1 BMI T1

Sample: Concluded intervention (N = 147)

Sample: Answered both questionnaires (N=127)

’

T1 Before enrolling in the intervention ^15–20 years (tertiary education, medium cycle and Masters degree) >15–20 years (tertiary education, medium cycle and Masters degree, source: Statistics Denmark 2010, age 15–65 # Source: Statistics Denmark 2011 (total population) ~ Participants, age 18 to 65 years ¤ Workforce, age 16 to 64 years ’ 500,000 DKR p.a. before tax deduction ¬ All Danes 2011 ! Danes between 18 and 65+ years, 2009, source: Bonke & Greve, 2010, pp. 53–54.

As can be seen in Table 2, women were over-represented (at 67% and 71% in the respective dietary groups) among those who completed the OPUS dietary intervention, relative to the Danish population as a whole (52%), and men were correspondingly under-represented. In the category of intervention participants there was also a remarkable over-representation of those with higher levels of education (60% in both dietary groups) when compared to the national population (21%), and of those with a higher household income (35% and 28%) when compared to the population as a whole (12%). The employment level of intervention participants (64% and 67%) is markedly lower than the national level (94%), and, not surprisingly, participants also had higher BMI than the national

48

average. Thus, in terms of gender, level of education, income, available time, and health status, intervention participants in both dietary groups who completed this trial deviate markedly from the Danish population. These factors influence dietary preferences and eating habits, and differences between intervention participants and the Danish population have far more than a merely arbitrary significance. Among Danish consumers, it has been found that women and consumers with higher levels of education and income have healthier eating habits than others (Biltoft-Jensen et al., 2009; Groth & Fagt, 2003; O’Doherty Jensen & Holm, 1999). Thus, because they have the time and the motivation to enrol in a dietary intervention that focuses on the improvement of health, these participants are likely to have healthier eating habits than others. They may also be more receptive to changing their dietary habits with a view to improving health. Since they also make up the population of the survey of dietary acceptance, I will return to these differences and their implications in the discussion of the main findings (see Section 4.3). Two other factors that may have influenced measured levels of dietary acceptance should be noted here. First, participating in a six-month controlled supermarket-intervention trial which restricted what participants could eat and where they could procure their food placed significant demands on all participants. For this reason, all potential participants were evaluated by intervention personnel before they were included in the study to determine whether they would adhere to either one of the two intervention diets to which they might be assigned, would take part in the clinical examinations and be likely to complete the intervention successfully. In other words, individuals deemed unfit to handle the demands of the trial were excluded, for the most part before the trial began, and their evaluation of the NND or ADD diet is therefore not known. Secondly, an attempt was made by the sociological research group to measure levels of acceptance of both diets among drop-outs, but this was not successful. The second questionnaire employed in the survey was mailed to all drop-outs from the intervention (N=41) with a view to measuring their acceptance of their diet. However, after all of the drop-outs had been contacted twice, it was found that only eight had returned the questionnaire. This failed to produce any reliable information about the drop-outs’ acceptance of their diet, and so this line of enquiry had to be abandoned. In sum, given the intervention’s recruitment strategy, the differences between the sample and the Danish population, the controlled conditions of the trial, and the absence of information regarding acceptance of their diet on the part of drop-outs, the results of the survey of intervention participants’ acceptance of their diet are very likely indeed to be biased towards an over-estimation of dietary acceptance.

49

The intervention setting nevertheless offers a unique opportunity to analyse how the consistent and sudden implementation of a novel dietary regime is experienced by participants (cf. Holm, 1993). Sociological studies conducted under such circumstances have produced interesting findings, highlighting ways in which an intervention diet can be in conflict with important social rules of interaction and cultural norms governing meal structures, as well as practical concerns about the procurement, preparation and consumption of the diet (Lotte Holm et al., 2008; Nielsen et al., 2008). Bearing methodological limitations in mind, the OPUS intervention does offer an opportunity to explore factors likely to play a central role in the acceptance and appropriation of the NND within a wider population.

50

4 Main findings In this section the main results of each of the studies in the PhD project are presented. First, the acceptance study of consumers is presented. This is followed by a summary of the results of the acceptance and appropriation studies of intervention participants. After this, the principal findings are discussed with the aim of addressing the central social and cultural factors that appear to influence acceptance of the NND.

4.1 Acceptance of the NND by consumers The exploratory, qualitative study of consumers’ acceptance of the NND focused on factors likely to influence consumer demand, excluding factors on the supply side that might serve to promote or hinder the production, distribution or consumption of NND foods at the present time, or which might be expected to do so in the future. The study found that consumers’ approval of the principles underlying the NND, particularly with regard to health and environmental sustainability, and their enthusiasm for the taste of NND foods, were features likely to advance acceptance of this diet in a majority of the informants. On the other hand, the meal formats of the NND prototype meals, the lack of meat, the time-consuming task of preparing the meals, and the perceived availability of NND food products all operated as barriers to consumer acceptance. On a conceptual level, the NND was generally found to be relevant and interesting by a majority of informants, and it was interpreted in the light of current issues in public media such as healthy eating and climate-friendly consumption. Although not mentioned in the description presented to focus groups, the NND was interpreted as an organic diet, which was viewed positively by many participants. However, not all informants shared these positive opinions of the NND or the project of developing it. Some resented the implication that their current eating habits were not healthy, while others expressed the view that the NND – with its ties to New Nordic Cuisine – was an upmarket and elitist dietary option. These opinions were often accompanied by the view that the NND had been concocted by gourmets and experts seeking to impose their food preferences on the population. Informants evaluated the NND in relation to their everyday meals and food practices. So far as appearance was concerned, those with a preference for vegetables and the colour these lend to interesting-looking meals found the NND appetising. The taste of the NND was evaluated 51

positively by many, who experienced it as natural and pure. Those less positive about the taste pointed out that in general the NND lacked intensity, that spices were missing, and that the dishes tasted too much of apple owing to the use of apple vinegar as a source of sour taste. In response to the two NND prototype meals, 71% of informants had found the meal containing meat to be tasty, while 57% found the vegetarian meal so. In terms of preparing the NND, the amount of time needed to prepare it, and a lack of equipment (such as a food processor), were identified as barriers to its acceptance. Although procurement of the NND was not included in the testing of these meals, perceived difficulties revolving around the availability of NND foods surfaced as a factor relevant to its acceptance. The unfamiliarity of some NND foods, and their perceived lack of availability, were issues that raised difficulties for some – to such an extent indeed that they were not interested in the prospect of including NND dishes in their everyday meals in future. These availability issues did not surface in the responses of those who appeared to accept the NND, since they already exhibited eating habits in line with the NND and were familiar with NND foods. In terms of cultural factors that influenced acceptance, the study revealed that a quarter of participants had changed the recipe for one prototype meal, while a third had changed the recipe for the other meal. This had been done to ensure dishes better accorded with the participants’ individual preferences, and mainly by adding extra ingredients not included in the recipes. More specifically, the NND meal formats did not accord with their conception of a ‘proper meal’, since it lacked meat, gravy, a staple or a side dish of salad – shortcomings remedied by a number of consumers. The format of the lamb meal served in a large oven-proof dish was also perceived as inconsistent with the idea that this dish constitutes a finer meal for weekends or for special occasions, and the ‘weekday’ character of this meal format was in turn seen as being inconsistent with the length of time needed to prepare it. Thus, the meal formats of the NND prototype meals, given the role of meat in preferred traditional meal formats, presented itself as an important cultural barrier to the acceptance of the NND. Turning to social factors influencing acceptance of the NND, consumers who exhibited a preference for traditional meal formats in which meat is a central component, and who expressed reservations about the NND concept and the project of developing it, were for the most resident in rural rather than urban areas. By contrast, the study found that those who embraced ‘modern’ food habits, and who expressed a preference for organic foods, were more inclined to accept the NND. These informants, however, also maintained a preference for the inclusion of a

52

diversity of cuisines in their everyday eating habits, and while they were open to the idea of making NND dishes in future, they balked at the idea of adhering to one cuisine. In sum, the study found that the practical implications of preparing and procuring the NND and preferences for more traditional meal formats were both barriers to the acceptance of the NND, and to approval of the project of developing it, whereas the taste of the NND, preferences for organic foods and more modern food habits are factors facilitating acceptance of the diet.

4.2

Acceptance and appropriation of the NND by intervention participants

The acceptance, by participants in the intervention, of, on the one hand, the NND and, on the other, the ADD were compared. Relative measures were recorded in two indexes: an ‘eating acceptance’ index expressing the eating qualities of the diet, and a ‘practical acceptance’ index tracking the practical implications of the diet in everyday life. In terms of eating acceptance, the NND was generally reported in very positive terms. The ADD control diet was evaluated more negatively. Indeed, all NND participants stated that they found the NND tasty, whereas only 65% of the ADD participants did so. However, the practical aspects of procuring and preparing the ADD, as measured by the practical acceptance index, were generally reported as very positive, while the NND was evaluated more negatively. Thus, 98% of the ADD participants found their diet easy to cook, whereas only 67% of the NND participants felt the same way. It should also be noted that a small, yet significant, positive correlation between scores on the two indexes (Pearson = .29984, p < .10) was identified in NND participants. This suggests that the experience of practical difficulties impeding the consumption of the NND in everyday life tends to have a negative effect on the experience of the NND’s eating qualities. No such correlation was found in connection with the ADD diet. The profiles of participants who accepted the NND and those of participants who accepted the ADD exhibited contrasts on specific points. Those who already had a strong preference for organic foods, seasonal foods, and fish and vegetables prior to the intervention, and who often tried out new dishes at home, reported a higher level of acceptance of the NND than other participants in the NND dietary group. Also, women and those with higher levels of education reported a higher level of acceptance than others in the NND group, although the differences in acceptance associated with level of education were not significant. In contrast, the ADD emerged as being especially acceptable to men, those with lower a level of education, those living in single53

person households, those who are less concerned about buying healthy food and seasonal foods, those who spend less money on food, and those who expressed limited interest and involvement in cooking – although differences in acceptance associated with involvement in cooking were not found to be significant. In other words, these findings suggest that those interested in cooking and those with dietary preferences that accord with the dietary composition of the NND have a higher level of acceptance of the NND than do other participants in this intervention. Thus, practical acceptance – as compared with eating acceptance – was found to hinder acceptance of the NND. In terms of the cultural factors affecting acceptance of the NND, a preference for organic consumption, and for seasonal foods, the apparently healthy eating habits indicated by preferences for fish and vegetables, and food habits which embrace culinary experimentation, are all significant. In terms of social factors influencing acceptance of the NND, women, more than men, find the NND acceptable, and level of education also appears to be a facilitating factor.

The study of appropriation of the NND found that some participants had reservations about the sustainability of the diet on the grounds that it entails, in their view, an excessive use of fuel energy. Preparing the NND appeared to have presented all intervention participants with a significant challenge, since it is seen to be a very time-consuming process and entails lengthy preparation of ingredients prior to cooking. However, the experience of eating the NND, and its taste, were generally evaluated positively, which accords with a general tendency to perceive the NND as a healthy diet comprising products of high quality. Where both the taste of the NND and the practical difficulties entailed in preparing it are concerned, these findings accord with the results of the survey of intervention participants. The findings also show that participants’ appropriation of the NND during the course of the intervention is a process in which, on the one hand, the practices involved in preparing food become adapted to the demands of making the NND and, on the other hand, the NND is itself adapted in ways that accord with personal preferences and with the demands of everyday life. In this process, participants effectively became active co-producers of the NND: they dropped specific recipes they had not liked and/or adjusted dishes to accord with personal taste – e.g. by using less apple juice or apple cider vinegar. Also, participants tailored the NND to the demands of everyday life by ceasing to make two- or three-course dinners. They learned to prepare relatively large quantities of fresh produce each day before commencing to cook, and some claimed to have become

54

more efficient in the kitchen. In order to accomplish this time-consuming work, they also felt compelled to change routines in their everyday lives in ways that would enable them to accomplish these tasks. Some had learned to appreciate the situation in which they prepared food for up to two hours each evening, finding it a new way of being together with other members of their households. Others, however, did not come to appreciate this use of time on preparing meals and were looking forward to the conclusion of the intervention. Many intervention participants found that they had acquired a taste for the NND and its unfamiliar flavours, leaving some with little desire to consume fast food or unhealthy snacks. For these participants, appropriating the NND seems to have presented a basis for a new and healthier lifestyle supported by their adapted food practices. Others viewed the NND as too demanding to adhere to and as presenting tastes that never became familiar. Finally, participants appropriated the NND during an intervention in which the task of procuring NND food products did not resemble the practices usually entailed in shopping for food in everyday life. In particular, the study found that the monitoring of participants’ procurement of the NND had played an essential role in their learning of the dietary guidelines, particularly with regard to the relative quantities of foods securing compliance with Nordic dietary recommendations. Furthermore, since the intervention called for the alignment of food procurement, preparation and consumption, participants learned how to deviate from the menu plan, and how to replace or adjust recipes in ways that also accorded with the demands of dietary compliance. Thus, participants’ appropriation of the NND appears both to have been strongly supported by the intervention itself and to have been motivated by participants’ on-going work of trying to live with the NND.

4.3

Discussion of main findings

Findings across the three studies of this PhD thesis have identified central social and cultural factors that appear to influence acceptance of the NND. In this section, these factors are drawn out, set against the limitations of the studies, and presented as the basis on which conclusions can be drawn vis-à-vis the aim of the OPUS project – i.e. that of improving public health in Denmark by disseminating the NND to consumers (see Section 1.2). In qualitative studies of both consumers and intervention participants, a majority expressed positive views on the NND concept. Clearly, intervention participants had a positive

55

interest in participating in the intervention, and the fact that few of them raised voices in criticism of the ideals underlying the development of the NND may have been the result of the their already concurring with these ideals. The only point of concern that emerged in focus groups bore on the extent to which the NND is actually as sustainable as it claims to be. For some intervention participants the NND appeared less sustainable than initially assumed, essentially because the preparation consumed too much electricity. The critical minority of consumers, however, had a number of different points to make. Some viewed the NND as an elitist, up-market diet while some informants living in rural areas tended to view it as a “big city” project. Others resented the assumption that they needed to be told how to eat healthily. They did not feel the need for the advice of experts on this topic. Approval of the NND concept on the part of a majority of informants is not wholly surprising in light of the fact that a very large majority (approximately 80%) of Danish consumers approve of the principals underlying organic consumption with respect to health, sustainability and animal welfare (Wier, O’Doherty Jensen, Andersen, & Millock, 2008). A minority, constituting 19% of households, pronounce themselves sceptical about organic foods and prefer not to buy them at all. However, it transpires that the high level of approval of the organic concept by Danish consumers is a poor predictor of actual consumption, since only 50% of Danish households purchase these products with any notable frequency, while the other half of the population do not (Lund, O’Doherty Jensen, & Andersen, 2011). This suggests that approval of the NND concept is also a poor predictor of acceptance of the diet in practice. Positive evaluation of the taste of the NND was found in consumers and intervention participants in all three studies, and this must be taken as a fact of some importance. The majority of consumers found the meal containing meat tasty (71%), moreover to a greater extent than the vegetarian meal (57%), whereas – having consumed the NND for six months – all intervention participants reported that they found the NND tasty. However, in agreement with findings from the consumer study, which showed that not all informants liked the taste of the NND, a number of participants in the intervention study also made it clear, in their focus groups, that they had not liked the taste of the NND when first introduced to it, but had learned to like it – and also how to adjust recipes to their taste – during the course of the intervention. All three studies found that both consumers and intervention participants experienced a number of similar practical obstacles in their everyday lives to consuming the NND. Specifically, the finding that preparation of the NND was experienced as too demanding and too time-consuming

56

emerged in all three studies. Added to this, the perceived price and lack of available NND food products in the usual shopping venues emerged as central barriers to the acceptance of NND for both consumers and intervention participants. As we have seen, both consumers and intervention participants changed the NND to accord with personal preferences and their everyday lives. The study of consumers identified that the NND meal format did not accord with the informants’ conception of a ‘proper meal’, either because it was seen as comprising only two components or because it lacked an “essential” component such as meat or gravy. A number of consumers had changed the recipes accordingly. The appropriation study of the intervention participants found – even under controlled conditions – that participants changed recipes to accord with individual taste, and also changed the NND menusystem to fit the demands of everyday life. These processes had played a central role in their appropriation of NND. In terms of cultural factors influencing acceptance of the NND, the study of consumers’ acceptance of the NND and the survey of intervention participants’ found that gendered eating habits were a significant factor. Eating habits that priorities vegetables rather than meat were found to be an important indicator of acceptance of the NND among the consumers. Intervention participants who had a preference for fish and vegetables were also more inclined than others to accept the NND. Indeed, vegetables and fish are foods that are perceived as symbolic markers of femininity in western culture in addition to being important recommended health foods (O’Doherty Jensen and Holm, 1999). Earlier studies have also found that women refrain from eating meat more often than men (Kubberød, Ueland, Risvik, & Henjesand, 2006; Resano et al., 2011). Conversely, meat bears a strong cultural association with masculinity in western culture (O’Doherty Jensen & Holm, 1999; Sobal 2005). Preferences for organic consumption are also seen as a factor in the acceptance of the NND by consumers and intervention participants. Consumers with a high frequency of organic consumption also exhibit a preference for ‘modern’ dishes as compared with ‘traditional’ that emphasise meat as a central component of ‘proper meal’ formats (Lund et al., 2011; O’Doherty Jensen, 2009). This corresponds with my findings regarding consumer acceptance of the NND. Those with seemingly ‘modern’ meal preferences were generally positive towards the concept and taste of the NND, whereas those who expressed reservations about the project of developing the NND, and who viewed it – with its ties to New Nordic Cuisine – as an upmarket and elitist dietary option, tended to have more ‘traditional’ meal preferences. In addition to this, among both

57

consumers and intervention participants, an interest in cooking, and willingness to devote time to it, appeared to be central factors in accepting the NND. A similar interest and involvement in cooking has also been found among consumers who are committed to organic foods and have modern eating habits (Lund et al., 2011). In sum, then, healthy eating habits, a preference for organic consumption, ‘modern’ meal formats, and dishes that tend to be perceived as appealing to ‘feminine’ tastes appear to be central cultural factors underlying acceptance of the NND, whereas ‘traditional’ eating habits, which emphasise the role of meat in the more customary ‘proper meal’ formats, and which tend to be perceived as appealing to ‘masculine’ tastes, constitute barriers to acceptance of the NND. In terms of social factors, gender emerges as a variable that strongly influences acceptance of the NND. Among both consumers and intervention participants, women appear to find the NND acceptable to a greater extent than men. A higher level of education was also seen to facilitate acceptance of the NND among intervention participants, although this tendency was not significant. However, the non-significance may be due to the remarkably high educational level observed in intervention participants in general, as compared with the Danish population, which in turn suggests that people with a high level of education were attracted to the idea of participating in this intervention. Finally, the qualitative study of consumers living in urban and rural areas indicated that urbanisation is also a factor influencing acceptance. In light of qualitative and quantitative evidence that acceptance of the NND was most pronounced among informants who were already familiar with NND foods, and those who tended to have healthy eating habits and a preference for organic products, none of these findings on the influence of social factors is particularly surprising. Earlier studies have shown that women and those with higher educational and income levels have eating habits that are healthier than those of other consumers (Biltoft-Jensen et al., 2009; Lau et al. 2004; Groth & Fagt, 2003; O'Doherty Jensen & Holm, 1999), while urbanisation level is also strongly correlated with higher frequency of organic consumption (Lund et al., 2011). Although the three studies undertaken as part of this PhD project are limited in scope by reason of qualitative design, and although the quantitative results are based on a sample drawn from only one geographical region, findings on the impact of social factors on acceptance of the NND are strongly supported by the results of other studies. On this basis, it can be concluded that the NND is likely to be more acceptable to women and those with higher levels of education than it is to men and those with lower levels of education, and more

58

acceptable also to people residing in the major Danish cities rather than smaller towns or rural areas. With regard to the appropriation of the NND by intervention participants, we have seen that new food practices were called for and were indeed established in the course of the intervention. However, we also saw that a new NND emerged from this process. Both consumers and intervention participants altered NND recipes to accord with individual preferences. Indeed, among intervention participants, the severe practical implications of adhering to the intervention diet, which is clearly reflected in a low level of practical acceptance of NND, became the driving force behind alterations to this diet. The participants thus domesticated the NND and learned to make it “doable” in relation to the demands of everyday life (cf. Halkier, 2010; Silverstone and Haddon, 1996). The intervention itself thus constituted the context within which new food procurement practices and new methods of food preparation were established, sustained and reproduced (cf. Pantzar & Shove, 2010; Elizabeth Shove, Pantzar, & Watson, 2012). Setting aside the perception among a number of consumers and intervention participants that NND food products are expensive and not available in usual shopping venues, it would seem to be doubtful whether the food practices entailed in consuming the NND would be established, sustained and reproduced outside the context of this intervention. Indeed, if consumers were to consume the NND outside that setting, my findings and those of earlier studies suggest that a new NND, which deviates from that consumed during the intervention, would emerge. Recipes would be adapted, supplemented and subjected to consumers’ different cooking styles, which define whether and how they are used (Halkier, 2010; Short, 2003; Wansink, 2003), while they may not be used at all by those with lower incomes and educational levels (Caraher et al., 1999). This pattern would favour a scenario in which the NND became adapted by those with higher incomes and higher levels of education – although such a potential development would not ensure that NND consumers would adhere to the dietary guidelines of the NND (as it was consumed during the intervention). The significance of the results of this PhD study needs to be assessed in light of the individual studies’ limitations (see Section 3.2). Regional differences in the food culture of Danish consumers have not been investigated, and intervention participants were mainly drawn from the greater Copenhagen area only. Consequently, the acceptance of the NND in relation to preferences influenced by regional culinary traditions as well as access to local foods in urban and rural areas have not been investigated. Participants in all three studies appear to have been highly motivated

59

study-participants. They seem to have had time available and also an interest in learning about cooking, in exploring the NND, and/or in losing weight. Importantly, the social composition of intervention participants strongly suggests that Danish consumers generally would exhibit a lower level of acceptance of the NND than that found here. Specifically, gender, level of education, and available resources of time are all respects in which participants who concluded the intervention differ from the Danish population as a whole. Moreover, they do so in ways that indicate that their acceptance of the NND is likely to be very much more positive than it would be among Danish consumers more generally. It is to be noted that acceptance levels by drop-outs from the intervention have not been measured. Similarly, those who participated until the intervention’s conclusion had created, over time, new food practices as a way of dealing with the practical difficulties of consuming the NND. In some cases, participants had also learned to appreciate and enjoy tastes associated with the NND. In short, when considering whether Danish consumers are likely to accept the NND we need to remember that the results reported here are set against a background of generally positive bias.

60

5 Conclusions: The future of the NND The main findings of the three empirical studies undertaken as part of my PhD project have been presented and discussed in Section 4. As was mentioned at the start of Section 3, this project also had a fourth objective – namely, to access which social and cultural factors are likely to have an impact upon the achievement of the over-arching aim of the OPUS research project. That aim is: to improve public health in Denmark by renewing Danish culinary culture through developing, testing and disseminating the New Nordic Diet (OPUS, 2012a). Since my presentation of findings has already indicated the likelihood that the NND will appeal to some population groups and not to others, I approach this task by seeking to answer two questions rather than one: which social and cultural factors are likely to have an impact on efforts to improve public health, and which factors are likely to have an impact on efforts to renew Danish culinary culture? Both of these aims were to be achieved by means of developing, testing and disseminating the NND to Danish consumers. Developing the NND was the first task to be undertaken within the OPUS project, and the outcome of this task, undertaken by Meyer’s House of Food, was the diet tested in the OPUS dietary intervention. This is the diet that has also been the focus of my studies of the acceptance and appropriation of the NND by intervention participants. It has been described elsewhere in these pages (see also Part II of this thesis). Testing the possible health benefits of this diet, including its effect on weight loss, was the task of nutritionists and other scientists within the OPUS Research Centre. The results of this work had not been published at the time of writing. Disseminating the NND to Danish consumers was the task managed by WP7, based at the Office for Faculty Communication within the Faculty of Science at Copenhagen University in co-operation with the OPUS Management Team. The dissemination was to be undertaken throughout the five-year period of the OPUS project. Before seeking to answer the two questions I have posed, I will outline the initiatives undertaken in the course of disseminating information about the OPUS project and the NND to Danish consumers. Having then attempted to answer the questions, I will conclude by reflecting on the need for further studies of the role of the NND in the Danish context.

5.1 Disseminating the NND to Danish consumers Apart from the main actors already mentioned, others who have played a major role in publicising the OPUS project, disseminating information about the NND to Danish consumers, and promoting new Nordic foods, are: the supermarket chain Coop, owned by FDB, and Meyer’s House of Food.

61

Coop manages the largest supermarket chain in Denmark and thus represents a major player within the Danish food retail industry. The concerted efforts of these important actors have been successful in drawing considerable attention to OPUS and the NND in Danish public media. The NND from OPUS has been promoted with slogans such as “fighting obesity with palatability” (Tv2 - Lorry, 2011, 10:30), and “New Nordic food will save us and the planet” (Cuculiza & Leth-Espensen, 2010). Likewise, informative discussion of the OPUS dietary intervention in public media has also drawn attention to the NND (cf. (c) TV2 Denmark, 2011; Frances Schwartzkopff, 2011). Danish national television has aired six programmes about the OPUS school intervention, thereby drawing attention to the need for nutritious school meals and children’s responses to NND lunches (Danmarks Radio, 2012). Again, high school students throughout Denmark have been introduced to the NND through education material (Copenhagen University (News Editor), 2011). OPUS has also tried to attract the attention of consumers by encouraging their involvement in initiatives including the launch of a user-driven website for developing and sharing NND recipes (The idea cassarole, 2010). In most of these efforts, the NND appears to be communicated with an emphasis on healthy eating based on local foods. By means of a stakeholder alliance between OPUS, Meyer’s House of Food and FDB/COOP, two cookery books have been published. These are designed to introduce New Nordic recipes to Danish consumers (Meyer & Astrup, 2012; Meyer & Astrup, 2011). Following the publication of the first NND cookery book, FDB also organised 90 NND cookery classes in Denmark (FDB, 2011). Coop has introduced several Nordic foods into its product range and launched a Nordic food marketing campaign (Coop, 2011). These efforts reflect FDB/Coop’s interest in gaining a competitive edge by promoting new Nordic foods. Continued involvement on their part would doubtless improve the availability of NND foods in Denmark, which could also be expected to lead to lower prices in the longer term. The promotional emphasis in Coop-managed supermarket chains, and in associated marketing campaigns, is on new Nordic food as local food products. During the 5-year period of the OPUS project, the promotion of New Nordic Cuisine by celebrity chefs in public media has continued. Celebrity chefs in Denmark and elsewhere have become public figures that have gained importance within the entertainment industry (Rousseau, 2012). Their role has often evolved beyond that of the gastronomic chef. They have engaged, for instance, in the roles of social activist, travel guide and business advisor to restaurateurs (cf. Rousseau, 2012). These chefs are also entrepreneurs, and their appearances in public media play an

62

important role in branding their products and differentiating these from those of their competitors, thereby securing competitive advantage (Henderson, 2011). Within Danish public media, Claus Meyer is one of the main representatives of New Nordic Cuisine, and the promotion of new Nordic foods and recipes appears to be a significant part of his business, as represented by Meyer’s House of Food. In this context, it is the gastronomic qualities of Nordic foods that play an important role in the promotion of local NND foods. Despite the differences of emphasis in these actors – with the focus shifting from health to gastronomy – a common denominator is that the NND refers to local food. Indeed, according to Meyer, OPUS opted to employ the label ‘Nordic’ for reasons of branding, since the NND first and foremost comprises Danish, organic, seasonal foods (Meyer et al., 2010: p.5). Thus, given this emphasis on ‘local’ food, not least on the part of the supermarket chain involved, further dissemination of the NND, if successful, may stimulate increased demand for local foods in Denmark. I return to this issue in Section 5.3. This new focus, however, would require consumers to associate local foods with the healthy and gastronomic qualities of the NND.

5.2 Improving public health With a view to improving public health, a comprehensive food and nutrition policy would include strategies on both the nutritional composition of the diet and a sustainable food supply (WHO, 2002). The OPUS project contributes to both of these goals in its ambition to design a diet that accords with dietary recommendations and promotes the use of regional, plant-based foods while reducing use of meat products. There is, however, a gap between design and implementation. Achieving these goals rests upon whether or not the diet, as conceived, is in fact accepted and appropriated by consumers. Inequality in levels of health remains one of the greatest challenges facing public health policy in the twenty-first century (Nelson, 1999; WHO, 2002). The close link between lower socio-economic status and higher risk of nutrition-related chronic conditions, including heart disease, cancer, stroke, high blood pressure and obesity, is well documented. Households with lower socio-economic status spend less money on foods that promote health, such as fruit and vegetables, and more money on energy-dense foods (Nelson, 1999). National surveys in countries with a plentiful food supply show that the cheapest food energy takes the form of fats, white bread,

63

sugar, soft drinks and fatty meat products and that households with lower socio-economic status buy these energy-dense food products more often, while households with higher socio-economic status buy more plant-based foods (WHO, 2002). Unsurprisingly, this is also the pattern found in Denmark (Groth & Fagt, 2003; Biltoft-Jensen et al., 2009). Nutritionists involved in designing the OPUS project are – perhaps, needless to say – wholly familiar with the nutritional determinants of chronic health problems such as heart disease, cancer and obesity. There is also some indication that the social determinants of these same problems have been recognised by OPUS nutritionists, as evidenced in the resolve to make the NND “… available to those segments of the population who suffer most from nutrition-related lifestyle diseases, and who normally do not exhibit an interest in gastronomic cooking” (OPUS, 2009c). At issue here are population groups with lower socio-economic status. My PhD project would have developed very differently had the sociological contribution to the OPUS project been conceived as an investigation of the social determinants of nutrition-related, chronic health problems. Given that this was not so, my studies can make only a limited contribution to assessment of the extent to which the aim of OPUS to improve public health has been, or is likely to be, achieved. The focus of my studies has been restricted to investigating acceptance and appropriation of the NND at the micro-level of food practices among participants in the OPUS dietary intervention together with a limited number of informants among Danish consumers. Given this limitation, it must be said that I have found no evidence that dissemination of the NND is likely to redress the balance of inequality in the health levels of Danish consumers. On the contrary, my findings indicate that the NND has little or no contribution to make to the achievement of this goal. The main social factors influencing acceptance of the NND appear to be level of urbanisation (larger cities in Denmark as compared with smaller towns and rural areas) and gender (women as compared with men). Higher levels of education and income, as well as greater resources of free time, are also indicated as factors with an impact on acceptance of the NND. Cultural factors identified as relevant to acceptance of the NND are consumers’ involvement and interest in cooking, eating habits that embrace ‘modern’ dishes, a preference for healthy food products, including fruit, vegetables and fish, as well as preferences for consuming organic and seasonal foods. In other words, the NND appears to appeal first and foremost to urban, educated and well-off consumers, who are interested in “new” culinary trends, and who already eat healthily and consume organic and seasonal foods. Developing a healthy, sustainable and tasty diet that

64

precisely appeals to this segment of the population cannot be regarded as a path to the serious redressing of health inequalities among Danish consumers. Given the dietary habits of Danes, consumers with low socio-economic status – and in particular men – are those who could be expected to benefit most from learning to appropriate a healthy, sustainable and tasty diet (cf. Groth & Fagt, 2003; Groth et al., 2009). The findings of my studies suggest that the task of disseminating the NND to Danish consumers, with a view to their appropriating this diet, faces other obstacles. As seen by the low level of practical acceptance by the intervention participants, the NND is perceived as too demanding. Time-consuming food preparation, lack of availability in usual shopping venues, and high prices, are all seen as significant barriers to the adoption of the NND. In addition to this, the process of appropriating the NND, which requires the diet and the practitioner’s food practices to be successfully fitted together, presents itself as a challenging learning process. And finally, even if practitioners could appropriate NND food practices in everyday life, their NND recipes would probably be domesticated in accordance with individual cooking styles and household preferences, rendering adherence to dietary recommendations uncertain. Given the likelihood of a positive bias in the results of the survey of intervention participants’ acceptance of the NND (see Section 3.2.2), my findings indicate that considerable social and cultural barriers must be overcome if the NND, in the form investigated in this PhD project, is to become a source of improved public health across the broader population rather than a source of gastronomic inspiration for consumer segments with specific interest in new food trends.

5.3 Renewing culinary culture As we have seen, the NND represents an attempt to develop a new cuisine that will vitalise Danish culinary culture (OPUS, 2009a). The results of my studies indicate that this ambition may well be realised, at least with regard to one or more segments of the Danish population. As presented in Section 5.1, the common denominator in the dissemination of the NND is the reference to local food. Studies of consumer perceptions of local foods have observed that regionally embedded food systems often stimulate consumers to perceive crops, food products and food producers as being ‘unique’ and ‘authentic’, just as local food products are seen as being fresher,

65

better tasting and more trustworthy than non-local foods (Chambers et al., 2007; Groves, 2001; Kuznesof, Tregear, & Moxey, 1997). The perception of local foods also appears to have a number of features in common with consumer perceptions of ‘organic food’, including low climate impact, improved animal welfare, pesticide-free produce and environmental sustainability (Chambers et al. 2007; Ostrom, 2006; Zepeda & Deal, 2009). However, motives for buying local food include the desire to support local food producers and a local community as well as the wish to support domestic food production, which are not typical motives for buying ‘organic food’ (Zepeda & Deal, 2009) – at least, not in a mature organic market such as that found in Denmark today (cf. Wier et al., 2008). Zepeda & Deal suggest that some organic consumers find communality and identity as local food consumers (2009). Thus, it would seem that organic consumers, in particular those with a high frequency of consumption, are possible future consumers of local, NND foods. It is to be noted in this context that both intervention participants and other informants in my studies perceived NND foods as organic foods. Lund and colleagues have identified a ‘Convinced’ segment of ‘heavy users’ of organic foods in Denmark. They represented 12.8% of all Danish households in 2007– 2008, and were found to be eager to purchase organic products that carried the promise of meeting higher ethical standards (2012). Members of this segment tend to be interested in cooking and are engaged in the issues of food quality, health and new culinary trends. It would seem that this segment represents a potential market for local, Nordic foods in Denmark, since local foods and food production are associated with higher ethical standards than conventional foods and food production, and this in turn harmonises with the ideals behind New Nordic Cuisine. Moreover, the members of this segment strongly resemble those consumers for whom the NND carries the greatest appeal (see Section 5.2). However, on its own this observation does not reliably indicate that the NND as a dietary regime will be appropriated by these consumers, since they might well adapt New Nordic Cuisine foods to fit their culinary repertoire. Finally, the taste of the NND, and the idea that specific foods have a legitimate Nordic cultural heritage, may conceivably cause consumers to change their taste preferences and their perceptions of culinary heritage in Denmark. Since the taste of the NND seems to have been clearly accepted by consumers and intervention participants alike, the doorway to consumer acceptance may well be the taste of the NND. However, whether Danes will come to appropriate the dominant apple taste, which appears to be a central gastronomic feature of the NND, is unknown. The exclusion of lemons, conventional tomatoes and many “non-Nordic” foods may well be felt to go

66

against the grain of current and traditional Danish culinary culture, since many emblematic Danish dishes and desserts include lemons and other non-Nordic foods. Furthermore, the exclusion of nonNordic foods may be taken to exclude consumers with non-Nordic backgrounds and culinary heritage, presenting yet another barrier to nationwide appropriation of the NND. Thus, a possible development may be that the NND will change into a New Local Diet (cf. Meyer, 2013), thereby side-stepping the issues of cultural heritage and cultural exclusion.

5.4 Considerations of importance in future studies Before exploring what kinds of future study are called for by the results presented in this PhD thesis, I would like to address what I see as an important shortcoming in the OPUS project – one that would need to be corrected in the event of a similar project being undertaken in the future. The findings of my studies underline the need to base health promotion efforts focusing on food and nutrition on in-depth consideration of the existing food practices and concerns of the members of the target population. The only study pursued under the auspices of the OPUS project which explored whether, and how, consumers would accept the NND given the everyday eating habits they currently have was the qualitative study of the acceptance of prototype meals. This study is part of my PhD project. Thus, no extensive, exploratory investigation of this issue was undertaken prior to the development of the NND. Such studies would inform the designers of the NND (or designers of a different healthy and tasty diet) about current food practices and dietary preferences within the population at issue. They would yield insights into central points of entry governing adoption of a new diet by these consumers. However, given that the developers of the NND were mainly chefs, and given also that the NND was developed with reference to New Nordic Cuisine (entailing the gastronomic criterion that Nordic foods alone could be included), the NND was designed with the explicit intention that it would depart significantly from the common dietary habits of Danes. Consequently, its developers appear to have shaped this diet in accordance with their own preferences, implementing these in the diet without due consideration of food practices within the target population. In other words, then, preconceived eaters are embedded in the dietary regime of NND, and they appear to be the designers themselves (Ingram et al., 2007). Including innovation and in-depth user/consumer studies in the development of the NND would undoubtedly

67

have improved the success of OPUS (cf. Grunert et al., 2008; Oudshoorn & Pinch, 2003; Woolgar, 1991), and it could have provided inspiration for further studies of this issue. Judging by the results presented in this PhD thesis, a number of questions remain open, suggesting the need for further studies. Apart from the need for studies within the sociology of food, I would like to focus on two issues that also fall within sociology of science and science and technology studies. The first concerns the question of why the OPUS Research Centre came to focus on the project of developing the NND, and not merely on a healthy and tasty diet, with a view to improving public health. From my perspective this is not only an interesting question: it is a vital one. It draws attention to the fact that we have reached a point in our society at which gastronomy and nutritional science can form a seemingly legitimate alliance – in the form of a University Research Centre – and together seek to advance Nordic terroir and Nordic food products with the aim of revitalising Danish culinary culture and improving public health. Exploration of the historical developments that enabled this alliance to form between institutions and actors, and clarification of the stakeholder interests at issue, could tell us much about the ways in which concepts of health, gastronomy, local food and Nordic culture gain new meanings in public discourse. Second, in the OPUS project the sociology of food also gained a new role – that of designer (in part) of a diet which is intended to revitalise the nation’s culinary culture. My findings on, for example, consumer perceptions of the NND as an elitist diet were utilised in the design of the NND and in OPUS’ dissemination of information about it. The names of dishes were changed and, parallel to this development, the Danish title of the NND was also changed in an attempt to emphasise that the NND is suited to everyday consumption6. In other words, my research was embedded in a predefined objective which was to disseminate the NND successfully, and my results were used to feed into the creation of the NND. This research context presents challenges and questions about our role and obligations around research (cf. Bell & Nutt, 2002). It suggests the need for ethnographic studies exploring in detail how a new diet is actually created, and what ideals, interests, and unspoken assumptions underlie the process of creating, testing and disseminating a new diet (cf. Cetina, 1991; Folker, Holm, & Sandøe, 2009; Fujimura, 1992; Kastenhofer, 2007;

6

Originally, the New Nordic Diet was called ‘Ny Nordisk Kost’ in Danish. However, in Danish ‘kost’ may be interpreted as being too clinical a concept with strong associations with nutritional science.

68

Latour & Woolgar, 1986; Latour, 1988, 1999). Such studies may also serve as an opportunity to explore and reflect upon our own role, obligations and interests when ‘doing’ sociology of food. Finally, I have suggested that the NND may be adopted – and altered – by a selected group of urban and well-educated consumers who have an interest in new food trends and a preference for organic consumption, and that the taste of the NND may play a significant role in the wider appropriation of this diet. Also, I have suggested that the dissemination of the NND may intensify the consumption of local food among those consumers who are identified in this PhD study as potential recipients of the NND (see Section 5.3). Obviously, these predictions are topics for future studies within the sociology of food. Exploring these issues may, among other things, unearth whether OPUS in fact has had an impact on consumers’ eating habits and Danish culinary culture.

69

References Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T Andersen, L. M. (2009). Documentation of CONCEPT questionnaires. Retrieved from http://orgprints.org/15741/ Andersson, I., & Rössner, S. (1997). Weight development, drop-out pattern and changes in obesity-related risk factors after two years treatment of obese men. International Journal of Obesity & Related Metabolic Disorders, 21(3), 211–216. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=8853626&site=ehost-live Appadurai, A. (2009). How to Make a National Cuisine: Cookbooks in Contemporary India. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 30(1), 3. doi:10.1017/S0010417500015024 Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the Theory of Planned Behaviour: a meta-analytic review. The British journal of social psychology / the British Psychological Society, 40(Pt 4), 471–99. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11795063 Astrup, A. V, & Nielsen, M. (2003). Randomiseret sammenligning af kursus i sund gastronomisk madlavning versus adfærdsmodifikation i behandling af svær overvægt [Randomized comparison of course in healthy gourmet cooking versus behavior modification in the treatment of obesity]. Ugeskrift for Læger, 16(51), 4958–4961. Aurier, P., Fort, F., & Sirieix, L. (2005). Exploring terroir product meanings for the consumer. Anthropology of food [Online],, 4(May), 1–17. Retrieved from http://aof.revues.org/187 Beardsworth, A., & Keil, T. (1997). Sociology on the Menu: An Invitation to the Study of Food and Society. Routledge. Becker, W., Lyhne, N., Pedersen, A., Aro, A., Fogelholm, M., Þhórsdottir, I., … Pedersen, J. (2004). Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2004 - integrating nutrition and physical activity. Scandinavian Journal of Nutrition, 48(4), 178–187. doi:10.1080/1102680410003794 Bell, L., & Nutt, L. (2002). Ethics in Qualitative Research. In Ethics in Qualitative Research. 1 Oliver’s Yard, 55 City Road, London England EC1Y 1SP United Kingdom: SAGE Publications Ltd. doi:10.4135/9781849209090 Bere, E., & Brug, J. (2009). Towards health-promoting and environmentally friendly regional diets - a Nordic example. Public health nutrition, 12(1), 91–6. doi:10.1017/S1368980008001985 Biltoft-Jensen, A., Groth, M. V, Matthiessen, J., Wachmann, H., Christensen, T., & Fagt, S. (2009). Diet quality: associations with health messages included in the Danish Dietary Guidelines 2005, personal attitudes and social factors. Public health nutrition, 12(8), 1165–73. doi:10.1017/S1368980008003662 Bonke, J., & Greve, J. (2010). Helbred, trivsel og overvægt blandt danskere [Health, well-being and obesity among Danes]. (GYLDENDAL, Ed.). Rockwool Foundation Research Unit.

70

Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Bowen, D. J., Ph, D., Kuniyuki, A., Shattuck, A., Nixon, D. W., & Sponzo, R. W. (2000). Results of a volunteer program to conduct dietary intervention research for women. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 22(1), 94–100. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02895173 Brown, J. B. (1999). The Use of Focus Groups in Clinical Research. In B. F. Crabtree & W. L. Miller (Eds.), Qualitative Research1 (Second., pp. 109–124). London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Byrkjeflot, H., Pedersen, J. S., & Svejenova, S. (2013). From Label to Practice: The Process of Creating New Nordic Cuisine. Journal of Culinary Science & Technology, 11(1), 36–55. doi:10.1080/15428052.2013.754296 Caraher, M., Dixon, P., Lang, T., & Carr-Hill, R. (1999). The state of cooking in England: the relationship of cooking skills to food choice. British Food Journal, 101(8), 590–609. doi:10.1108/00070709910288289 Cardello, A. V, Schutz, H., Snow, C., & Lesher, L. (2000). Predictors of food acceptance, consumption and satisfaction in specific eating situations. Food Quality and Preference, 11(3), 201–216. doi:10.1016/S0950-3293(99)00055-5 Cetina, K. K. (1991). Epistemic Cultures: Forms of Reason in Science. History of Political Economy, 23(1), 105–122. Chambers, S., Lobb, A., Butler, L., Harvey, K., & Traill, W. B. (2007). Local, national and imported foods: a qualitative study. Appetite, 49(1), 208–13. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2007.02.003 Christensen, B. (2012). Ny nordisk gastronomi // New Nordic Cuisine (1. ed.). Politikens Forlag. Coop. (2011). Coop Ansvarlighedsrapport 2011 - Irma [Coop Responsibility Report 2011 - Irma]. Retrieved January 23, 2013, from https://om.coop.dk/ansvarlighedsrapport2011/kaederne/irma.html Copenhagen University (News Editor). (2011, March 2). Danske unge medvirker i skabelsen af en Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmadkultur [Danish youth involved in the creation of the New Nordic food Culture]. Kommunikation. Retrieved August 28, 2012, from http://nyheder.ku.dk/alle_nyheder/2011/2011.3/danske_unge_medvirker_i_skabelsen_af_en_ny_nordis k_hverdagsmadkultur/ Cuculiza, M., & Leth-Espensen, L. (2010). Ny Nordisk mad skal redde os og kloden [New Nordic food will save us and the planet]. 24timer, pp. 1, 4–5. Danmarks Radio. (2012). Mission Skolemad [Mission School meals]. Retrieved February 07, 2013, from http://www.dr.dk/Undervisning/Norden/MUMS/20121122125106.htm#/67295 Drew, W. (2012). The World’s 50 Best Restaurants. Restaurant magazine, part of William Reed Business Media Ltd. Retrieved July 20, 2012, from http://www.theworlds50best.com/ Due, A., Larsen, T. M., Mu, H., Hermansen, K., Stender, S., & Astrup, A. (2008). Comparison of 3 ad libitum diets for weight-loss maintenance, risk of cardiovascular disease, and diabetes: a 6-mo

71

randomized, controlled trial. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 88(5), 1232–1241. Retrieved from http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/88/5/1232 Duruz, J. (2004). Adventuring and Belonging: An Appetite for Markets. Space and Culture, 7(4), 427–445. doi:10.1177/1206331204269380 Dynesen, a W., Haraldsdóttir, J., Holm, L., & Astrup, A. (2003). Sociodemographic differences in dietary habits described by food frequency questions--results from Denmark. European journal of clinical nutrition, 57(12), 1586–97. doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601728 Evans, D., McMeekin, A., & Southerton, D. (2012). Sustainable Consumption, Behaviour Change Policies and Theories of Practice. In A. Warde & D. Southerton (Eds.), The Habits of Consumption (pp. 113– 129). Helsinki: HELDA - The Digital Repository of University of Helsinki, Collegium for Advanced Studies. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10138/34226 FDB. (2011). 1250 kursister deltog i FDB’s køkkenkurser i 2011 [1250 course participants took part in the FDB's kitchen courses in 2011]. FDB Forum. Retrieved August 22, 2012, from http://fdbforum.fdb.dk/nyheder/1250-kursister-deltog-i-fdbs-koekkenkurser-i-2011 Featherstone, M. (1990). Perspectives on Consumer Culture. Sociology, 24(1), 5–22. doi:10.1177/0038038590024001003 Fischler, C. (1980). Food habits, social change and the nature/culture dilemma. Social Science Information, 19(6), 937–953. doi:10.1177/053901848001900603 Fischler, C. (1988). Food, self and identity. Social Science Information, 27(2), 275–292. doi:10.1177/053901888027002005 Folker, A. P., Holm, L., & Sandøe, P. (2009). “We Have to Go Where the Money Is”—Dilemmas in the Role of Nutrition Scientists: An Interview Study. Minerva, 47(2), 217–236. doi:10.1007/s11024-009-9122-6 Frances Schwartzkopff. (2011). Danish Foods Behind Noma Success Cause Weight Loss, Study Finds Businessweek. @2012 BLOOMBERG L.P. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. MADE IN NYC. Retrieved August 24, 2012, from http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-11-02/danish-foods-behind-nomasuccess-cause-weight-loss-study-finds.html Fujimura, J. (1992). Crafting science: Standardized packages, boundary objects, and “translation”. In A. Pickering (Ed.), Science as Practice and Culture (pp. 168–211). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Gaston, A. Y., Arpege, L., Roux, A., Roux, M., & Amis, L. (2011). Noma. William Reed Business Media Ltd. Retrieved from http://www.theworlds50best.com/awards/1-50-winners/noma/ Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society. Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press. Gram-Hanssen, K. (2011). Understanding change and continuity in residential energy consumption. Journal of Consumer Culture, 11(1), 61–78. doi:10.1177/1469540510391725 Gronow, J., & Warde, A. (2001). Ordinary consumption. Studies in consumption and markets v 2 (p. VIII, 257 s.). Routledge.

72

Groth, M. V., & Fagt, S. (2001). Udviklingen i kostvaner i Danmark og Sverige siden 1960’erne. Ugeskrift for læger, 163, 425–429. Groth, M. V., & Fagt, S. (2003). Danskernes kostvaner. Måltidsvaner, holdninger, sociale forskelle og sammenhæng med anden livsstil [The Danish diet. Meal habits, attitudes, social differences and relationship with other forms of lifestyle] (pp. 2–156). Søborg. Groth, M. V, Fagt, S., & Brøndsted, L. (2001). Social determinants of dietary habits in Denmark. European journal of clinical nutrition, 55(11), 959–66. doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601251 Groth, M. V, Fagt, S., Stockmarr, a, Matthiessen, J., & Biltoft-Jensen, A. (2009). Dimensions of socioeconomic position related to body mass index and obesity among Danish women and men. Scandinavian journal of public health, 37(4), 418–26. doi:10.1177/1403494809105284 Groves, A. M. (2001). Authentic British food products: a review of consumer perceptions. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 25(3), 246–254. doi:10.1046/j.1470-6431.2001.00179.x Grunert, K., Jensen, B., Sonne, A., Brunso, K., Byrne, D., Clausen, C., … Kristensen, N. (2008). Useroriented innovation in the food sector: relevant streams of research and an agenda for future work☆. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 19(11), 590–602. doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2008.03.008 Hahnemann, T. (2009). The Scandinavian Cookbook. Andrews McMeel Publishing. Hahnemann, T., & Ranek, L. (2011). The Nordic Diet: Using Local and Organic Food to Promote a Healthy Lifestyle. Skyhorse Publishing. Halkier, B. (2010). Consumption Challenged - Food in Medialised Everyday Lives (p. 209pp). Ashgate Pub Co. Henderson, J. C. (2011). Celebrity chefs: expanding empires. British Food Journal, 113(5), 613–624. doi:10.1108/00070701111131728 Hjelmar, U. (2011). Consumers’ purchase of organic food products. A matter of convenience and reflexive practices. Appetite, 56(2), 336–44. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2010.12.019 Hjulgaard, L. (2004). Flere grøntsager på spisebordet [More vegetables on the dinner table]. NYT fra Danmarks Statestik. Danmarks Statistik [Statistics Denmark]. Hollway, W., & Jefferson, T. (2008). The free association narrative interview method. In L. M. Givens (Ed.), Qualitative Research (pp. 296–315). Sage. Retrieved from http://www.sagepub.com/refbooksProdDesc.nav?prodId=Book229805 Holm, L. (1993). Cultural and social acceptability of a healthy diet. European journal of clinical nutrition, 47(8), 592–9. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8404795 Holm, Lotte, Hoff, A., Erichsen, L., Mohl, M., Toubro, S., Astrup, A., & Møhl, M. (2008). Social and cultural acceptability of fat reduced diets among Danish overweight subjects: High-protein versus highcarbohydrate diets. Food Quality and Preference, 19(1), 43–50. doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2007.06.001 Hård, M., & Jamison, A. (Eds.). (1998). The Intellectual Appropriation of Technology: Discourses of Modernity, 1900-1939. The MIT Press.

73

Ilmonen, K. (2004). The Use of and Commitment to Goods. Journal of Consumer Culture, 4(1), 27–50. doi:10.1177/1469540504040903 Inelmen, E. M., Toffanello, E. D., Enzi, G., Gasparini, G., Miotto, F., Sergi, G., & Busetto, L. (2005). Predictors of drop-out in overweight and obese outpatients. International journal of obesity (2005), 29(1), 122–8. doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0802846 Ingram, J., Shove, E., & Watson, M. (2007). Products and Practices: Selected Concepts from Science and Technology Studies and from Social Theories of Consumption and Practice 1. Design Issues, 23(2), 3– 16. doi:10.1162/desi.2007.23.2.3 Jørgensen, K. (2012). Udenlandsk frugt og grønt fortrænger dansk frugt og grønt fra butikshylderne [Foreign fruits and vegetables are pushing Danish fruit and vegetables from store shelves] (pp. 1–5). Retrieved from http://www.voresmad.dk/~/media/lf/Tal og analyser/Forbrug og detail/Analyse Stigende import af frugt og gr%C3%B8nt.ashx Kastenhofer, K. (2007, December). Converging Epistemic Cultures? Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research. doi:10.1080/13511610701767908 Kjærnes, U. (2001). Eating Patterns - A Day in the Lives of Nordic Peoples. Oslo. Retrieved from http://www.sifo.no/files/file48478_rapport2001_07.pdf Korzen, S., Sandøe, P., & Lassen, J. (2011). Don’t wash my meat: public perceptions of decontamination in meat production. British Food Journal, 113(5), 598–612. doi:10.1108/00070701111131719 Kristensen, S. T., & Holm, L. (2006). Modern Meal Patterns: Tensions Between Bodily Needs and the Organization of Time and Space. Food and Foodways, 14(3-4), 151–173. doi:10.1080/07409710600962316 Kubberød, E., Ueland, Ø., Risvik, E., & Henjesand, I. J. (2006, July). A study on the mediating role of disgust with meat in the prediction of red meat consumption among young females. Journal of Consumer Behaviour. doi:10.1002/cb.180 Kuznesof, S., Tregear, A., & Moxey, A. (1997). Regional foods: a consumer perspective. British Food Journal, 99(6), 199–206. doi:10.1108/00070709710181531 Latour, B. (1988). Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society (New editio., p. 288). Harvard University Press, Cambridge Mass., USA. Latour, B. (1992). Where Are the Missing Masses? The Sociology of Mundane Artifacts’'. (W. E. Bijker & J. Law, Eds.)TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY, 225–258. Retrieved from http://www.brunolatour.fr/sites/default/files/50-MISSING-MASSES-GB.pdf Latour, B. (1999). Pandora’s hope: essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge Mass., USA,: Harvard University Press. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

74

Lau, C., Faerch, K., Glümer, C., Toft, U., Tetens, I., Borch-Johnsen, K., & Jørgensen, T. (2004). Evaluation of dietary intake in a Danish population: the Inter99 study. Scandinavian Journal of Food & Nutrition, 48(3), 136–143. doi:10.1080/11026480410000931 Lie, M., & Sørensen, H. K. (1996). Making Technology Our Own? Domesticating Technology onto Everyday Life. In M. Lie & H. K. Sørensen (Eds.), Making Technology Our Own? Domesticating Technology onto Everyday Life (2nd ed., pp. 1–30). Scandinavia University Press. Lindseth, A., & Norberg, A. (2004). A phenomenological hermeneutical method for researching lived experience. Scandinavian journal of caring sciences, 18(2), 145–53. doi:10.1111/j.14716712.2004.00258.x Lund, T. B., O’Doherty Jensen, K., & Andersen, L. M. (2011). Økologiske forbrugere i Danmark – hvem er de? [Organic consumers in Denmark – Who are they?]. In G. Tveit & P. Sandøe (Eds.), Økologiske fødevarer – hvor bevæger forbrugerne sig hen? [Organic foods – which direction are consumers taking?]. Copenhagen: Centre for Bio-ethics and Risk Assessment, University of Copenhagen. Lund, TB., Andersen, LM & Jensen, K. O. (2012). The emergence of diverse organic consumers: Who are they and how do they shape demand? Copenhagen. Retrieved from http://okonomi.foi.dk/workingpapers/WPpdf/WP2012/W ... rganic_consumers.pdf Maiser, J. (n.d.). Eat Local Challenge. Retrieved February 01, 2013, from http://www.eatlocalchallenge.com/ McEwan, J. A., & Thomson, D. M. H. (1988). A behavioural interpretation of food acceptability. Food Quality and Preference, 1(1), 3–9. doi:10.1016/0950-3293(88)90002-X Meiselman, H. (2003). History of food acceptance research in the US Army. Appetite, 40(3), 199–216. doi:10.1016/S0195-6663(03)00007-2 Meiselman, H. L., & MacFie, H. J. H. (1996). The contextual basis for food acceptance, food choice and food intake: the food, the situation and the individual. (pp. 239–263). Blackie Academic & Professional. Meiselman, Herbert L., & MacFie, H. J. H. (1996). food choice, acceptance and consumption (p. 397). Chapman and Hall. Mennell, S., Murcott, A., & Van Otterloo, A. H. (1994). The sociology of food: eating, diet, and culture. London: Sage. Messier, V., Hayek, J., Karelis, A. D., Messier, L., Doucet, E., Prud’homme, D., … Strychar, I. (2010). Anthropometric, metabolic, psychosocial and dietary factors associated with dropout in overweight and obese postmenopausal women engaged in a 6-month weight loss programme: a MONET study. The British journal of nutrition, 103(08), 1230–5. doi:10.1017/S0007114509993023 Meyer, C. (2012). The New Nordic Cuisine Movement. Retrieved July 18, 2012, from http://www.clausmeyer.dk/en/the_new_nordic_cuisine_.html Meyer, C. (2013). Newletter from Meyer’s House of Food. Newsletter from Meyer’s House of Food, 03.04.2014. Retrieved March 04, 2013, from http://www.clausmeyer.dk/newsletter_preview/548ad59b52b9d7b9e7610949acb0f8e2/

75

Meyer, C., & Astrup, A. (2002). Spis igennem [Eat what you can] (1st ed., p. 312). Copenhagen: Politiken. Meyer, C., & Astrup, A. (2011). Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad [The New Nordic Diet] (p. 160). FDB, Meyers Madhus og Forskningscenter OPUS. Meyer, C., & Astrup, A. (2012). Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad. Spis efter årstiden [The New Nordic Diet. Eat according to the season]. Strandberg for FDB. Meyer, C., Mithril, C., Blauert, E., & Holt, M. K. (2010). Grundlag for Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad [The fundament for the New Nordic Diet]. The research center OPUS, Copenhagen University, Denmark. Retrieved from http://www.foodoflife.dk/~/media/Foodoflife/docs/pdf/opus/WP 1/100823_Grundlag for Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad_Pressem%C3%B8de.ashx Meyer’s House of Food. (2012). Meyer’s House of Food. Meyer’s House of Food. Retrieved August 20, 2012, from http://www.clausmeyer.dk/en/ Miele, M., & Murdoch, J. (2002). The Practical Aesthetics of Traditional Cuisines: Slow Food in Tuscany. Sociologia Ruralis, 42(4), 312–328. doi:10.1111/1467-9523.00219 Mithril, C., Dragsted, L. O., Meyer, C., Blauert, E., Holt, M. K., & Astrup, A. (2012). Guidelines for the New Nordic Diet. Public health nutrition, 1–7. doi:10.1017/S136898001100351X Morgan, D. L. (1996). FOCUS GROUPS. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 129–152. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2083427 Möhring, M. (2008). Transnational food migration and the internalization of food consumption: ethnic cuisine in West Germany. In A. Nützenadel & F. Trentmann (Eds.), Food and globalization: consumption, markets and politics in the modern world (pp. 129–150). Nelson, M. (1999). Nutrition and health inequalities. In D. Gordon et al. (Ed.), Inequalities in health: Studies in poverty, inequality and social exclusion. Bristol: The Policy Press. Nielsen, A., Korzen, S., & Holm, L. (2008). Inverting the food pyramid? Social and cultural acceptability of Walter Willett’s dietary recommendations among people with weight concerns. Appetite, 51(1), 178– 86. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2008.02.011 Niva, M. (2008). Consumers and the conceptual and practical appropriation of functional foods. National Consumer Research Centre, Helsinki. Retrieved from http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-698-174-4 Niva, M., Jauho, M., & Mäkelä, J. (2013). “If I drink it anyway, then I rather take the light one”. Appropriation of foods and drinks designed for weight management among middle-aged and elderly Finns. Appetite, 64C, 12–19. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2012.12.019 Nordea-fonden. (n.d.). Nordea-fonden. Retrieved January 05, 2013, from https://www.nordeafonden.dk/english Nordic Council of Ministers. (2007). New Nordic Food. Copenhagen: Scanprint A/S, Århus. Retrieved October 30, 2012, from http://www.norden.org/en/news-and-events/news/new-nordic-food-at-the-uncooking-for-a-sustainable-future

76

Nordisk Ministerråd. (n.d.-a). NEW NORDIC FOOD II PROGRAMME. Retrieved January 05, 2013, from http://newnordicfood.org/about-nnf-ii/ Nordisk Ministerråd. (n.d.-b). Nordic Cook Books. Retrieved February 01, 2013, from http://www.nfd.nynordiskmad.org/fileadmin/webmasterfiles/Billeder/Checklista Kokböcker.pdf Nordisk Ministerråd. (2005). Århus-deklarationen om ny nordisk mad [The Aarhus Declaration on Nordic food] . Retrieved from http://nynordiskmad.org/fileadmin/webmasterfiles/PDF/AArsrapport_07/AArhusdeklarationen_Bil2.pdf O’Doherty Jensen, K. (2009). Sociological aspects of meat in meals – cultural impacts and meal patterns. In Proceedings of the 55th International Congress of Meat Science and Technology. Copenhagen. Retrieved from http://www.icomst2009.dk. O’Doherty Jensen, K., Holm, L., & Jensen, K. O. D. (1999). Preferences, Quantities and Concerns: SocioCultural Perspectives on the Gendered Consumption of Foods. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 53(53), 351–359. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10369489 OPUS. (2009a). Enhanced quality of LIFE through Nordic food. LIFE. Retrieved January 05, 2013, from http://www.foodoflife.dk/Opus/English/press/press_releases/999_nnd.aspx OPUS. (2009b). Can obesity be fought with good taste as the weapon? foodoflife.dk. LIFE. Retrieved August 20, 2012, from http://www.foodoflife.dk/Opus/konference_09/konference.aspx OPUS. (2009c). Low hedonic value of the recommended diet as a barrier to consumer acceptance. foodoflife.dk. LIFE. Retrieved July 12, 2012, from http://www.foodoflife.dk/Opus/English/background/bg6.aspx OPUS. (2009d, June 25). Ny nordisk madkultur skal give os bedre liv [New Nordic food culture is going to give us a better life]. foodoflife.dk. Servicedesk. Retrieved March 30, 2013, from http://cms.ku.dk/sitecore_import/ali-testerher/opus_kopi/opus/presse/pressemeddelelser/998_konference09/ OPUS. (2010). Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad skal testes [New Nordic Diet is going to be tested]. LIFE. Retrieved February 20, 2013, from http://www.foodoflife.dk/nyheder/2010/984_shopus.aspx OPUS. (2012a). Food of LIFE, OPUS – healthier food, better life, New Nordic Diet. foodoflife.dk. LIFE. Retrieved July 12, 2012, from http://www.foodoflife.dk/Opus/English.aspx OPUS. (2012b). OPUS Supermarket intervention, “SHOPUS”. foodoflife.dk. LIFE. Retrieved July 12, 2012, from http://www.foodoflife.dk/Opus/English/wp/supermarket.aspx Ostrom, M. (2006). Everyday Meanings of “ Local Food ”: Views from Home and Field. Community Development, 37(1), 65–78. Oudshoorn, N., & Pinch, T. (2003). How Users Matter: The Co-Construction of Users and Technology. (N. Oudshoorn & T. Pinch, Eds.)Engineering (p. 360). MIT Press. doi:10.1111/j.14684446.2004.00040_10.x Panayi, P. (2008). Spicing up Britain: The multicultural history of British food. London. London: Reaktion.

77

Pantzar, M., & Shove, E. (2010). Understanding innovation in practice: a discussion of the production and re-production of Nordic Walking. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 22(4), 447–461. doi:10.1080/09537321003714402 Pedersen, A. N., Fagt, S., Groth, M. V., Christensen, T., Biltoft-Jensen, A., Matthiessen, J., … Trolle, E. (2010). Danskernes kostvaner 2003 - 2008 - Hovedresultater [Dietary habits in Denmark 2003-2008. Main results ]. Fødevareinstituttet, Danmarks Tekniske Universitet. Retrieved from http://www.foedevarestyrelsen.dk/SiteCollectionDocuments/25_PDF_word_filer til download/07kontor/DanskernesKostvaner2010.pdf Pilgrim, F. J. (1957). The components of food acceptance and their measurement. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 5(2), 171–5. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/13410821 Plum, C. (2010). The Scandinavian Kitchen. Kyle Books. Reckwitz, A. (2002). Towards a Theory of Social practices. A Development in Culturalist Theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5(2), 243–263. doi:10.1177/13684310222225432 Resano, H., Pérez-Cueto, F. J. A., Sanjuán, A. I., De Barcellos, M. D., Grunert, K. G., & Verbeke, W. (2011). Consumer satisfaction with dry-cured ham in five European countries. Meat science, 87(4), 336–43. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.11.008 Rousseau, S. (2012). Food media : celebrity chefs and the politics of everyday interference / (English ed.). London ;: Berg,. Røpke, I. (2009). Theories of practice — New inspiration for ecological economic studies on consumption. Ecological Economics, 68(10), 2490–2497. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.05.015 Saxe, H., Larsen, T. M., & Mogensen, L. (2012). The global warming potential of two healthy Nordic diets compared with the average Danish diet. Climatic Change. doi:10.1007/s10584-012-0495-4 Scandinavian Cooking AS. (n.d.). New Scandinavian Cooking. Retrieved January 05, 2013, from http://www.newscancook.com/series-guide/ Schatzki, T. (1996). Social Practices: A Wittgensteinian approach to human Activity and the Social. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schatzki, T. R. (2002). The Site of the Social: A Philosophical Account of the Constitution of Social Life and Change. Library (p. 295). Pennsylvania State University Press. Schatzki, T. R., Cetina, K. K., & Savigny, E. Von. (2001). The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory. London and New York: Routledge. Serra-Majem, L., Bach-Faig, A., Miranda, G., & Clapes-Badrinas, C. (2011). Foreword: Mediterranean diet and climatic change. Public Health Nutrition, 14(12A), 2271–2273. doi:10.1017/S1368980011002503 Short, F. (2003). Domestic cooking skills - what are they ? Journal of the HEIA, 10(3), 177–185. Shove, Elisabeth. (2003). Comfort, cleanliness + convenience. The social organization of normality. Oxford: Berg.

78

Shove, Elisabeth, Watson, M., Hand, M., & Ingram, J. (2007). The design of Everyday Life. Oxford: Berg. Shove, Elizabeth. (2009). Everyday practice and the Production and Consumption of Time. In Time, Consumption and Everyday Life. Practice, Materiality and Culture. Oxford: Berg. Shove, Elizabeth. (2010). Beyond the ABC: climate change policy and theories of social change. Environment and Planning A, 42(6), 1273–1285. doi:10.1068/a42282 Shove, Elizabeth, Pantzar, M., & Watson, M. (2012). The Dynamics of Social Practice: Everyday Life and how it Changes (p. 208). SAGE Publications Ltd. Sijtsema, S. J., Backus, G. B. C., Linnemann, a. R., & Jongen, W. M. F. (2004). Consumer orientation of product developers and their product perception compared to that of consumers. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 15(10), 489–497. doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2004.03.004 Silverstone, R. (1994). Television and Everyday Life (p. 216). Routledge. Silverstone, R., & Haddon, L. (1996). Design and the Domestication of ICTs : Technical Change and Everyday Life. Communication. Silverstone, R., & Hirsch, E. (Eds.). (1992). Consuming technologies: Media and information in domestic spaces. London and New York: Routledge. Skov, a R., Toubro, S., Raben, a, & Astrup, A. (1997). A method to achieve control of dietary macronutrient composition in ad libitum diets consumed by free-living subjects. European journal of clinical nutrition, 51(10), 667–72. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9347286 Smith, A., & MacKinnon, J. B. (n.d.). Local Diet, the 100 mile diet, eat locally, help local business and the planet. Retrieved February 01, 2013, from http://localdiet.org/ Sobal, J. (2005). Men, Meat, and Marriage: Models of Masculinity. Food and Foodways, 13(1-2), 135–158. doi:10.1080/07409710590915409 Steptoe, A., & Pollard, T. M. (1995). Development of a Measure of the Motives Underlying the Selection of Food: the Food Choice Questionnaire. Appetite,, 25, 267–284. The idea cassarole, ©. T. F. of L. S. (2010). Idégryden.dk [The idea casserole]. LIFE/OPUS. Retrieved August 28, 2012, from http://www.idegryden.dk/ Tv2 - Lorry. (2011). Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad - Interview med Claus Meyer og Arne Astrup [New Nordic Diet - Interview with Claus Meyer and Arne Astrup]. Tv2 - Lorry. Retrieved from http://www.lorry.dk/artikel/83172?autoplay=1&video_id=60766 TV2 Danmark. (2012). Se listen: Her kan du også få Noma-mad - TV 2 Finans [See the list: You can also get Noma-food here]. TV2 Danmark. Retrieved January 05, 2013, from http://finans.tv2.dk/nyheder/article.php/id-30182593:se-listen-her-kan-du-ogs%C3%A5-f%C3%A5nomamad.html TV2 Denmark. (2011). TV 2 News: “Nordic food on the table”. Retrieved from http://nyhedernedyn.tv2.dk/video/index/id/45058709/

79

Van der Lans, I. A. (2001). The role of the region of origin and EU certificates of origin in consumer evaluation of food products. European Review of Agriculture Economics, 28(4), 451–477. doi:10.1093/erae/28.4.451 Viestad, A. (2007). Kitchen of Light: The New Scandinavian Cooking. Artisan. Wansink, B. (2003). Profiling nutritional gatekeepers: three methods for differentiating influential cooks. Food Quality and Preference, 14(4), 289–297. doi:10.1016/S0950-3293(02)00088-5 Warde, A. (2005). Consumption and Theories of Practice. Journal of Consumer Culture, 5(2), 131–153. doi:10.1177/1469540505053090 Warde, A. (2009). Imagining British Cuisine: Representations of Culinary Identity in the Good Food Guide, 1951–2007. Food, Culture and Society: An International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 12(2), 151–171. doi:10.2752/175174409X400710 WHO. (2002). Food and Health in Europe. Copenhagen. Retrieved from http://www.euro.who.int/InformationSources/Publications/Catalogue/20030224_1 Wier, M., O’Doherty Jensen, K., Andersen, L. M., & Millock, K. (2008). The character of demand in mature organic food markets: Great Britain and Denmark compared. Food Policy, 33(5), 406–421. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2008.01.002 Woolgar, S. (1991). Configuring the user: the case of usability trials. In J. Law (Ed.), A Sociology of Monsters Essays on Power Technology and Domination (pp. 58–99). Routledge. Zepeda, L., & Deal, D. (2009). Organic and local food consumer behaviour: Alphabet Theory. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 33(6), 697–705. doi:10.1111/j.1470-6431.2009.00814.x

80

Part II Article 1: Consumer acceptance of the New Nordic Diet: An exploratory study Submitted to Appetite 26 October 2012 (Revised and resubmitted 6 February 2013)

Arun Micheelsen, Lotte Holm and Katherine O'Doherty Jensen

Abstract With direct reference to New Nordic Cuisine and Nordic dietary recommendations, the OPUS Research Centre in Denmark is developing and testing a healthy, regional New Nordic Diet (NND) that promises to have outstanding gastronomic properties. The NND is disseminated to Danish consumers with a view to improving public health. To explore the acceptability of the NND to consumers, a qualitative study comprising focus groups, home-testing of NND prototype meals and personal interviews was conducted in urban and rural areas (N=38). Most participants, particularly women and residents in urban areas, are positive towards the ideas underlying the development of this new diet and enjoy the taste and appearance of NND meals. Barriers to acceptance include the untraditional formats of NND meals, the time needed to prepare them, the unfamiliarity of ingredients, perceived problems regarding product availability, reservations about the elitist character of this project and unwillingness to exclude non-Nordic dishes on an everyday basis. The study concludes that several social and cultural barriers must be overcome if the NND shall constitute a source of improved public health. The pursuit of this objective could more fruitfully take its point of departure in in-depth consideration of existing food practices among Danish consumers.

Keywords: New Nordic Cuisine; food habits; consumers; meal formats; acceptability studies

81

Introduction Local food products appear to be an effective means of differentiating products within globalized markets (Resano et al. 2012), not least because some consumer segments perceive region of origin as an indicator of quality (van der Lans et al. 2001). The concept of terroir, which links products to a specific geographical region, is one marketing strategy employed by food producers (Aurier et al. 2005). In Southern Europe, the concept of terroir has a longstanding association with gastronomy, e.g. in French ’nouvelle cuisine’ and the Italian ‘slow food’ movement (cf. Miele & Murdoch 2002), occasionally feeding into discourses that advocate market protection (DeSoucey 2010). In Northern Europe, the terroir concept has yet to be used by larger food producers as a tool for product differentiation. Organic foods are often perceived as products with added-value, particularly among Danish consumers (Andersen & Lund 2011; Hjelmar 2011; Korzen & Lassen 2010), but this applies to imported as well as domestic products. However, the notion of Nordic terroir has been introduced by the New Nordic Cuisine movement, an innovative form of haute cuisine in Scandinavia. As presented in a manifesto formulated by gourmet chefs in 2003, New Nordic Cuisine draws its gastronomic qualities from local, seasonal foods and from wild foods indigenous to the Nordic region, while adopting an ethical stance towards animal welfare and environmental sustainability (Välimäki et al. 2003). The New Nordic Cuisine has been politically endorsed and financially supported by the Nordic Council of Ministers, while the gastronomic achievements of the restaurant, noma, in Copenhagen, recently awarded the titles of ‘World’s Best Restaurant’ and ‘Best Restaurant in Europe’ (cf. Mithril et al. 2012), have served to gain international recognition for New Nordic Cuisine.

82

With direct reference to New Nordic Cuisine, the OPUS Research Centre1 (20092013) was established in Denmark at the University of Copenhagen with the purpose of developing a New Nordic Diet (NND) fit for everyday consumption, testing its health benefits in controlled dietary interventions, and promoting its acceptance by Danes (OPUS 2012). The over-arching objective is to improve public health by transforming food habits in a manner that bridges the gap between habits that satisfy gastronomic criteria, as represented by New Nordic Cuisine, and those that accord with national dietary recommendations. This project is based on cooperation between nutritionists and other scientists, including sociologists and communication specialists, as well as gastronomic experts associated with New Nordic Cuisine. This paper reports the results of the first sociological investigation of how New Nordic Cuisine in the form of the NND is received by Danish consumers. Recently published guidelines for the NND regard three central principles: (1) health, (2) gastronomic potential and Nordic identity, and (3) sustainability (Mithril et al. 2012). The first concerns the prevention of weight gain and nutrition-related diseases, the improvement of general health, and compliance with Nordic dietary recommendations. The second regards foods produced in the Nordic countries, which express Nordic terroir and have exceptional gastronomic properties in terms of taste and quality. The third regards food security without jeopardizing the environment. This is to be achieved by focusing on locally grown, organic foods, sourcing wild game, foraged wild plants and fungi, reducing meat consumption and minimizing waste. Meat consumption in Denmark and other Nordic countries is among the highest in the world (Groth & Fagt 2001), and a 30% reduction is one of many points on which the NND deviates from usual dietary habits among Danes (Pedersen et. al. 2010). The NND excludes food products

1

OPUS is an acronym of the project ’Optimal well-being, development and health for Danish children through a healthy New Nordic Diet’ and is supported by a grant from the Nordea Foundation.

83

imported from outside the Nordic region and most processed foods. It prioritizes the consumption of fresh products, including game and animals from free-range animals, fish and seafood, wild plants and fungi, fruit and berries, root vegetables, legumes and full grain barley, oats and rye. From a sociological point of view, the objective of the OPUS Centre in regard to changing the dietary habits of Danes is an interesting ambition insofar as it rests on the supposition that consumers are willing to incorporate a dietary regime developed by experts into their everyday lives. Seen from a perspective that takes dietary habits to be taken-for-granted routine social practices (i.e. procurement, preparation, consumption and waste-disposal routines) (Gronow & Warde 2001; Warde & Hetherington 1994; Ilmonen 1991), this ambition would appear to be unrealistic since typical changes in food practices are understood to occur as gradual responses to changes the wider food system, and as adaptation to changes in the labour market, in household composition and in household resources. Even if consumers could be motivated to exclude familiar foods, and to buy and prepare new foods, such initiatives could only become sustained practices, according to this perspective, if supported by corresponding changes in the wider food system. Against this point of view, other sociologists conceive dietary habits in modern societies as being exposed to the authoritative voices of dietary regimes (Fischler 1980, 1988; Lupton 1996; Nielsen 2008). Some such regimes comprise a set of explicit principles regarding acceptable foods as well as norms for appropriate means of combining them in acceptable meals. From this perspective, modern consumers come to reflect upon food choice, as in the case of those who prioritize the consumption of organic foods, for example, or those who follow weight loss programmes. In partial contrast to both of these perspectives, Beardsworth and Keil (2002) characterise the culture of modern Western societies as comprising ‘menu pluralism’, in which many alternative schemes for structuring eating habits are on offer. Apart from ‘traditional’ menus,

84

which draw rules of food choice from customary practices, and ‘rational’ menus, which involve selection criteria for achieving a specified goal, they also identify ‘convenience’ menus devoted to minimizing time and effort when procuring and preparing food, ‘economy’ menus devoted to keeping costs within a strict budget, ‘hedonistic’ menus based on maximising gustatory pleasure, and ‘moral’ menus based on ethical selection criteria. From this perspective, the NND would be seen as a new dietary regime that combines ‘rational’, ‘hedonistic’ and ‘moral’ considerations.

Methods This study was designed to qualitatively explore the acceptability of the NND to Danish consumers in regard to: (1) the ideas underlying the NND, (2) the taste of NND and (3) the prospect of adopting the NND in everyday life. To advance beyond spontaneous responses, it was decided that participants should assess two NND meals prepared and consumed at home, based on recipes produced by OPUS. On this basis, the study sought to identify drivers and barriers with respect to the acceptability of the NND. Given the complexity of these tasks and the policy of obtaining richly detailed qualitative data, it was decided that sample size should comprise a maximum of 40 and a minimum of 30 adult consumers.

Population and sample Studies have shown that age, gender and household composition as well as level of urbanization and education influence the healthiness of food habits among Danes (Kjærnes et al. 2001; Groth, Fagt & Brøndsted 2001; Groth & Fagt 2001; Dynesen et al. 2003; Christoffersen 2004), their use of organic food products (Smed 2002; Wier et al. 2005; Lund et al. 2011; Denver et al. 2012), and their preferences for ‘traditional’ as compared to ‘modern’ dishes (Korzen et al. 2011). It was decided therefore that two focus groups would be recruited within the area of Copenhagen and its

85

suburbs, while two would be recruited from the area surrounding a provincial town (population 20,000), including nearby villages and rural areas (henceforth ‘urban’ and ‘rural’ groups respectively). Inclusion criteria for potential subjects were: (1) age within the range of 18-50 years, (2) the subject has full or shared responsibility for household shopping, and (3) is employed or engaged in fulltime education. The latter criterion was designed to exclude atypical households. In 2009, only a small minority of Danes in that age-group was neither employed nor pursuing education. Quota sampling was used whereby each focus group comprised a minimum of three persons within each of the following categories: men, women, one-person households, couples with no children living at home, households with children, those who have completed secondary education, and those who have completed or are undertaking tertiary education. The attempt was made to maximize the representation of age-groups within each focus group. Food preferences were established by the following question in the screening questionnaire: “I would like to hear whether you prefer traditional or modern dishes? Traditional dishes are for example roast pork and minced beef. Modern dishes are for example stir fry and pasta dishes”. Each focus group comprised a minimum of two persons who had selected each of the response categories: ‘traditional’, ‘modern’ and ‘both traditional and modern’. Vegetarians, persons suffering from food allergies and those in food-related occupations were excluded.

Recruitment Participants were recruited from a database with approximately 10,000 contacts by a professional agency, using a structured screening instrument administered by telephone interview. Among those who met all inclusion criteria, approximately half of those residing in an urban area declined to participate, while three quarters of those in rural areas did so. This relatively high refusal rate is attributed to the demands which this study placed on participants’ time. Forty one persons were

86

recruited, of whom 38 participated in a focus group interview, while 33 of these also fully participated in the succeeding phase of data collection. Six of these were selected for a follow-up personal interview, three of whom had agreed with the statement that they would like to make NND meals in future, while three had disagreed. Both men and women were represented in both subgroups, which also differed in regard to age-groups, household composition and place of residence.

Data collection All data were collected by the first author using three successive methods of data collection: (1) focus groups lasting between one and a half and two hours each, (2) questionnaire data and photodiaries collected from focus group participants in the course of one week during which they made two NND dinners in their homes, and (3) follow-up personal interviews with a selected sub-sample of participants also lasting one and a half to two hours each. The focus groups with urban participants were conducted at Copenhagen University, whereas those with rural participants were conducted in a hotel. Personal interviews were conducted in the homes of participants.

A semi-structured interview schedule was employed in the focus groups, designed to ensure that central themes would be discussed and elucidated while at the same time facilitating open reactions from individuals and informal exchange among participants. The two main themes regarded reactions to hearing about the NND concept and reactions to seeing and tasting NND foods. In order to provide a context for the discussion of these themes, the schedule opened with a discussion of everyday eating habits among participants. After introducing themselves, participants were asked to recount what they had eaten for dinner the previous day, followed up by asking, "Why did you/your family eat that particular meal?” The first main theme was introduced by reading aloud a written description of the NND, copies of which were then handed out. Each participant was asked to note his or her immediate reactions on the notepads provided, while

87

discussion was initiated by asking, “What do you think of the New Nordic Diet from OPUS?” The second main theme was introduced by serving an NND sample meal. Once again, participants were encouraged to note their reactions before discussion began. The moderator’s task was that of probing comments made with a view to clarifying the range of reactions at issue and asking questions such as, “Would you consider making a dish like that at home?”

A written description of the NND had not yet been published in 2009 when this study was planned. The description given to participants was therefore prepared in cooperation with the board of OPUS. Apart from listing the principles and typical food products included in the NND, it stated that the NND is a Nordic, sustainable, seasonal, and healthy diet that does not include nonNordic foods. It referred to New Nordic Cuisine and the restaurant noma in Copenhagen as its sources of inspiration, and briefly described the role of Meyer’s House of Food in developing a tasty NND and the role of Danish universities in testing and ensuring that this diet would be healthier to eat and more sustainable than ordinary Danish food habits. The sample NND meal served to participants in focus groups as well as the recipes and ingredients needed for making NND meals at home were developed by members of the Opus team. Focus group sessions were brought to a close by providing each participant with a basket containing the recipes and ingredients needed for making two NND prototype meals, instructions on how to produce a photo-diary of their dinner meals during the following week, and a questionnaire regarding the time taken to prepare and eat each dinner that week and with whom it had been shared. Instructions regarding the photo-diary were to take a picture of the place where dinner had been eaten each day and a close-up picture of the meal before and after consuming it. Photos were either mailed or e-mailed to the moderator. The questionnaire included additional questions regarding the assessment of NND meals, using five point Likert-scales, and inquiring in more depth about such topics as the use of recipes, ease of preparation and satisfaction with the

88

meal (see Table 1). A semi-structured follow-up telephone interview with each participant was undertaken during the same period for the purpose of encouraging compliance and screening potential interviewees for the follow-up personal interview. Follow-up interviews focussed in depth on the participant’s experience and assessment of NND meals in the context of his or her daily life and food habits. With the consent of all participants, focus group discussions were audio and videotaped, while follow-up personal interviews were audio-taped. All interviews were transcribed verbatim.

Data analysis Coding and analysis followed the principles of Template Analysis (Crabtree & Miller 1999; King 1998), in accordance with the interview themes described earlier. Approximately 13 main thematic codes were generated covering interpretations of OPUS and the NND as well as experiences related to preparing, consuming and procuring the NND. Descriptive analysis of questionnaire data was undertaken using SPSS, version 11. Participants’ photographs were used as a means of gauging the content and format of meals served during the week of data collection and specifically used as a point of departure in personal interviews regarding the assessment of NND meals.

Results Results are presented thematically such that data collected by different methods are combined. Findings regarding the everyday food habits of participants are presented first since these constitute a context for understanding their responses to and experiences of the new diet. An account of participants’ reception of the NND concept and of NND foods is then presented, followed by their assessments of their experience of preparing and consuming two NND meals. Although participants were not required to do any shopping in conjunction with this task, the issue of procuring NND

89

foods emerged as a central theme in the analysis and is also presented here. Drivers and barriers in regard to acceptance of the NND are discussed in the following section.

Food habits in everyday settings Participants explain how their meals depend on the time available for shopping, cooking and consumption. All agree that the preparation of elaborate or time-consuming meals only takes place during weekends, when there is more time to prepare demanding dishes and when guests are sometimes invited. The timing of meals and the frequency with which they are prepared and eaten at home differs according to household composition. Participants who are single appear not eat at a fixed hour and may often eat out with friends or buy take-away meals. Although in a less pronounced fashion, this is also the case among those who live with a partner and do not have children in their household. In sharp contrast, participants who do have children in their households – whether they are single parents or otherwise – stress the importance of home-cooked meals on a regular basis in their households. These participants, particularly women, tend to stress the fact that dinner-time is the event of the day during which all family members are gathered together. It is considered important that the food preferences of all family members are taken into account when preparing and presenting meals, thus ensuring that dinner-time is a peaceful event. This is sometimes achieved by involving children in the preparation of meals, but is more often reflected in the content and/or format of the dinners served. These are variously described as including foods that children like, “camouflaging” foods they dislike or offering the possibility of choice. One woman living in a rural area illustrates the latter approach in the following manner:

90

“…Mexican food – that’s nice and easy. There’s a lot of salad and different things, and then some nachos and taco-shells or burritos, and then some chicken or beef…” Asked what makes this “nice and easy”, she replies: “Oh, that’s because then everybody is satisfied! Everybody can take what ever they like. That’s probably the thing that makes it nice and easy.”

Participants’ preferences differ with regard to the traditional format of the Danish dinner, in which meat and gravy are central components, usually accompanied by potatoes and a vegetable. Relatively many from rural areas speak more fondly of this format, and relatively fewer of those from urban areas. Also, relatively many men, disregarding their place of residence, express a strong preference for meals in which meat and gravy are dominant components. Women, in contrast, express preferences for meals with vegetables as main components, stressing variety of colour as a signifier of their preferred meal formats.

Reception of the NND concept Based on the description of the NND presented in the focus groups, the majority of the participants interpret the principles of the NND in relation to current issues of public debate in Denmark, including climate change, organic versus conventional food production, and health issues. Hence, the focus upon using only Nordic foods is primarily seen in the light of global climate problems and as a way of reducing CO2 emissions by transporting products only within a limited geographical area. Participants not sharing this interpretation express reservations concerning the focus on Nordic foods, since they view this as excluding other cuisines and as tending to be somewhat nationalistic.

91

Perhaps due to the focus on environmental friendliness, animal welfare and health, all of which are widely associated with organic foods in Denmark (cf. Weir et al. 2008), most participants in all focus groups assume that NND foods are organic – although this was not mentioned in the description provided. Finally, almost all participants readily perceive the main purpose of the NND project as concerning the improvement of health, and in most cases – although by no means all – this is seen as a positive feature. Several participants in most focus groups – women more often than men – pronounce their agreement with the principles behind the NND, stressing their view that food should be produced in an environmentally friendly way and welcoming NND as an interesting, presumably tasty and healthy cuisine. One woman, the mother of children living in an urban area, expresses this view in the following way: “Well, I think it’s just bang on! Well, I must say, I think it's exciting. I think it’s the right way forward in relation to CO2, and I think those products are delicious – although I don’t use them in my own life. But I could do. I do go on mushroom trips and find this and that, but I could do that more often.” Typically, those who approve of the principles of the NND also tend to view its food products as being interesting and exciting. However, some critical opinions of the NND and of OPUS are raised by a minority in all focus groups. Some view the whole enterprise of creating a new healthy diet as a presumptuous attempt to dictate changes in dietary habits. One woman, a mother living in a rural area, expresses this opinion with some intensity: “Ha, I get offended and say, “So what?”…So, it’s meant to be healthier to eat and better for the environment than the ordinary food Danes eat every

92

day? Who do they think they are? In my opinion, the food I cook is healthy food. I do think about what I put into my mouth and into the mouths of my children […] and now they say that what I make is not healthy…” Some participants view NND foods – wild-game, free-range meat and seaweed – as indicators that this diet will appeal to up-market consumers living in the “big cities”, a view most often expressed by those living in rural areas. One man puts it this way: “Well, if you try to get Danes to eat any of those indigenous products – blueberries and chanterelles – there won’t be many that will eat them. So I’d say there would have to be made a very big effort to get people to eat them. Since it [the NND diet] would also be seen as being exclusive and snobbish, I think that would be very difficult.” A tendency to perceive the NND as constituting an elitist diet is strengthened by reference made to Meyer’s House of Food and to the restaurant noma in the statement provided. Several participants refer to these, viewing both as being specifically oriented towards an elite clientele living in the capital city. Reservations on this point are also directed towards the OPUS Centre, the body responsible for the development of the NND. Reservations about “organic” or “exotic” foods are also expressed by some, who view the principle of only using seasonal and local foods as being romantic and unrealistic. On the basis of the list of typical NND foods provided, some participants express reservations about whether these foods are available, how expensive they are likely to be and the amount of time that would be needed to prepare them. We return to these points in the following sections. Finally, among those who perceive the NND as being an up-market cuisine, reservations

93

are expressed about whether NND meals would accord with personal food preferences or with those of other family members.

Initial reception of the taste of NND A small sample meal was served in each focus group with a view to acquainting participants with the taste and appearance of NND foods and inviting their appraisal. The menu comprised roasted flank steak with pearl barley, kale salsa with apple, split pea purée and Oland wheat bun, followed by buttermilk mousse with sea buckthorn and sunflower croquante. Discussion focused upon the tastes, appearance, formats and names of these items, which were unfamiliar to many. Most approve of the tastes or find them interesting, but once again opinions are divided. Several participants – mainly women – express interest in and positive opinions about this sample meal. The relatively small amount of meat, the colour combination and the taste accord with their preferences and are viewed positively. They typically describe the taste as being natural, fresh or good, and appreciate that they can identify different flavours. Less enthusiastic participants, both men and women, consider the meal as lacking spicy flavours and an intensity of taste, while some are of the opinion that the small serving of meat would be enhanced by the provision of gravy, which they miss. Some of those who express criticism also focus upon the names of the individual dishes, pointing out their “snobbish” or “up-market” character, thus reinforcing the view that the NND is indeed an elitist diet.

Preparing two NND meals The NND meals to be prepared at home comprised: (1) a joint of lamb to be roasted with apple juice in a large oven-proof dish together with kohlrabi and a selection of root vegetables, and served in this dish with bread on the side, and (2) a vegetarian dish consisting of pearl barley with roasted

94

mushrooms to be served on a plate with a kale salsa topping and bread on the side (hereafter referred to as the lamb and pearl barley meal respectively). Almost all participants found the recipes easy to follow and the dishes easy to make (see Table 1), although some encountered difficulty in preparing the pearl barley meal. The main reason for this was that almost half of the participants do not possess the kitchen equipment recommended in the recipes – specifically, a food-processor for making the salsa. Although both meals had been designed as a complete main course, a quarter of the participants (26%) had changed the recipe for the lamb meal, either by serving it with the addition of potatoes, rice or pasta, by making and serving a gravy or adding ingredients such as tzatziki, garlic or spices. One third of the participants (33%) had changed the pearl-barley meal, mainly by serving it with meat. It thus emerges that most changes made had the function of changing the format of these meals in ways that more closely resemble the format of the traditional Danish meal, which includes meat as the centrepiece and a staple and gravy as accompaniments.

95

Table 1: Percentage of participants in focus groups who agree or totally agree with statements about NND following a home test of two NND meals (5-point Likert scale) Lamb-meal

Pearl-barely meal

%

%

(n = 34)

(n = 33)

Is easy to follow

100 (34)

88 (29)

Gives a clear picture of the meal

68 (23)

88 (21)

I changed the recipe

26 (9)

33 (11)

Is easy to make

91 (31)

76 (25)

I have the necessary cookware

94 (32)

52 (17)

Is as I expected it to be

47 (16)

45 (15)

Is familiar

48 (16)

39 (13)

Is healthier than dinners usually eaten

41 (14)

58 (19)

Is as filling as dinners usually eaten

50 (17)

73 (24)

Tastes well

71 (24)

82 (27)

Consumption by guests/family members:

(n = 28)

(n = 28)

Is as filling as dinners usually eaten

57 (16)

68 (19)

Tastes well

71 (20)

57 (16)

I would like to make this NND meal again

53 (18)

58 (19)

I would like to make NND meals in general

65 (22)

76 (25)

In general I am satisfied with the NND meal

68 (23)

82 (27)

The NND recipe:

Preparation of the NND meal:

Consumption of the NND-meal:

Satisfaction:

96

Table 2: Time used to prepare dinner meals during the test week NND Meals:

Other Meals:

Preparation time:

% (n)

% (n)

Less than 10 min.

-

17 (23)

10 to 20

2 (1)

16 (22)

21 to 30

11 (6)

16 (22)

31 to 40

11 (6)

22 (29)

More than 41 min.

77 (44)

28 (38)

Total:

101 (57)

99 (134)

Not surprisingly, most participants had used considerably more time than usual to prepare the NND meals during the test week (see Table 2). Responses to the questionnaire reveal that while the large majority (79%) of all other dinners prepared during that week had been accomplished within forty minutes or less, the preparation of most NND meals (77%) had taken longer. This use of additional time might be expected, since the NND meals are based on new recipes. Nevertheless, both in focus groups and personal interviews, participants stress that meals should fit within the time schedule of their everyday lives, which usually permits only little time for preparing meals – especially on weekdays. This may be one reason why, having made these meals and liked them, only little more than half of the participants (53% and 58 %, respectively) state that they would like to make either of these meals again.

Consuming two NND meals A large majority of participants report a general satisfaction with the lamb meal (68 %) and the pearl barley meal (82 %). However, only half find that the lamb meal is as filling as the meals they

97

usually eat, and satisfaction with the taste of the pearl barley meal is considerably lower among other household members and guests than among participants (see Table 1). A majority does not agree with statements that these NND meals are familiar or are as they had expected them to be. Somewhat surprisingly, a majority also does not agree that the lamb meal is healthier than the dinners they usually eat, although more than half (58 %) do rate the pearl barley meal as being healthier than their usual meals. Dissatisfaction with both meals focuses upon their format, a point that is further elucidated in personal interviews. Several reservations in regard to the format of these meals are identified among those who are otherwise generally positive to the NND. By design, the lamb meal with vegetables is to be cooked and served in a large oven-proof dish. Reservations regard the fact that this dish is perceived as having only two main components, such that a third component – either a staple such as potatoes or a side dish of salad – is perceived as lacking. This format is also perceived as being inconsistent with the idea that this dish constitutes a finer meal, which could be made at weekends or for special occasions. The ‘weekday’ character of this meal format is in turn seen as being inconsistent with the length of time needed to prepare it. Furthermore, this format does not fulfil the demand of being an “easy” meal in households that like to serve a number of dishes between which participants may choose. Finally, although these participants are generally satisfied with the pearl-barely meal, they express some reservations about its presentation on the plate since the meal only has one bright colour – the green colour of the kale salsa. Even though this colour is appreciated, it seems that one colour does not satisfy some participants. Finally, these participants make it clear that they would never restrict themselves to one cuisine such as the NND since they enjoy culinary divergence in their everyday lives. They use vacations, cookbooks and TV-programs as sources of culinary inspiration that can help their efforts to make meals that are an aesthetic as well as pleasant social experience for family members.

98

Among those who are generally negative towards the NND there are several points of criticism in regard to the taste and meal format. It is pointed out that the lamb meal needs more spices such as salt, pepper and garlic, while the apple taste in both meals is too dominant for their taste. In particular, the absence of meat in the pearl-barely meal is an issue among participants who are less inclined to accept NND, since meat is conceived as an integral component of the usual format of meals at dinnertime. Likewise, the absence of potatoes and gravy as accompaniments to the lamb meal is pointed out. Nevertheless, these participants do express positive surprise about the taste of the pearl-barely meal, recounting that they like this dish and that mushrooms almost lend sufficient taste, such that meat is missed less than expected. Without probing, they explain that their meal preferences are founded in the dietary habits and traditions of their parents – or grandparents. One woman, a single mother living in a rural area, emphasizes this point during her interview: “Well, I like to eat the things that I can remember getting as a child – just normal traditional dishes and that sort of thing.” The issue of providing for the possibility of individual choice of dishes within the meal does not present itself as a problem in households that are less inclined to accept NND. On the contrary, as it emerges from photo-diaries, usual meals in these households comprise a stew, casserole or a pizza to be shared among participants. A central reason why those who are negative towards the NND express reluctance about the idea of adopting this new diet is that it would represent a break with family meal traditions.

Procurement of NND foods Although shopping for foods that would accord with the principles of NND was not a task to be undertaken, many participants expressed reservations about the availability of these products, their expected cost and the time needed to procure or prepare them. NND foods are seen as being

99

unfamiliar, a point that is confirmed by responses to the questionnaire (see Table 1). Several focus group participants assume that NND foods would be expensive to buy and generally not available in local supermarkets. The issue of availability is more clearly pronounced as constituting a problem in the focus groups drawn from rural areas, but also arises in urban focus groups. It is also clearly pronounced in personal interviews, especially by those who had declared themselves unwilling to make NND meals in the future. The assumption that unfamiliar foods are not readily available appears to underlie an unwillingness to make NND meals again. In contrast, interviewees who are positive towards the idea of making NND meals in future are already well acquainted with NND foods. This is illustrated in the following excerpt from an interview with a woman living with her partner and children in an urban area: “They [NND meals] look a lot like that Claus Meyer food – so, I thought, “That’s fine, we already eat that, we’ll do fine.” And I thought it was cool, those things [NND foods]. When I need something, we’ll have it – rapeseed oil and stuff like that. We have…those things – those are the things we eat, basically.” Thus, some participants are not merely familiar with NND foods, but these foods already appear to be an integral feature of their food habits. Responses to the questionnaire (see Table 1), regarding the familiarity of the NND meals and whether they are as expected, indicate that these participants constitute a minority in these focus groups.

Discussion The findings regarding the importance of time as a factor in the everyday food habits of consumers are well documented (Cheng et al. 2007). Likewise, the prioritization of home-cooked meals in 100

households with children and the gendered character of food preferences with reference to meat and vegetables respectively, are familiar features of food habits in Denmark and elsewhere (Kjærnes et al. 2001; Holm & Kildevang 1996 ; O’Doherty Jensen & Holm 1999; Lupton 1996; Moisio et al. 2004; Beardsworth & Kiel 2002). The importance of meal format, which emerges as a central theme in the present study, has been most thoroughly explored in regard to British food habits (Douglas & Nicod 1974; Murcott 1982; Charles & Kerr 1988). But it has also been shown that the format of the British ‘proper dinner’ appears in Nordic eating patterns (Mäkelä 2001) and that it closely resembles the preferred format of the traditional Danish dinner (O’Doherty Jensen 2009). A recent survey documents that 29 % of Danish consumers prefer a ‘traditional’ dinner, in which meat is the main component, 36 % prefer ‘modern’ dishes such as a stir-fry or pasta dish, while the remaining 35 % are equally pleased by either format (Korzen et al. 2012). It has also been shown that preferences for ‘traditional’ meals are more prevalent in rural and less urbanized areas of Denmark than in larger cities (O’Doherty Jensen & Lund 2012). A very large majority of Danish consumers express approval of the environmentally friendly character of organic food production, as well as its emphasis upon animal welfare and human health (Weir et al. 2008). However, only 50 % of Danish households actually purchase organic products with notable frequency (Lund et al. 2011). Among these, the disparity between their expressed attitudes and the actual frequency of their purchases over time is attributed to the slow pace at which a wide range of organic products became readily accessible on the Danish market, while household resources of time and/or money remain decisive factors in regard to high frequencies of consumption (O’Doherty Jensen et al. 2011; Lund et al. 2011). Besides organic consumption, the NND project adds the objectives of restricting consumption to regional products in season, adhering to national dietary recommendations, restricting the consumption of meat and accepting a cuisine that deviates from traditional meal formats.

101

Our findings indicate that the drivers likely to advance a positive reception of the NND are approval of the principles underlying NND, particularly in regard to health and environmental sustainability, and approval of the taste of NND foods and meal formats. These conditions appear to be met to a greater extent among those living in urbanized areas as compared to rural areas, among women as compared to men, among consumers who express a preference for ‘modern’ as compared to ‘traditional’ dishes and meal formats, and in households that prioritize the time needed to prepare home-cooked meals from fresh ingredients as compared to those who do not. The barriers that present themselves are many. This study throws light upon some factors influencing consumer demand, while factors regarding the production, distribution and cost of NND foods relative to other foods have not been explored. It can be noted in light of consumer studies of organic foods, however, that premium pricing and/or lack of support for promoting Nordic foods on the part of major distributors would constitute considerable barriers to consumer demand (cf. O’Doherty Jensen et al. 2011; Lund & Andersen 2011). The extent to which consumer interest might support the emergence of region-of-origin labelling within the Nordic region or yield the possibility of achieving competitive advantage within the retail sector have not been explored in this study. On the surface, the unfamiliarity of some NND foods and their perceived lack of availability appear to constitute central barriers to their consumption. It is also clear that consumer appropriation of this diet would call for a considerable investment of time with regard to both procurement and food preparation. The majority view that NND meals taste well is offset by lacking resources of time and equipment, dissatisfaction with meal formats, and lack of appreciation of the vegetarian meal among other members of the household. Even more, strong cultural barriers to the acceptance of the NND are the role of meat in preferred traditional meal formats (cf.

102

O’Doherty Jensen 2009), the role of processed products and imported produce in current food habits, the widespread conviction among Danish consumers that current food habits are healthy (Groth et.al. 2009) and, among those who embrace ‘modern’ food tastes, a preference for including a diversity of cuisines in the diet. Particularly among those who express a preference for traditional cuisine, the NND with its ties to New Nordic Cuisine tends to be seen as constituting an upmarket, elitist option, concocted by gourmets and experts, who are seeking to impose their food preferences on the population. On this basis it can be said that consumers whose preferences include ‘traditional’, ‘convenience’ and ‘economy’ menus (cf. Beardsworth & Kiel 2002) are less likely to find the dietary options of NND acceptable on an everyday basis. The results of this study should be viewed in relation to a possible recruitment bias, given educational levels among participants that are higher than that of the population and an unusually high refusal rate among potential participants from rural areas. In light of the demands which this study placed upon participants, it would seem likely that consumers with greater than average resources of time and interest in food were willing to participate. In that event, barriers to the acceptability of NND cuisine may be greater than indicated by these results.

Concluding remarks Barriers to the acceptance of the NND by Danish consumers suggest that the status of this diet in the foreseeable future will be that of a tasty option with particular appeal to those who find its underlying principles inspiring. In cultural terms these are consumers who accept the need to base their consumption upon ethical principles of food production and embrace ‘modern’ food habits with preference for a diversity of cuisines. In social terms these are more likely to be women, to live in urban areas, to have a relatively high level of education and resources of time and/or money to expend upon the procurement and preparation of food.

103

Since these data were collected in 2009, the NND has drawn considerable attention in public media in Denmark, some supermarkets have launched several Nordic food products, and a cookbook designed to introduce New Nordic recipes (Meyer & Astrup 2011) has sold well on the Danish market. It has yet to be seen whether these events indicate that barriers to the acceptability of the NND identified in this study can be overcome. While this study only concerns potential demand and not the supply of NND foods, it should be noted that lower costs and better availability are likely to increase demand. Nevertheless, the findings of this study suggest that considerable social and cultural barriers must be overcome if the NND shall constitute a source of improved public health among the broader population rather than a source of gastronomic and ethical inspiration for consumer segments with specific interest in new food trends. These findings also underline that when seeking to introduce new dietary principles it is necessary to base this ambition on in-depth consideration of already existing food practices and concerns in the population at issue.

Acknowledgements The NND prototype meals and taste samples employed in this study were designed by Meyer’s House of Food. The authors thank Claus Meyer, Emil Blauer and Mathias Krog Holt from Meyer’s House of Food for their valuable contribution to the study. The OPUS steering committee participated in designing the ‘Description of the New Nordic Diet’ presented to participants in this study. The authors thank the OPUS Centre Director, Professor Arne Astrup, for this contribution. Finally, and most significantly, the authors would like to thank the informants for their participation in this study.

104

Role of the funding source The OPUS research project is funded by the Nordea Foundation. The article manuscript has been approved by the OPUS’ Management Team prior to its submission. For correspondence regarding OPUS: Eva Gleje, Administrative Manager, Department of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, Faculty of Science, University of Copenhagen, Rolighedsvej 30, 1958 Frederiksberg C, Denmark (e-mail: [email protected]).

105

References Andersen, L.M. & Lund, T.B. (2011). Udvikling I det økologiske forbrug [Development of organic consumption]. In G Tveit & P Sandøe (eds.), Økologiske fødevarer – hvor bevæger forbrugerne sig hen? [Organic foods – which direction are consumers taking?] Copenhagen: Centre for Bio-ethics and Risk Assessment, University of Copenhagen.

Aurier, P., Fort, F. & Sirieix, L. (2005). Exploring terroir product meanings for consumers. Anthropology of food [Online], 4.

Beardsworth, A. & Keil, T. (2002). Sociology on the Menu: Invitation to the Study of Food and Society. London and New York: Routledge.

Charles, N. & Kerr, M. (1988). Women, Food and Families. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Cheng, S-L., Olsen, W., Southerton, D., & Warde, A. (2007). The Changing Practice of Eating: Evidence from UK Time Diaries, 1975 and 2000. The British Journal of Sociology, 58, 1, 39-61.

Christoffersen, M. N. (2004). Familiens udvikling i det 20. århundrede. Demografiske struktur og processer. [The development of the family in the 20th century. Demographic structures and processes] Copenhagen: Socialforskningsinstituttet 04:07.

106

Crabtree, B.F. & Miller, W.L. (1999). Using codes and code manuals: a template organizing style of interpretation.In B.F. Crabtree and W.L. Miller, (eds.), Doing Qualitative Research, 2nd edition. Newbury Park, California: Sage.

Denver, S., Christensen, T., Jensen, J.D. & O’Doherty Jensen, K. (2012). The stability and instability of organic expenditures in Denmark, Great Britain and Italy. Journal of International Food and Agribusiness Marketing 24, 1, 47-65.

DeSoucey, M. (2010). Gastronationalism: Food Traditions and Authenticity in the European Union. American Sociology Review, 75(3), 432-455.

Douglas, M. & Nicod, M. (1974). Taking the Biscuit: The Structure of British Meals. New Society, 30, 744-747.

Dynesen, A.W., Haraldsdóttir, J., Holm, L., & Astrup, A. (2003). Socio-demographic differences in dietary habits described by food frequency questions - results from Denmark. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 57, 1586-1597.

Fischler, C. (1980). Food habits, social change and the nature/culture dilemma. Social Science Information, 19,6, 937-953.

Fischler, C. (1988). Food, self and identity. Social Science Information/sur les sciences sociales, 27,2, 275-292.

107

Gronow, J. & Warde, A. (2001) (eds.). Ordinary Consumption. London: Routledge.

Groth, M.V. & Fagt, S. (2001). Udviklingen i kostvaner i Danmark og Sverige siden 1960'erne [Trends in dietary habits in Denmark and Sweden since the 1960s]. Ugeskr Læger 163,425–429.

Groth, M.V., Fagt, S. & Brøndsted, L. (2001). Social determinants of dietary habits in Denmark. EuR J Clin Nutr, 55, 959-966.

Groth, M. V., Sørensen, M., Biltoft-Jensen, A., Matthiessen, J., Kørup, K. & Fagt, S. (2009). Danskernes måltidsvaner, holdninger, motivation og barrierer for at spise sundt 1995-2008, [Meal habits, attitudes, motivation and barriers to healthy eating in Denmark 1995-2008] Fødevareinstitutet, Danmarks Tekniske Universitet, Søborg.

Hjelmar, U. (2011). Consumers’ purchase of organic food products. A matter of convenience and reflexive practices. Appetite 56, 336–344

Holm, L. & Kildevang, H. (1996). Consumers' views on food quality. A qualitative interview study. Appetite 27, 1-14.

Ilmonen, K., (1991). Change and stability in Finnish eating habits. In Fürst, E.L., Prättälä, R., Ekström, M., Holm, L. & Kjaernes, U. (eds.), Palatable Worlds: Sociocultural Food Studies. Oslo: Solum Forlag, 169–184.

108

King, N. (1998). Template analysis. In G. Symon & C.Cassell (eds.), Qualitative Methods and Analysis in Organizational Research. London: Sage

Korzen S., Sandøe P. & Lassen J. (2011). Don't wash my meat: public perceptions of decontamination in meat production, British Food Journal, 113, 5, 598 – 612.

Korzen, S. & Lassen, J.(2010). Meat in context. On the relation between perceptions and contexts, Appetite, 54, 2, 274-281

Kjærnes, U. (ed.) (2001). Eating Patterns: A Day in the Lives of the Nordic Peoples. Oslo: SIFO, Report No. 7.

Lund, T.B. & O’Doherty Jensen, K. (2008). Consumption of organic foods from a life history perspective: an explorative study among Danish consumers. Copenhagen: University of Copenhagen, Dept. of Human Nutrition. Online: http://orgprints.org/15200.

Lund, T.B., O’Doherty Jensen, K. & Andersen, L.M. (2011). Økologiske forbrugere i Danmark – hvem er de? [Organic consumers in Denmark – Who are they?] In G. Tveit & P. Sandøe (eds.), Økologiske fødevarer – hvor bevæger forbrugerne sig hen? [Organic foods – which direction are consumers taking?] Copenhagen: Centre for Bio-ethics and Risk Assessment, University of Copenhagen.

109

Lund, T.B., Andersen, L.M. & O’Doherty Jensen, K. (2012). The emergence of diverse organic consumers: Who are they and how do they shape demand? Working paper, Institute of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen. Online: http://orgprints.org/20542/

Lupton, D. (1996). Food, the Body and the Self. London: Sage.

Meyer, C. & Astrup, A. (2011). Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad [New Nordic everyday food]. Albertslund: FDB, Meyers Madhus og KU LIFE/ Forskningscenter OPUS 2011.

Meyer’s House of Food. (2012). Meyer’s House of Food. Meyer’s House of Food. Retrieved August 20, 2012, from http://www.clausmeyer.dk/en/

Miele, M. & Murdoch, J. (2002). The Practical Aesthetics of Traditional Cuisines: Slow Food in Tuscany. Sociologia Ruralis, 42, 4, 312-328.

Mithril, C. E., Dragsted, L. O., Meyer, C., Blauert, E., Holt, M. K., & Astrup, A. (2012).Guidelines for the New Nordic Diet: [Epub ahead of print]. Public Health Nutrition, 1-7.

Moisio, R., Arnould, E.J., & Price, L.L. (2004). Between mothers and markets. Constructing family identity through homemade food. Journal of Consumer Culture, 4, 3, 361-384.

Murcott, A. (1982). On the social significance of the "cooked dinner" in South Wales. Social Science Information/sur les sciences sociales, 21,4-5, 677-696.

110

Mäkelä, J. (2001). The meal format. In Eating patterns. A day in the lives of Nordic people, U. Kjærnes, ed., Lysaker, Norge: SIFO - Statens institutt for forbruksforskning, pp. 125-158.

Nielsen, A. (2008). Keeping it down and getting it right: a sociological analysis of weight control and dietary change in an experimental setup. University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Life Sciences, Department of Human Nutrition, ISBN 978-87-7611-215-8.

O’Doherty Jensen, K. (2009). Sociological aspects of meat in meals – cultural impacts and meal patterns. Copenhagen: Proceedings of the 55th International Congress of Meat Science and Technology. Online: http://www.icomst2009.dk.

O’Doherty Jensen, K. & Holm, L. (1999). Preferences, quantities and concerns: Socio-cultural perspectives on the gendered consumption of foods, Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 53, 351-359.

O’Doherty Jensen, K. & Lund, T.B. (2012). Økologiske fødevareforbrug [Consumption of organic foods]. In L. Holm & S. T. Christensen (eds.), Mad, mennesker og måltider [Food, people and meals]. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.

O’Doherty Jensen, K., Denver, S. & Zanoli, R. (2011). Actual and potential development of consumer demand on the organic food market in Europe. Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences. 58, 79-84.

OPUS (2012). Food of LIFE, OPUS – healthier food, better life, New Nordic Diet. http://www.foodoflife.dk/Opus/English.aspx (accessed April 2012).

111

Pedersen, A., Fagt, S., Groth, M.V., Christensen, T., Biltoft-Jensen, A., Matthiessen, J., Andersen, N.L., Kørup, K., Hartkopp, H., Ygil, K.H., Hinsch, H.-J., Saxholt, E., & Trolle, E. (2010). Danskernes kostvaner 2003-2008. Hovedresultater [Dietary habits in Denmark 2003-2008, main results], Søborg, Fødevareinstituttet, Danmarks Tekniske Universitet.

Resano, H., Sanjuán, A. I. & Albisu, L. M. (2012). Consumers’ response to the EU Quality policy allowing for heterogeneous preferences. Food Policy, 37, 355–365.

Smed, S. (2002). A socio-demographic analysis of Danish food demand. FOI report no. 146. Copenhagen: Copenhagen University, Dept. of Food and Resource Economics.

van der Lans, I. A., van Ittersum, K., De Cicco, A. & Loseby, M. (2001). The role of the region of origin and EU certificates of origin in consumer evaluation of food products. Eur Rev Agric Econ, 28 (4), 451-477.

Välimäki, H. Sørensen, L., Dahlgren, M. et al (2004). Manifesto for the New Nordic Kitchen. http://www.clausmeyer.dk/en/the_new_nordic_cuisine_/manifesto_.html.

Warde, A. & Hetherington, K. (1994). English households and routine food practices: a research note, Sociological Review, 42(4), 758-778.

Wier M., Andersen, LM. & Millock, K. (2005). Information provision, consumer perceptions and values – the case of organic foods. In C. Russell & S. Krarup (eds.), Environment, Information and

112

Consumer behaviour. New Horizons in Environmental Economics series. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Wier, M., O’Doherty Jensen, K., Andersen, L.M., Millock, K. & Rosenkvist, L. (2008). The character of demand in mature organic food markets: Great Britain and Denmark compared, Food Policy, 33: 406-421.

113

Article 2: The acceptability of the New Nordic Diet by participants in a controlled six-month dietary intervention Submitted to Food, Quality and Preference 20 February 2013

Arun Micheelsen, Louis Havn, Sanne Kellebjerg Poulsen, Thomas Meinert Larsen, and Lotte Holm

Abstract Taking low hedonic value to be an important barrier to public acceptance of dietary recommendations, the OPUS Center designed a healthy and palatable ‘New Nordic Diet’ (NND) with the aim of improving public health in Denmark. A controlled intervention study compared NND’s health potential with a control diet labeled ADD (the ‘Average Danish Diet’). A sociological acceptability study measured acceptance of the two diets against an eating index expressing eating qualities and a practical index expressing practical implications of the diet in everyday life. The NND had high eating acceptance and low practical acceptance. The ADD had low eating acceptance but high practical acceptance. NND participants already exhibiting healthy eating habits showed high acceptance of the NND. The ADD had high acceptance among the ADD participants already exhibiting less healthy eating habits. Low practical acceptance may hinder public acceptance of the NND.

Keywords: New Nordic Diet, Eating acceptance index, Practical acceptance index, Controlled dietary intervention, Survey study

114

1. Introduction In Denmark, as in other countries, consumers’ dietary habits fail to conform with national dietary recommendations (Ball, Mishra, Thane, & Hodge, 2004; M. V. Groth & Fagt, 2003; HermannKunz & Thamm, 1999; Lau et al., 2004). The perceived barriers to healthy eating among Danish consumers are lack of time, taste, and price, as well as old habits (M. V. Groth & Fagt, 2003; M. V. Groth et al., 2009). In Denmark consumers with lower levels of education tend to have a higher prevalence of overweight and obesity (M. V Groth, Fagt, Stockmarr, Matthiessen, & Biltoft-Jensen, 2009). Women and consumers with higher levels of education and more income have healthier eating habits and appear to be more inclined to follow the Danish national dietary recommendations (Biltoft-Jensen et al., 2009; M. V. Groth & Fagt, 2003; O’Doherty Jensen & Holm, 1999). Given this, Danish national dietary recommendations have not been efficient in appealing to all segments of the population; nor have they successfully brought down obesity and nutrition-related lifestyle diseases among all segments of the population (Biltoft-Jensen et al., 2009). Recognizing this challenge, the research Center OPUS1 (2008-2013) has developed an innovative approach to the improvement of public health. Taking low hedonic value to be the main barrier to the adoption of recommended healthy diets (OPUS, 2009), nutritional scientists and others have collaborated with gastronomic experts from the ‘New Nordic Cuisine’ movement in the development of a New Nordic Diet (NND) (OPUS, 2012). Designed to conform with the Nordic nutritional recommendations (Becker et al., 2004) and the gastronomic principles of New Nordic Cuisine (Meyer, Mithril, Blauert, & Holt, 2010; Nordic Council of Ministers, 2012), the NND is meant to be a desirable, healthy and culturally acceptable diet for all Danes (Bere & Brug, 2009; Mithril et al., 2012), including “those segments of the population who suffer most from nutritionally related lifestyle diseases” (OPUS, 2009). In general, foodstuffs included in NND are indigenous to 1

OPUS is an acronym of the project ’Optimal wellbeing, development and health for Danish children through a healthy New Nordic Diet’ and is supported by a grant from the Nordea Foundation.

115

the Nordic region, locally produced and organic, and the NND contains less meat and more fish, vegetables and whole grain than commonly consumed by Danes. (Meyer et al., 2010; Mithril et al., 2012; Pedersen et al., 2010). The OPUS project has already started to disseminate the NND as a highly palatable ‘everyday’ diet to the general public by various means – most significantly, by publishing an award-winning NND cookbook in collaboration with one of Denmark's largest supermarket chains (Meyer & Astrup, 2011; © S.P.A Gourmand, 2012). As part of the OPUS project a randomized and controlled six-month dietary intervention trial was conducted (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01195610). The trial investigated the NND’s health potential and compared it with another controlled diet labeled the ‘Average Danish Diet’ (ADD). During the intervention, participants in each group collected food ad libitum and free of charge in a controlled supermarket setting (Skov, Toubro, Raben, & Astrup, 1997) established at the department of Human Nutrition at Copenhagen University. All meals were prepared and consumed at home. Intervention personnel were available in the supermarket, monitoring participants’ procurement of foods in a computerized database and helping participants to adhere to their dietary guidelines. Participating couples living together were randomly assigned to the same diet. In addition to 3 days of clinical examinations, participants had, on average, 9 individual consultations with an intervention dietician. These consultations allowed dieticians to monitor dietary compliance and offer guidance on lifestyle and dietary issues relating to food procurement, preparation and consumption. Finally, the participants were invited to participate in one free cooking lesson learning basic cooking skills specifically tailored to each diet. As the idea behind NND is to encourage dietary change by harnessing the diet’s hedonic value and thereby improve public health (OPUS, 2009), acceptance of the NND’s eating qualities is important. To determine participants’ acceptance of the NND, the intervention incorporated a sociological dietary acceptability study. Following the work of Pilgrim (Meiselman,

116

2003), who defines the criterion of food acceptance as “consumption with pleasure” (Pilgrim, 1957, 171), a common approach to food acceptance emphasizes affective responses to the experience of eating (Cardello, Schutz, Snow, & Lesher, 2000; Pilgrim, 1957). On this approach, acceptance is a subjective construct. Moreover, “the measurement of food acceptance relies on the use of psychometric, psychophysical, and/or behavioral methods” (H. L. Meiselman & MacFie, 1996, 2). In this perspective, the hedonic eating qualities of the food are the primary aspect of food acceptance (McEwan & Thomson, 1988; H. L. Meiselman & MacFie, 1996) . However, sociological studies of food have demonstrated that food, and meals, are deeply entrenched in existing social arrangements, cultural identities and culinary cultures (Fischler, 1988; Holm & Kildevang, 1996). These factors, in turn, shape the social significance of food and meals in accordance with, for example, cultural norms, social context and everyday practices (Douglas & Nicod, 1974; O’Doherty Jensen, 2003; Warde, 2005). From this perspective, food acceptance is also a practical matter, negotiated in social settings in everyday life (Holm, 1993; Nielsen et al., 2008; Sijtsema et al., 2002) and influenced by practices involved in procuring, preparing, consuming food, and thereafter disposing of food waste (Beardsworth & Keil, 1997; Mennell, Murcott, & H van Otterloo, 1994). Accordingly, when investigating dietary acceptance in prolonged, controlled intervention trials, sociological studies have focused on social, cultural and practical factors. Doing so, they have found that the intervention diet can be in conflict with important social rules of interaction and cultural norms governing meal structures, as well as practical concerns around the procurement, preparation and consumption of the diet (Holm et al., 2008; Nielsen, Korzen, & Holm, 2008b). Thus the practical implications of adhering to diets in everyday life are important determinants of dietary acceptance (Holm, 1993). If the OPUS project is to promote public health effectively, the NND will have to be acceptable to all consumers, independent of social class. NND is inspired by the gastronomic

117

principles of the New Nordic Cuisine, which tends to be associated in people’s minds with expensive, high-end restaurants such as noma (an establishment recently awarded ‘World’s Best Restaurant’ and ‘Best Restaurant in Europe’) (cf. Mithril et al., 2012). It is an important question whether NND will reach a broader audience, including people who are accustomed to spending less money on food. Previous studies suggest that NND would comply more readily with the eating habits of women, individuals with higher levels of education and those on higher incomes, and with persons living in multi-person households. Individuals in these categories tend to have healthier eating habits than men, and those with limited education or living in single-person households (Biltoft-Jensen et al., 2009; Dynesen, Haraldsdóttir, Holm, & Astrup, 2003; M. V. Groth & Fagt, 2003). Further, studies have shown that women have a less strong preference for meat (Kubberød, Ueland, Risvik, & Henjesand, 2006; Resano et al., 2011), a higher preference for fish and vegetables (O’Doherty Jensen & Holm, 1999), and are over-represented among organic consumers (Hughner, McDonagh, Prothero, Shultz, & Stanton, 2007; Squires, Juric, & Cornwell, 2001). Accordingly, this study focused on social variation in the participants’ acceptance, and on the way in which attitudes affecting the consumption of healthy and organic foods relate to the acceptance of NND. Finally, the NND presented participants with numerous new dishes to be prepared involving more fish and vegetables than is common in Denmark (Mithril et al., 2012; Pedersen et al., 2010). Hence, participants’ food habits in relation to the preparation of food as well as the consumption of fish and vegetables were also examined in this study. Thus, in order to determine the acceptability of the NND, the study presented in this article: (1) measured participants’ acceptance of NND as compared with the control diet ADD; and (2) investigated variations in dietary acceptance among participants according to gender, level of education, household composition, and money spent on food per month, as well as attitudes relating to food consumption and food habits.

118

2. Methods 2.1. The Intervention diets The NND was designed as a coherent dietary system composed of organic (50% intake goal) foodstuffs indigenous to the Nordic region (90% intake goal) (Table 1) (Meyer et al., 2010; Mithril et al., 2012). The macronutrient composition was based on Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2004 (Becker et al., 2004), but with a slightly higher level of protein content. The NND included mostly fresh foodstuffs such as game meat, fish, and whole grain products, as well as seasonal fruits and vegetables such as berries, cabbage, root crops, leguminous crops and fresh herbs. The ADD was constructed so as to accord with the average diet of adult Danes as established in national dietary surveys (Pedersen et al., 2010). A maximum of 50% of foodstuffs in the ADD were of Nordic origin; the rest were both Danish and foreign. A maximum of 10% of foods were organic. Furthermore, the ADD was defined to include more meat, added sugar and fat, and less whole grain, fruit and vegetables, than the NND.

119

Table 1: Nutrient intake goals for macronutrients and food groups

Protein (E%) Total carbohydrate (incl. fiber) (E%) Added sugar (E%) Total fat (E%) SFA (E%)

NND 18 (15-23) 52 (48-56) < 10 30 (25-35) < 10

ADD 15 (10-20) 50 (45-55) ≥12 35 (33-37) 15 (10-20)

Nordic food (% of total amount of food) Organic food (% of total amount of food) Fruit (g/10MJ/d) Berries (g/10MJ/d) Vegetables (g/10MJ/d) Cabbages (g/10MJ/d) Root vegetables (g/10MJ/d) Legumes (g/10MJ/d) Potatoes (g/10MJ/d) (g/10MJ/d) Wild plants and mushrooms (g/10MJ/d) Nuts (g/10MJ/d) Wholegrain (g/10MJ/d) Meat (g/10MJ/d) Game meat (g/10MJ/d) Fish and shellfish (g/10MJ/d) Seaweed (g/10MJ/d)

≥ 95 > 50 300 (250-350) 75 (50-100) 400 (350-450) 30 (25-35) ≥ 150 ≥ 30 150 (140-160) As much as possible 5 (3-7) ≥ 30 ≥ 75 100 (90-110) >4 >43 5 (3-7)

≤ 50 ≤ 10 200 (150-250) 4 (2-6) 180 (150-210) ≤ 10 30 (25-35) ≤1 100 (90-110) ≤1 0 ≤1 35 (25-45) 140 (130-150) 0 20 (15-25) 0

The dietary system used in the NND was based on a seasonal dinner menu plan, with meals to be cooked on the basis of fresh products. To ensure dietary compliance, NND participants were asked to follow an intervention cookbook containing the recipes of 180 NND dishes set out in a predefined seasonal menu plan. NND dinners comprised two courses on weekdays (one of which was usually leftovers from the day before) and three courses at weekends. An ADD cookbook was also given to the ADD participants. It contained 84 recipes which participants could use as they pleased, as there was no predefined seasonal meal system. The ADD also incorporated a larger

120

number of processed food products and ready-made meals, which participants were allowed to consume.

2.2. Study population Participants were self-recruited via online advertisement on websites, social media and via news announcements published in newspapers, the radio and Danish national TV. The inclusion criteria required participants to be 18–65 years old, with a waist circumference of ≥80 cm for women and ≥94 cm for men; approximately 33% had one or more component of the metabolic syndrome, and all were able to prepare and eat food at home for the duration of the intervention. After initial screening, 220 participants were included in the intervention (135 NND and 85 ADD) all of whom lived in, or close to, the capital city of Denmark. Of these, 147 participants completed the trial (91 NND and 56 ADD).

2.3. Data A sociological questionnaire was presented to participants before (N=197) and after (N=147) the intervention. The first questionnaire contained 27 principal questions. Answers to these investigated the participants’ everyday eating habits and attitudes to food consumption, and specifically organic, healthy and seasonal food, on a four-point scale (Andersen, 2009; Korzen, Sandøe, & Lassen, 2011; Steptoe & Pollard, 1995); and food preferences and acceptance, on a five-point Likert scale (Holm, 1993; Nielsen, Korzen, & Holm, 2008a). The second questionnaire repeated questions from the first survey, but added questions inviting participants to evaluate their intervention diet in five dimensions: (1) ‘Preparation of diet’, covering practical aspects of cooking the intervention diet; (2) ‘Consumption of diet’, which included the hedonic qualities of the diet; (3) ‘Everyday life and diet’, depicting how adhering to the diet worked in daily life; (4) ‘Wellbeing and diet’, covering how the

121

diet influenced bodily wellbeing; and (5) ‘Continuation with the diet after the intervention’, which concerned participants expectations about sticking with their intervention diet after the study. These questions were all answered on a five-point Likert scale. Finally, participants were asked to evaluate various aspects of the intervention, and to report on changes relating to dietary habits, also on a five-point Likert scale. The population of this study comprises 147 persons, who participated in this dietary intervention until its conclusion, of whom 127 (86%) completed both questionnaires Sociodemographic information (age, level of education, household type, income, etc., as well as weight) was obtained from the intervention database.

2.4. Dietary acceptance index The initial strategy was to identify a single dietary acceptance index based on all five dimensions mentioned above. This would relate to participants evaluation of their diet; it would correspond to 19 items in the second sociological questionnaire. A principal component analysis (Paul Kline, 1993) using a Varimax rotation (Paul Kline, 1999) was performed on the 19 items to investigate their relation. Five items were excluded: they did not yield an interpretable factor structure and failed to meet the requirement of having a primary factor loading of 0.4 or above and no crossloading of 0.4 or above. An examination of the Kaiser-Meyer Olkin measure of the sampling adequacy suggested that the remaining group of 14 items was factorable (overall KMO = 0.8615). On the basis of this analysis, two strong factors emerged (Table 2). These were interpreted as a practical acceptance index consisting of 7 items depicting the diet’s practical implementation in everyday life and an eating acceptance index also consisting of 7 items representing the eating qualities of the diet. Thereafter, χ2 tests on items two-by-two within each index confirmed the onedimensionality of the indexes.

122

Table 2: Principal component analysis and Cronbach’s Alpha for acceptance indexes (N = 119) Item I. Preparation of diet 1. My diet is easy to cook 2. My diet is very time consuming to cook

Factor Loadings I: Practical II: Eating acceptance acceptance 0.73 0.83

0.14 -0.22

3. Cooking my diet requires too many kitchen tools (e.g. bowls, pots, a food processor, etc.)

0.79

-0.15

4. Cooking my diet results in too much washing-up

0.76

-0.22

5. My diet is tasty

-0.20

0.76

6. My diet is filling

-0.13

0.84

7. My diet is monotonous

-0.24

0.48

8. Following my diet requires a lot of planning

0.74

-0.17

9. My diet fits nicely with my everyday life

0.18

0.74

10. I have generally missed eating the food I ate before the intervention

-0.17

0.68

-0.20

0.72

-0.20

0.72

0.70

-0.21

0.70

-0.32

5.63 40.2 0.8848

2.46 17.6 0.8473

II. Consumption of diet

III. Everyday life and diet

IV. Wellbeing and diet 11. Eating my diet has given me energy 12. My diet has made me physically uncomfortable V. Continuation with the diet after the intervention 13. It will be too expensive to stay on my diet after the intervention 14. The foodstuffs I have eaten during the intervention are difficult to find at my local supermarket Eigenvalues % of variance Cronbach’s Alpha Note: Factor loadings over .40 appear in bold.

The practical acceptance index consisted of all items in dimensions (1) ‘Preparation of diet’ and (5) ‘Continuation with the diet after the intervention’, together with one item – i.e. “Following my diet

123

requires a lot of planning” – from dimension (3) ‘Everyday life and diet’. The eating acceptance index was made up of the remaining items in dimension (3) along with all of the items in (2) ‘Consumption and diet’ and (4) ‘Wellbeing and diet’. Each index was constructed by summing the 7 items and linearly converting the result from 0 to 100, making the index scores easier to interpret without affecting their correlation with other variables in the sample. Participants who failed to answer one or more of the 14 questions were excluded from subsequent analyses. Participants who gave the answer ‘Do not know’ to one or more of the 14 items had their value changed to ‘Neither agree nor disagree’ to prevent further data loss. This resulted in a sub-sample of 119 participants, and it was on this sub-sample that the analyses of indexes were based. In view of the small sample and missing responses linear regression analysis was not used to explore differences in acceptance scores. Instead a series of bivariate comparisons were conducted across relevant variables (socioeconomic background, attitudes to food consumption, and food habits) and variations in acceptance scores (Table 4). A series of plots revealed varying degrees of non-normality in the distribution of both accept indexes, and therefore the nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test was employed to compare mean accept scores (Agresti & Finlay, 2009).

3. Results 3.1. Population Among the 127 participants who participated in the intervention and in the survey, no significant differences were found between the two groups before enrolling in the intervention (T1) with respect to gender, household composition, level of education, income, expenditure on food per month, employment, and BMI. There was a tendency for mean age to be higher among NND participants than it was among ADD participants. Among the 119 participants who filled out both

124

questionnaires and were included in the analysis of the acceptance indexes this difference was significant, at 5% (Mean age NND: 43.21 (13.64), ADD: 38.36 (12.88)).

3.2. Evaluation of NND and ADD In accord with the gastronomic ambitions of the NND, the results showed that the eating qualities of NND were highly appreciated, and more so than those of ADD (Table 3). Indeed, all NND participants found the diet tasty, almost all found it filling, more than 60% found the diet energizing, and hardly anyone reported that the NND had made them physically uncomfortable, while 45% disagreed with the diet being monotonous after six months. By contrast, approximately 66% of ADD participants found their diet to be tasty and filling, approximately 20% found the diet energizing, approximately 50% reported that the diet did not make them physical uncomfortable, and only 13% did not find the ADD monotonous.

125

Table 3: Participants’ positive evaluation of NND and ADD diets (%a) NND

ADD

(N=91)

(N=56)

I. Preparation of diet My diet is easy to cook*** (agreeb)

67

98

My diet is very time consuming to cook*** (disagreeb)

21

79

Cooking my diet requires too many kitchen tools (e.g. bowls, pots, a food processor, etc.)*** (disagreeb)

34

83

Cooking my diet results in too much washing-up*** (disagreeb)

21

76

II. Consumption of diet My diet is tasty*** (agreeb)

100

65

My diet is filling*** (agreeb)

96

65

My diet is monotonous*** (disagreeb)

45

13

20

65

My diet fits nicely with my everyday life (agreeb)

88

70

I have generally missed eating the food I ate before the intervention*** (disagreeb)

52

15

IV. Wellbeing and diet Eating my diet has given me energy*** (agreeb)

64

22

My diet has made me physically uncomfortable*** (disagreeb)

85

48

15

63

15

87

III. Everyday life and diet Following my diet requires a lot of planning*** (disagreeb)

V. Continuation with the diet after the intervention It will be too expensive to stay on my diet after the intervention*** (disagreeb) The foodstuffs I have eaten during the intervention are difficult to find at my local supermarket*** (disagreeb) a

High number indicates a positive evaluation of the diet whereas a low number indicates a negative evaluation of the diet b Agreeing (totally or partially) with positive statements or disagreeing (totally or partially) with negative statements about diets. Full scale: Totally Agree, Partially agree, Neither agree nor disagree, Partially disagree, Totally disagree, Do not know. *** Significant at a 1% level between cells within each row

126

However, the experience of preparing NND, and expectations about continuing with it after the intervention, were both less positively evaluated than was the case with ADD. While close to 66% of NND participants found their diet was easy to cook, only approximately 20% did not find it too time-consuming to cook and to result in too much washing-up; and only approximately 33% did not find that it required too many kitchen tools. Even more strikingly, only 15% of NND participants did not expect this diet to be too expensive to adhere to after the intervention and too difficult to shop for in their local supermarket. By contrast, almost all ADD participants found their diet easy to cook, and the great majority did not find it time-consuming to prepare, nor to require too many kitchen tools, or to result in too much washing-up. Likewise, participants expected ADD foodstuffs to be easy to obtain and did not expect it to be too expensive to adhere to ADD after the intervention. The majority of participants in both groups found that their specific diet could be accommodated readily, in general, with their everyday life. Rather more NND (88%) than ADD (70%) participants found their diet required a lot of planning. After six months of intervention approximately 50% of NND participants had not missed eating the food they ate before the intervention, while only 15% of the ADD participants had not done so.

3.3. Eating acceptance and practical acceptance Figure 1 shows how the eating and the practical acceptance scores of the two diets are distributed. Overall, the impression given is that two diets contrast. Whereas NND participants in general score high on eating acceptance, they score low on practical acceptance. The ADD scores depict the reverse distribution. Among NND participants, a small, yet significant, positive correlation exists between scores on the two indexes (Pearson = .29984, p < .10), which suggests that experiencing

127

practical barriers to the consumption of NND in everyday life tends to have a negative effect on the experience of NND’s eating qualities. Here, no correlation was found for ADD. Figure 1: Scatterplot diagram of participants’ eating acceptance and practical acceptance (N=119)

Correlation between practical acceptance and eating acceptance for both diets: Pearson's correlation -0.42697***, Spearman -0,36964*** Correlation between practical acceptance and eating acceptance for the NND: Pearson's 0,29984*, Spearman 0,28527* Correlation between practical acceptance and eating acceptance for the ADD: Pearson's -0,03973, Spearman 0,03539 * Significant at a 10% level, ** Significant at a 5% level, *** Significant at a 1% level

128

3.4. Acceptance index scores for NND and ADD In Table 4 differences in the acceptance scores for the two diets relating to the participants’ socioeconomic background are shown. The mean eating acceptance score of NND is very high (81.0), and higher than that of ADD (51.6). However, NND has a mean practical acceptance score of 42.9, which is markedly lower than ADD’s mean score of 77.5.

As anticipated, women had a higher practical and eating acceptance of NND than men. Likewise, NND participants with higher levels of education tended to have higher eating acceptance, but the differences here were not significant. Among ADD participants, those living in single-person households and those with lower levels of education had higher eating acceptance, while those who spent less money on food per month had higher practical and eating acceptance than other ADD participants. Differences among ADD participants were only marginally significant, however.

129

Table 4: NND and ADD scores on the practical and eating acceptance indexes Socioeconomic background (T1) Participants

All

N~ 73 50

Male

23

9-13y

14

14-15y

13

15-16y

21

17+ya

21

Single person

22

42.7 (17.8)

78.3 (14.3)

18

86.1 (14.1)

60.1 (20.1)

28

44.4 (12.9)

77.6 (11.1)

8

74.1 (17.2)

42.4 (13.3)

23

40.8 (18.0)

76.7 (12.4)

19

80.8 (15.5)

47.7* (15.9)

34.5 (11.7) 43.9 (17.5)

81.0 (13.7) 78.8 (14.2)

92.3 (10.7) 77.5 (16.0)

66.1 (12.9) 44.8 (13.9)

Education

Economy Money spent on food per month (DKR.)

Multiperson: one adult in the intervention Multiperson: Couples in the intervention

130

32 14 10 8 9 16

1,999 or less

6

2,000 – 3,999

27

4,000 – 5,999

20

39.8 (14.3)

76.3 (11.7)

10

87.1 (10.5)

45.0 (21.4)

6,000 or moreb

6

44.1 (21.0)

78.6 (8.1)

5

72.1* (22.2)

51.4* (19.7)

Attitudes to food consumption (T1) Like to buy seasonal foodsc

N~ 46

ADD+ Practical Eating acceptance acceptance 77.5 51.6 (12.4) (18.3) 83.3 49.4 (15.0) (17.1) 75.8 56.4 (18.1) (20.6) 76.4 64.3 (17.3) (15.2) 75.0 44.6 (20.8) (21.3) 86.1 50.0 (10.0) (13.7) 81.7 50.0* (15.9) (18.8)

Female Gender

Households

NND+ Practical Eating acceptance acceptance 42.8 81.0 (16.0) (16.2) 45.9** 80.3*** (15.6) (11.4) 36.0 71.4 (15.0) (12.6) 37.2 74.0 (11.9) (15.2) 37.4 71.4 (19.4) (12.5) 47.1 80.3 (14.1) (11.9) 44.6 80.1 (18.2) (9.3)

N~

Highly

58

Less

14

NND+ Practical Eating acceptance acceptance 43.8 79.1 (15.4) (12.0) 39.8 71.4** (18.3) (12.8)

6 17

N~ 30 15

ADD+ Practical Eating acceptance acceptance 80.1 45.6 (15.5) (17.8) 82.4 62.4*** (18.4) (14.0)

Like to buy healthy foodsc

Like to buy organic foodsc

Highly

62

Less

10

Highly

49

Less

24

Food habits (T1)

N~ Often prepare new dishes

Dishes preparedd Neither or Stick to known dishes Spend time on cooking Time spent cookinge

“I like to eat fish for my evening meal”

Neither or

43 3 33 13 N~

81.2 50.3 (16.1) (17.9) 78.6 70.2* (21.4) (14.4) 81.0 51.5 (17.7) (17.4) 81.0 51.7 (12.1) (21.2) ADD+ Practical Eating acceptance acceptance

50

45.4 (15.3)

79.3 (11.5)

26

85.6 (14.6)

44.9 (18.4)

17

35.9 (15.0)

74.0 (13.6)

12

77.7 (17.7)

61.0 (15.7)

6

39.9* (21.0)

72.6 (14.4)

7

70.4* (16.1)

60.2** (13.7)

30

43.1 (15.0)

78.2 (11.9)

18

84.7 (16.1)

42.3 (19.3)

31

43.4 (17.3)

75.1 (12.1)

14

74.5 (16.1)

56.6 (15.7)

13

83.2 (16.0)

59.1** (15.5)

82.0 (15.8) 63.1 (14.4) 87.5 (17.7) 82.3 (14.5) 78.6 (20.1) 77.6 (21.1)

50.7 (17.5) 65.5 (18.3) 48.2 (37.9) 46.2 (16.0) 62.2 (17.5) 65.3** (19.4)

Get the cooking done fast

11

Agree

59

Neither/or

6

Disagreef

7

Agree “I feel something is missing if I eat a Neither/or hot meal without vegetables” Disagreeg

43.8 77.6 (16.1) (12.6) 38.6 77.1 (14.0) (12.5) 42.9 79.2 (17.5) (13.0) 42.4 74.0* (12.8) (10.5) NND+ Practical Eating acceptance acceptance

51 12 9

40.3 (16.8) 44.6 (16.6) 35.1 (13.1) 34.2* (9.0) 43.9 (16.6) 38.4 (18.3) 42.1 (9.1)

81.2 (14.3) 79.4 (11.3) 71.4 (11.7) 64.3** (13.4) 77.5 (11.4) 81.9 (15.0) 69.8* (11.3)

41 3 2 32 7 7

Significant difference between cells within the column: *10% level, **5% level, ***1% level T1 Before enrolling the intervention + Mean score on acceptance index at the completion of the intervention ~ Total N in each column is not consistently equal to 119 due to missing data on row variables

131

a

Scale: 9-13 years: General adult education/ Higher technical ex; 14-15 years: Tertiary education Short cycle; 1516 years: Tertiary education, medium cycle; 17 years or more: Master degree b Scale: Less than 1.000 DKR., 1.000-1.999 DKR., 2.000-2.999 DKR., 3.000-3.999 DKR., 4.000-4.999 DKR., 5.000-5.999 DKR., 6.000-6.999 DKR., 7.000 DKR. or more, Do not know, Do not wish to answer c Question: “To what extent are you concerned about that the food you buy is seasonal/healthy/organic foods”? answered on the following scale: Highly, To some extent, To a lesser extent, Not at all d Question is dichotomized: “I often prepare new dishes” as opposed “I stick to the dishes I know” answered on the following scale between statements: Agree, Mostly agree, Neither agree or disagree e Question is dichotomized: “I like to get the cooking done as fast as possible” as opposed “I often spend time on cooking” answered on the following scale between statements: Agree, Mostly agree, Neither agree or disagree f Scale: Totally Agree, Partial agree, Neither agree nor disagree, Partial disagree, Totally disagree, Do not know g Scale: Very Good, Good, Fair, Poor

As expected, those NND participants whose consumption preferences prior to the intervention already agreed with the dietary composition of the NND in that they self-reported a preference for buying seasonal foods or organic produce had higher acceptance of their diet than other NND participants, although the differences in eating acceptance in relation to buying organic food were small and only marginally significant. By contrast, ADD participants who were less concerned about buying seasonal food had a higher eating acceptance than those who were eager to procure seasonal food. Also, the very few ADD participants who reported being less concerned about health had a marginally significant higher eating acceptance of ADD than the remaining majority of ADD participants, i.e. those concerned to eat healthily.

Likewise, NND participants who reported before the intervention that they often prepared new dishes had a marginally significant higher practical acceptance of NND. Also, participants with a preference for fish had a higher eating acceptance, and a marginally significant higher practical acceptance, of NND than other participants, just as participants without a preference for vegetables had a lower eating acceptance than other NND participants. However, the few ADD participants with no preference for vegetables, and ADD participants who were in the habit of preparing their meals swiftly, had a higher eating acceptance of their diet than other ADD participants. Similarly,

132

ADD participants who were in the habit of preparing new dishes and had preference for vegetables had a lower eating acceptance than other ADD participants.

4. Discussion In many respects the two diets compared in the intervention study displayed contrasting character. The experience of eating the New Nordic Diet as measured by the eating acceptance index was generally reported to be very positive, but the ADD control diet was evaluated more negatively; and whereas practical aspects of procuring and preparing ADD as measured by the practical acceptance index were generally reported to be very positive, NND was evaluated more negatively. The profiles of participants with higher or lower acceptance of the two diets differed as well. NND appeared to be especially acceptable to participants who, before the intervention, had a stronger preference for seasonal foods, for fish and vegetables, who often tried out new dishes at home, and who possibly had a preference for organic food. Also, women and individuals with higher levels of education more often expressed higher acceptance of NND than others, although this was only a tendency. By contrast, ADD appeared to be especially acceptable to men and to those who were less concerned about buying seasonal food, who spent less money on food, and who expressed limited interest and involvement in cooking – and also participants who were less concerned about buying healthy food, had shorter education and lived in single-person households. In sum, the results of this study suggest that NND has the strongest appeal to those segments of the population who already eat healthily (Biltoft-Jensen et al., 2009; Lau et al., 2004) and who are presumably already interested in, and engaged with, organic foods (Lund, TB., Andersen, LM & Jensen, 2012; Squires, Juric, & Cornwell, 2001; Torjusen, Sangstad, O'Doherty Jensen & Kjærnes, 2004), seasonal foods, and cooking. By contrast, ADD has a stronger appeal to those who typically eat less healthily (Biltoft-Jensen et al., 2009; Dynesen et al., 2003; M. V. Groth

133

& Fagt, 2003), are less interested in seasonal food, and are less engaged in food and cooking. Thus OPUS may have only partially succeeded in its aim of developing a desirable, healthy and culturally acceptable NND that can be adopted by all Danes. Given that the NND is a healthy diet, its high eating acceptance indicates that OPUS has succeeded in designing a diet which may improve public health by virtue of its hedonic quality. Yet the results reported here indicate that this in itself will ensure neither broad acceptance nor widespread appropriation of this diet (OPUS, 2009). Consumers may well have difficulty implementing NND in their everyday life as a consequence of its low practical acceptability. In particular, the practical toil of preparing the diet, together with the participants’ perception of the price and availability of relevant foodstuffs, appear to present significant barriers to consumers’ adoption of the diet – at least, it did so at the time of the intervention study (years 2010–2011). This may explain why participants with an interest in cooking show higher acceptance of NND than others: these individuals are more likely to be interested in investing time and energy in locating and preparing the appropriate foods in accordance with NND guidelines. In terms of gendered eating habits that are specific to western food culture, it has been noted that recommended health foods such as vegetables and fish correspond with foods perceived as symbolic markers of femininity (O’Doherty Jensen & Holm, 1999). Given that women and those with a preference for fish and vegetables exhibited higher acceptance of NND, among the participants in this study, this diet may well be seen as a diet with a gender bias, deeming it less acceptable to consumers with more traditional, culturally specific, and thus gendered, eating habits. However, although the supermarket intervention trial offers an unique opportunity to investigate the acceptability of NND via participants’ procurement, preparation and consumption of the diet (Holm, 1993), the results here are not easily translated across to the Danish population as a whole. First, the participants are self-recruited and to that extent not a representative sample of the

134

Danish adult population. Secondly, as a result of unreturned questionnaires, errors in registration, and missing responses, the two acceptance indexes were based on only 119 participants out of the 147 who completed the intervention. Thirdly, a selection bias due to systematic drop-out may have inflated the acceptance of the two diets, as participants with a preference specifically for one of the diets would presumably be more inclined to drop-out of the intervention when assigned to the other diet – so it can be seen that the evaluations of the diets reported in the study might well be biased. Finally, Nielsen has observed that supermarket intervention participants learn in the course of the intervention to adhere to their dietary guidelines (2005). Thus, practical acceptance of intervention diets may well be positively biased when measured after such an intervention. This suggests that if NND were to be evaluated by individuals who have not participated in a lengthy controlled trial, and who have not volunteered to try out an entirely new type of diet, its practical acceptability would be likely to be more negative than it was shown to be in the present study. Still, individuals outside the intervention could appropriate various elements of the dietary regimes tested in the study without adhering to them in full. In short, the results of this study should be viewed with appropriate sensitivity to these reservations.

5. Conclusion The results show that, in the version tested in this study, NND has high eating acceptance but a low practical acceptance, as compared with the ADD. Although the results are not easily translated to the wider Danish population, they suggest that, in general, NND’s high eating qualities will appeal to consumers, in particular women, who already have healthy eating habits, who have a preference for organic and seasonal food, who are willing to spend time preparing meals, and who are in the habit of preparing new dishes. However, NND’s low practical acceptance, modulated as it seems to be by gender bias, may be a barrier to general public acceptance. Hence, NND’s potential to affect

135

public health positively in Denmark will be hindered if its primary appeal to women, and to consumers already eating healthily, are not addressed, and if practical barriers (perceived high price and low product availability, and time consuming cooking procedures) are not mitigated through, for example, the development of more convenient and cheaper versions of NND for households or the food service industry.

Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank those who participated in this study.

Role of the funding source The OPUS research project is funded by the Nordea Foundation. The article manuscript has been approved by the OPUS’ Management Team prior to its submission.

136

References Agresti, A., & Finlay, B. (2009). Statistical Methods for the Social Sciences (4th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Alan Beardsworth, & Teresa Keil. (1997). Sociology on the Menu: An Invitation to the Study of Food and Society. Routledge. Andersen, L. M. (2009). Documentation of CONCEPT questionnaires. Retrieved from http://orgprints.org/15741/ Ball, K., Mishra, G. D., Thane, C. W., & Hodge, A. (2004). How well do Australian women comply with dietary guidelines? Public health nutrition, 7(3), 443–52. doi:10.1079/PHN2003538 Becker, W., Lyhne, N., Pedersen, A., Aro, A., Fogelholm, M., Þhórsdottir, I., … Pedersen, J. (2004). Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2004 - integrating nutrition and physical activity. Scandinavian Journal of Nutrition, 48(4), 178–187. doi:10.1080/1102680410003794 Bere, E., & Brug, J. (2009). Towards health-promoting and environmentally friendly regional diets - a Nordic example. Public health nutrition, 12(1), 91–6. doi:10.1017/S1368980008001985 Biltoft-Jensen, A., Groth, M. V, Matthiessen, J., Wachmann, H., Christensen, T., & Fagt, S. (2009). Diet quality: associations with health messages included in the Danish Dietary Guidelines 2005, personal attitudes and social factors. Public health nutrition, 12(8), 1165–73. doi:10.1017/S1368980008003662 Cardello, A. V, Schutz, H., Snow, C., & Lesher, L. (2000). Predictors of food acceptance, consumption and satisfaction in specific eating situations. Food Quality and Preference, 11(3), 201–216. doi:10.1016/S0950-3293(99)00055-5 Douglas, M., & Nicod, M. (1974). Taking the Biscuit: The Structure of British Meals. New Society, 30, 744–747. Dynesen, A. W., Haraldsdóttir, J., Holm, L., & Astrup, A. (2003). Sociodemographic differences in dietary habits described by food frequency questions--results from Denmark. European journal of clinical nutrition, 57(12), 1586–97. doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601728 Fischler, C. (1988). Food, self and identity. Social Science Information, 27(2), 275–292. doi:10.1177/053901888027002005 Groth, M. V., & Fagt, S. (2003). Danskernes kostvaner. Måltidsvaner, holdninger, sociale forskelle og sammenhæng med anden livsstil [The Danish diet. Meal habits, attitudes, social differences and relationship with other forms of lifestyle] (pp. 2–156). Søborg. Groth, M. V., Sørensen, M. R., Biltoft-Jensen, A., Matthiessen, J., Kørup, K., & Fagt, S. (2009). Danskernes måltidsvaner, holdninger, motivation og barrierer for at spise sundt 1995-2008

137

[Danish meal habits, attitudes, motivation and barriers for healthy eating 1995-2008] (1st ed.). Søborg: DTU Fødevareinstiuttet: Afdeling for Ernæring. Retrieved from www.food.dtu.dk Groth, M. V, Fagt, S., Stockmarr, A., Matthiessen, J., & Biltoft-Jensen, A. (2009). Dimensions of socioeconomic position related to body mass index and obesity among Danish women and men. Scandinavian journal of public health, 37(4), 418–26. doi:10.1177/1403494809105284 Hermann-Kunz, E., & Thamm, M. (1999). Dietary recommendations and prevailing food and nutrient intakes in Germany. The British journal of nutrition, 81 Suppl 2, S61–9. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10999028 Holm, L. (1993). Cultural and social acceptability of a healthy diet. European journal of clinical nutrition, 47(8), 592–9. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8404795 Holm, L., Hoff, a, Erichsen, L., Mohl, M., Toubro, S., & Astrup, a. (2008). Social and cultural acceptability of fat reduced diets among Danish overweight subjects: High-protein versus high-carbohydrate diets. Food Quality and Preference, 19(1), 43–50. doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2007.06.001 Holm, L., & Kildevang, H. (1996). Consumers’ views on food quality. A qualitative interview study. Appetite, 27(1), 1–14. doi:10.1006/appe.1996.0029 Hughner, R. S., McDonagh, P., Prothero, A., Shultz, C. J., & Stanton, J. (2007). Who are organic food consumers? A compilation and review of why people purchase organic food. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 6(2-3), 94–110. doi:10.1002/cb.210 Korzen, S., Sandøe, P., & Lassen, J. (2011). Don’t wash my meat: public perceptions of decontamination in meat production. British Food Journal, 113(5), 598–612. doi:10.1108/00070701111131719 Kristensen, S. T., & Holm, L. (2006). Modern Meal Patterns: Tensions Between Bodily Needs and the Organization of Time and Space. Food and Foodways, 14(3-4), 151–173. doi:10.1080/07409710600962316 Kubberød, E., Ueland, Ø., Risvik, E., & Henjesand, I. J. (2006, July). A study on the mediating role of disgust with meat in the prediction of red meat consumption among young females. Journal of Consumer Behaviour. doi:10.1002/cb.180 Lau, C., Faerch, K., Glümer, C., Toft, U., Tetens, I., Borch-Johnsen, K., & Jørgensen, T. (2004). Evaluation of dietary intake in a Danish population: the Inter99 study. Scandinavian Journal of Food & Nutrition, 48(3), 136–143. doi:10.1080/11026480410000931 Lund, TB., Andersen, LM & Jensen, K. O. (2012). The emergence of diverse organic consumers: Who are they and how do they shape demand? Copenhagen. Retrieved from http://okonomi.foi.dk/workingpapers/WPpdf/WP2012/W ... rganic_consumers.pdf

138

McEwan, J. A., & Thomson, D. M. H. (1988). A behavioural interpretation of food acceptability. Food Quality and Preference, 1(1), 3–9. doi:10.1016/0950-3293(88)90002-X Meiselman, H. (2003). History of food acceptance research in the US Army. Appetite, 40(3), 199– 216. doi:10.1016/S0195-6663(03)00007-2 Meiselman, H. L., & MacFie, H. J. H. (1996). The contextual basis for food acceptance, food choice and food intake: the food, the situation and the individual. (pp. 239–263). Blackie Academic & Professional. Meiselman, Herbert L., & MacFie, H. J. H. (1996). food choice, acceptance and consumption (p. 397). Chapman and Hall. Meyer, C., & Astrup, A. (2011). Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad [The New Nordic Diet] (p. 160). FDB, Meyers Madhus og Forskningscenter OPUS. Meyer, C., Mithril, C., Blauert, E., & Holt, M. K. (2010). Grundlag for Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad [The fundament for the New Nordic Diet]. The research center OPUS, Copenhagen University, Denmark. Retrieved from http://www.foodoflife.dk/~/media/Foodoflife/docs/pdf/opus/WP 1/100823_Grundlag for Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad_Pressem%C3%B8de.ashx Mithril, C., Dragsted, L. O., Meyer, C., Blauert, E., Holt, M. K., & Astrup, A. (2012). Guidelines for the New Nordic Diet. Public health nutrition, 1–7. doi:10.1017/S136898001100351X Nielsen, A. (2005). Exercising freedom and control in the supermarket from an overweight perspective. In T.-A. Wilska & L. Haanpää (Eds.), Lifestyles and social change: essays in economic sociology (pp. 79–95). Turku: The Turku School of Economics and Business Administration. Nielsen, A., Korzen, S., & Holm, L. (2008). Inverting the food pyramid? Social and cultural acceptability of Walter Willett’s dietary recommendations among people with weight concerns. Appetite, 51(1), 178–86. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2008.02.011 Nordic Council of Ministers. (2012). New Nordic Food: Nordic Council of Ministers. Retrieved July 12, 2012, from http://newnordicfood.org/ OPUS. (2009). Low hedonic value of the recommended diet as a barrier to consumer acceptance. foodoflife.dk. LIFE. Retrieved July 12, 2012, from http://www.foodoflife.dk/Opus/English/background/bg6.aspx OPUS. (2012). Food of LIFE, OPUS – healthier food, better life, New Nordic Diet. foodoflife.dk. LIFE. Retrieved July 12, 2012, from http://www.foodoflife.dk/Opus/English.aspx O’Doherty Jensen, K. (2003). The Contribution of Cognitive Semantics to the Development of Sociological theory of Food Culture and Food Practices. Ph.D.-afhandling, Institut for Human Ernæring. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur Grafik. Retrieved from http://curis.ku.dk/ws/files/14491069/Katherine_O_Doherty_Jensen.pdf

139

O’Doherty Jensen, K., & Holm, L. (1999). Preferences, quantities and concerns: socio-cultural perspectives on the gendered consumption of foods. European journal of clinical nutrition, 53(5), 351–9. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10369489 Paul Kline. (1993). An Easy Guide to Factor Analysis (Paperback) (p. 208). Routledge. Paul Kline. (1999). Handbook of Psychological Testing (2nd ed., p. 752). Routledge. Pedersen, A. N., Fagt, S., Groth, M. V., Christensen, T., Biltoft-Jensen, A., Matthiessen, J., … Trolle, E. (2010). Danskernes kostvaner 2003 - 2008 - Hovedresultater [Dietary habits in Denmark 2003-2008. Main results ]. Fødevareinstituttet, Danmarks Tekniske Universitet. Retrieved from http://www.foedevarestyrelsen.dk/SiteCollectionDocuments/25_PDF_word_filer til download/07kontor/DanskernesKostvaner2010.pdf Pilgrim, F. J. (1957). The components of food acceptance and their measurement. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 5(2), 171–5. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/13410821 Resano, H., Pérez-Cueto, F. J. A., Sanjuán, A. I., De Barcellos, M. D., Grunert, K. G., & Verbeke, W. (2011). Consumer satisfaction with dry-cured ham in five European countries. Meat science, 87(4), 336–43. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.11.008 Sijtsema, S., Linnemann, A., Van Gaasbeek, T., Dagevos, H., & Jongen, W. (2002). Variables influencing food perception reviewed for consumer-oriented product development. Critical reviews in food science and nutrition, 42(6), 565–81. doi:10.1080/20024091054256 Skov, a R., Toubro, S., Raben, A., & Astrup, A. (1997). A method to achieve control of dietary macronutrient composition in ad libitum diets consumed by free-living subjects. European journal of clinical nutrition, 51(10), 667–72. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9347286 Squires, L., Juric, B., & Cornwell, T. B. (2001). Level of market development and intensity of organic food consumption: cross-cultural study of Danish and New Zealand consumers. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(5), 392–409. doi:10.1108/07363760110398754 Stephen Mennell, Anne Murcott, & Anneke H van Otterloo. (1994). The sociology of food: eating, diet, and culture. London: Sage. Steptoe, A., & Pollard, T. M. (1995). Development of a Measure of the Motives Underlying the Selection of Food: the Food Choice Questionnaire. Appetite,, 25, 267–284. Torjusen, H., Sangstad, L., Kjærnes, U., & O’Doherty Jensen, K. (2004). European Consumers’ Conceptions of Organic Food: A Review of Available Research. Review Literature And Arts Of The Americas (Vol. 4, p. -). Olso, Norway: National Insititute for consumer research. Retrieved from http://orgprints.org/00002490

140

Warde, A. (2005). Consumption and Theories of Practice. Journal of Consumer Culture, 5(2), 131– 153. doi:10.1177/1469540505053090 © S.P.A Gourmand. (2012). Gourmand Awards 2012 Winners: New Nordic Diet. Gourmand. Retrieved August 02, 2012, from http://www.cookbookfair.com/index.php/gourmandawards/winners/gourmand-awards-2012-winners/book/3?page=1

141

Article 3: Living with the New Nordic Diet Submitted to British Food Journal 5 March 2013

Arun Micheelsen, Lotte Holm, and Katherine O'Doherty Jensen

Abstract Purpose – Based on New Nordic Cuisine and Nordic dietary recommendations, the research Centre OPUS has developed a healthy, sustainable and tasty New Nordic Diet (NND) with the goal of improving public health in Denmark. In order to determine the health potential of the NND, a sixmonth, controlled dietary intervention trial was conducted, in which participants procured NND foods at a specially designed intervention-supermarket and prepared and consumed NND meals in their homes. Design/methodology/approach – A qualitative sociological study was conducted among intervention participants in order to explore whether and how they appropriated this diet into their everyday food practices. Findings – Participants appropriated the NND by becoming co-producers of this diet, tailoring it to accord with individual preferences and the demands of everyday life. Findings indicate that while the taste of the NND is likely to appeal to wider groups of consumers, the tasks of food procurement and preparation are likely to constitute barriers to its adoption. The strictly controlled intervention setting enabled participants to learn how to comply with dietary composition despite their deviations from given menu-plans and recipes. The extent to which such compliance would be achieved outside this context by other consumers is questioned. Further studies are needed to determine whether more widespread consumption of the NND would in practice comply with Nordic dietary recommendations. Originality/value – The study provides insights relevant to health agencies, public health researchers and food companies regarding consumer appropriation of a dietary system, the health benefits of which are dependent upon dietary compliance.

Keywords: eating practices; dietary appropriation; New Nordic Diet; dietary compliance; qualitative methods

142

1. Introduction Within Europe, interest in the idea that a regional cuisine can promote healthy, sustainable and local food consumption has mainly focused upon the benefits of the ‘Mediterranean diet’ (Bere & Brug, 2009; Serra-Majem et al,, 2011). However, within the Nordic region, New Nordic Cuisine is conceived as having similar benefits, drawing its culinary qualities from the terroir of this region (Meyer, 2012; Nordic Council of Ministers, 2012). Inspired by this innovation, a template for the design of a healthy, regional and sustainable ‘New Nordic Diet’ – envisaged as a diet that could become popular and widespread – has been presented (Bere & Brug, 2009). The Danish research Centre OPUS1 has developed the New Nordic Diet (NND) with the objective of improving public health (OPUS, 2012a). The NND is designed in accordance with the gastronomic principles of New Nordic Cuisine (Meyer et al., 2010) and with Nordic dietary recommendations (Becker et al., 2004). It also appears to support food consumption that is sustainable and climate friendly (Mithril et al., 2012; Saxe et al., 2012). To explore its potential health benefits, OPUS conducted a six month controlled dietary intervention trial at the University of Copenhagen. The setting was that of a ‘supermarket’, in which 135 recruited participants procured NND foods, as compared with 85 recruited participants who procured foods constituting an ‘Average Danish Diet’ (ADD). Both groups prepared and consumed these foods in their households in accordance with given dietary guidelines (OPUS, 2012b). Dietary compliance among participants is the sine qua none of this type of intervention. Consequently, much attention is given to monitoring food procurement and consumption among participants. A low drop-out rate together with a high level of dietary compliance are sometimes interpreted as indicating that participants have successfully adopted the diet at issue (cf. Skov et al., 1997), suggesting that it will also be acceptable to other consumers. 1

OPUS is an acronym of the project ‘Optimal well-being, development and health for Danish children through a healthy New Nordic Diet’ and is supported by a grant from the Nordea Foundation.

143

Earlier studies of participants in a supermarket intervention, however, have shown that new food practices adopted during the course of the trial, could in large measure be attributed to the controlled conditions of the intervention itself (Nielsen, 2005, 2008). It is therefore far from certain whether such practices will persist after the intervention is over since they may never have become integral features of ordinary day-to-day life. Food practices are conceptualised as constituting routinized patterns of behaviour (Reckwitz, 2002) that interlink specific materials, competences and meanings (Shove et al., 2012) regarding the procurement, preparation and consumption of food in everyday life (Halkier, 2010; Warde, 2005). The appropriation of novel foods and related practices can be seen as the incorporation of these novelties into existing routines (Ingram et al., 2007; Nissen et al., 2012; Niva, 2008). When new foods and related practices have been appropriated, they have become what Silverstone terms ‘domesticated’, that is to say, they have become integral features of that consumer’s everyday life (cf. Silverstone & Hirsch, 1992). The long term outcome of food appropriation is dependent upon whether new food practices can be performed in settings other than their context of origin (cf. Shove et al., 2012). Given the objective of improving public health by disseminating the NND to the wider public, the OPUS intervention offers a unique opportunity to observe the ways in which participants adapt their food practices to accord with this innovative diet. Insight into this process can inform discussion of the likelihood that newly appropriated practices will be maintained after the intervention, and whether they might conceivably be appropriated by other consumers. Thus, focusing on intervention participants consuming the NND, this study explores how they appropriated this diet during the course of the intervention, which new food practices emerged and to what extent these were experienced as being compatible with the demands of everyday life. In

144

this light, tentative conclusions about the potential of the NND as a means of improving public health are cautiously drawn.

Setting and intervention participants This intervention was designed as a controlled, ad libitum, gratis, supermarket trial, in which participants were randomly assigned to an NND or ADD diet (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01195610). A supermarket setting was selected since it enables controlled monitoring of dietary compliance in regard to food categories and macronutrients (Skov et al., 1997). This supermarket was set up in an 87 m2 room next to the Department of Human Nutrition at Copenhagen University. It displayed fresh vegetables and a broad assortment of groceries and other food products on shelves and in refrigerators or chest freezers – all marked with coloured stickers, signifying whether they were NND or ADD products. Weighing scales and cutting boards were placed throughout the supermarket allowing participants to weigh or cut products so that portion size would accord with dietary restrictions. Check-out procedure entailed registration of the contents of each food basket regarding the composition of macronutrients (protein, carbohydrate, added sugar, and fat), food categories (such as ‘Nordic’ and ‘organic’) as well as the individual food products procured. Participants were self-recruited in response to online advertisements and media coverage, the incentive being the prospect of consuming the ‘New Nordic Diet from OPUS’ free of charge for the duration of the intervention. Inclusion criteria were: 18 to 65 years of age, declared ability to prepare food at home for the duration and being somewhat overweight (i.e. recruited women had a waist circumference of at least 80 cm and men 94 cm). Also, approximately two thirds of recruited participants exhibited one or more components of metabolic syndrome, such as raised triglycerides, high blood pressure or reduced HDL cholesterol. Although this intervention

145

was not designed to study weight loss as such, this was one parameter to be assessed among other potential health benefits. Participants were given a cookbook with recipes relevant to their diet. Those assigned to the NND were asked to use this throughout the intervention. Recipes followed a seasonal menuplan (summer, autumn, winter and spring), each plan comprising a three-week period repeated until the end of a given season. During the intervention, participants were allotted 21 ’free-days’, on which they could each freely choose to eat and drink other foods. They met with a dietician nine times for the purpose of dietary counselling and monitoring of dietary compliance, and were invited to participate in a cookery lesson in order to learn basic cooking skills. They also participated in several medical examinations for the purpose of taking anthropometric measurements as well as blood, urine and tissue samples.

The New Nordic Diet The NND is designed in accordance with the gastronomic ideals of promoting consumption of wild and seasonal foods that reflect Nordic terroir, as well as the goals of promoting healthy and sustainable food habits (Meyer et al. 2010; Mithril et al. 2012). Approximately 75% of all NND foods are sourced from organic production systems with a view to promoting animal welfare and ensuring a pesticide-free diet (Mithril et al., 2012). Examples of these foods are wild game and free-range meat products, fish, seafood and seaweed from Nordic coastal waters, barley, oats and rye, cabbage, berries and herbs (Meyer et al., 2010). Since almost all non-Nordic foods such as citrus fruits, for example, are excluded, the diet includes a range of vinegars and ciders as sources of sour taste. NND recipes are developed in accordance with Nordic dietary recommendations, and include less meat and more vegetables than commonly consumed by Danes. Alcohol consumption is also restricted (Becker et al., 2004; Meyer

146

et al., 2010). In terms of gastronomic ideals, taste components, healthiness, sustainability, composition of macronutrients, as well as included and excluded food products, the NND differs from the diet commonly consumed by Danish consumers (Pedersen et al., 2010). The NND cookbook developed for the purpose of this intervention includes dinner recipes and suggestions regarding lunch, breakfast and snacks. All meals are made from scratch using fresh, unprocessed Nordic ingredients. Since the NND also seeks to promote the social aspects of household meals, the menu-plan calls upon participants to prepare a two course dinner on weekdays (one of which is usually leftovers from the day before) and a three course dinner on Saturdays (Meyer et al. 2010:60).

Study participants, data collection and analysis Data were collected by the first-author (AM), who conducted two focus groups among NDD and two focus groups among ADD participants (N=38) and undertook observation studies, including informal interviews, in a variety of intervention settings. Quota sampling was employed in recruiting to focus groups with the purpose of maximizing variation within each group in regard to gender, age, household composition, level of education, place of residence, and whether participants were partaking in the intervention as sole representative of their households or were accompanied by a partner. All persons recruited to this study had partaken in the intervention for at least 30 days, and their anonymity was assured. Those in food-related occupations were excluded. Recruitment was by telephone interview using a semi-structured questionnaire, undertaken by a member of the sociological research team. Observations were conducted among the personnel at staff meetings and in the supermarket, focusing on the design of the diet, the organization of the intervention and interactions with participants while shopping (cf. Denzin & Lincoln, 1994). Among participants, observations

147

were conducted at the meeting that introduced them to the intervention, in the supermarket while they perused and procured their food and at cookery lessons. The focus of these observations and informal interviews was upon participants’ perceptions of the NND and their experiences while procuring, preparing and consuming it. Finally, semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with drop-outs from the intervention, focusing on their experience of participation and reasons for leaving. Three attempts to reach all drop-outs from the NND dietary group (N=21) yielded five non-contacts and two refusals, a response rate of 67%. The interview schedule employed in focus groups was based upon insights gained from prior observations and informal interviews. It was designed to explore whether and how dietary appropriation had come about, focusing on which new food practices had been adopted in relation to food procurement, preparation and consumption, and whether these practices were perceived as fitting into their daily lives. Question order was structured by a funnel-technique, which started by exploring reasons for participating in the intervention, followed by probing participants’ experience of and opinions about their diet and the intervention, and ending by exploring whether and how the intervention had changed their food practices and affected their everyday lives. Focus group interviews were video-recorded with the prior permission of participants, and subsequently transcribed verbatim. Field observations and focus group data were analysed thematically in accordance with the above themes (cf. Crabtree & Miller 1999). Given the focus of the present study, data pertaining to the experiences of ADD participants are excluded here.

148

4. Results Appropriating new foods and shopping practices Observing how participants procured NND foods, differences compared to shopping in a commercial supermarket became readily apparent. Access to the intervention supermarket was by appointment only. Since all products were free of charge, no price-tags, advertisements or special offers were to be found. Instead, coloured stickers indicated which items were NND products. On entering this supermarket, participants picked up a grocery-list that had been prepared by the intervention personnel, which noted all products needed to prepare recipes for the NND menu-plan of that particular week. This meant, according to participants, that they procured their food with each coming dish of the week in mind. For them, it was a new experience to peruse the products on offer without having to think about cost or what was missing in their refrigerator, looked particularly tempting or would be appreciated by other household members. Some expressed relief about not choosing food products on the basis of impulse or temptation, since they had to choose products that accorded with their dietary guidelines. It emerged in focus groups that the hope of losing weight had been an incentive for many participants to join this intervention. Since a majority also agreed with the principles of the NND in regard to consuming local, healthy, seasonal and sustainable products, they tended to express enthusiasm about being able to obtain such products free of charge while loosing weight at the same time. Since weighing scales and cutting boards were available and many products had been repacked in smaller portions to minimize food waste, participants procured the specific quantities needed for preparing each dish as specified by the recipe. This entailed that they perceived their food baskets as being less full than usual. Indeed, during their first days of participating in the intervention, some expressed the fear that they would be going to bed hungry. As it turned out, they never did.

149

Participants reported that the process of registering food products in the intervention’s monitoring system gave them a better understanding of what their dietary guidelines allowed them to eat. For this purpose, the contents of each shopping basket were laid out on the counter in front of the participant and thus also displayed to those waiting in line. When a participant had taken wrong products or had failed to comply with target levels for the macronutrient composition of the diet by taking the wrong quantity, he or she was sent back to the shelves to replace items. In other cases, they were able to convince the personnel that they did not like specific NND foods and were then advised about which alternative products would comply with dietary guidelines. Observing these events, it became clear that the process of registration presented an opportunity for participants and personnel to talk about the products and about the participant’s dietary compliance – conversations witnessed by those waiting in line, who in turn appeared to pick up advice about how to comply with their diet. As participants became more experienced at procuring food in the intervention supermarket and as they became accustomed to preparing and eating the different dishes of the season, their shopping routines began to change. They reported that the constant weighing and cutting of foods in the supermarket had taught them how much they should take or cut off each product without having to weigh it, and still be able to comply with their dietary guidelines when registering their food. These routines had taught them which products were central to their diet, the quantities needed to comply with dietary guidelines and to satisfy their appetite. Several reported that they had also begun to tailor their shopping-list in accordance with their preferences – sometimes replacing specific ingredients or even dishes while still being able to comply with dietary guidelines. Thus, guided by prepared shopping-lists, the intervention supermarket also functioned as a learning environment, in which shopping practices changed in accordance with the experiences gained there as well as those gained by preparing and consuming NND meals.

150

Appropriating new food preparation practices With no exception, participants stressed that being introduced to new food products and dishes, as well as having to prepare two or three course dinners from fresh, unprocessed ingredients, made the preparation of NND meals very time consuming and hard to master. Some recipes called for the removal of all excess fat from meat before cooking it, and a large quantity of vegetables, as they saw it, had to be prepared before cooking could begin. Most participants were not used to undertaking extensive preparations prior to the cooking process and this was a recurring theme when talking about preparing NND meals – followed by complaints about the large amount of crockery and cookware needed. Thus, preparing this diet was experienced as being considerably more demanding and time-consuming than expected. This accords with the experience of those who had dropped out of the intervention, most of whom had found the diet too time consuming to prepare and too hard to manage in their everyday lives. Some recounted in focus groups that they had had to buy additional bowls and other items. Others had decided to buy and learn how to master a food processor in order to save time slicing and cutting vegetables. Among those living with a partner and/or children, who were not participating in the intervention, food preparation presented an additional problem since they had to prepare two different dinners each day. This caused great strain since these participants found it difficult to synchronize these tasks. Events such as the illness of a family member or sudden pressure at work also strained the ability to cope with the demands of food preparation. Participants from different types of households reported that they had developed new routines in order to use more time preparing meals, by separating the processes of preparing and cooking, by establishing a new division of labour within the household or by waiting to start the work until small children had

151

fallen asleep. A few made the point that they had become more practiced chefs, as exemplified by this dialogue initiated by a man, who was participating in the intervention with his partner: Brian: […] in the beginning [of the intervention] I’d say that I used an incredibly long time on it [i.e. preparing food], and I had twelve bowls constantly on the go for one thing, or another thing – or a third thing! Moderator: You are all nodding [I see]. Other participants: Yes! Brian: But now, as time has gone by, I don’t think ... No, I damn well don’t use more time than I usually did [before the intervention] to get the cooking done. That’s because we’ve now more or less got in the habit.

In fact, several – but by no means all – found that cooking their NND meals was quite an exciting learning process. Some reported that they had begun to appreciate the task of preparing their dinner every evening, using an hour and a half or two hours to do so. Some made the point that this was a good way of getting rid of all the stress from work and just “being in the moment”. Others said it presented an unforeseen opportunity to talk with one’s spouse and/or children while making dinner. However, far from all participants had learned to appreciate the time-consuming tasks involved in preparing NND meals, just as they did not find the challenge of preparing all meals from scratch exciting. Rather, these participants said that the work involved was too demanding, and that they consequently were looking forward to the conclusion of the intervention. As they gained experience, many participants had begun to change the NND when preparing it. Initially, the majority had prepared all dishes in accordance with the menu-plan in the cookbook. However, some thought that too many recipes required use of the oven, which took too

152

much time and consumed too much energy. One participant explained his concern in the following manner: Martin: […] it [i.e. the NND] costs on electricity. It says in all the recipes that you have to turn on the oven while doing the preparation. Well, our oven, it heats up to 180 degrees in four minutes […], and we have a big oven. That means, we have to warm up a big oven, [usually] for a small portion of food.

Indeed, for the majority of participants, the extended use of the oven ran against their perception of the NND as being a sustainable diet. Accordingly, a number of them had begun to deviate from the cooking instructions – by frying their meat instead of baking it in the oven or by cooking it at a higher temperature. As they became more confident about what was permitted according to their dietary guidelines, and after cooking all recipes in a season, many participants had changed recipes to better accord with their preferences, stopped making the dishes they had not liked or stopped making two or three course dinners. Those who only made a one course dinner were able to reach the target levels set by their dietary guidelines by using the left-over ingredients when making lunch or snacks the following day. In these ways, participants in this intervention became co-producers of the NND they actually consumed, rather than passive recipients of given menu-plans and recipes.

Appropriating new eating practices Although the NND contains many foods that are new to participants, and excludes very many commonly consumed products, the general consensus was that NND meals are filling, healthy and, in particular, very tasty. This point was made for example in the following way by two women, both of whom were participating in the intervention together with their respective partners: Moderator: How does it taste? All participants: [It] tastes great! Fantastic! Super! Anna: We sat like this the first few days [of the intervention] with our arms [over

153

our heads]. We pretended that we were at a restaurant. It’s so delicious – through and through. Beth: We used to eat out a lot, but – wow – we moved the restaurant home to us.

Yet, several participants also spoke of having initial difficulty in getting used to using rapeseed oil or cider vinegar, for example, since new ingredients presented them with unfamiliar flavours. They missed using products such as lemons, growing tired of what they viewed as an excessive use of apple juice, apple cider or apple cider vinegar. Some had tailored recipes to better accord with their taste. Others reported that they had learned to appreciate the taste of the NND and found it increasingly difficult to enjoy eating with friends and family members on their ‘free-days’. They talked about feeling physically ill when eating out and about how they had begun to dislike the taste of non-NND foods. Their bodies had reacted badly to eating too much sugar or to drinking wine, since the intervention had made them accustomed to restricting their consumption of sugar and alcohol. When reflecting on these experiences in the focus groups, a number of participants talked about how they had started to think differently about food and had begun to dislike food which they perceived as being of poor quality. As explained by one woman: Beth: I was on a study trip to London… [during the intervention], but I didn’t really feel like having any fast food. When I was staring at the menu in the cafeteria, I found that my thinking had cognitively changed, and that has been perhaps the biggest plus – that change in my brain.

On the other hand, other participants had experienced sensory stimuli that had reminded them of particular flavours or dishes, which they now missed, or had awakened a craving for specific non-Nordic foods. These tended to agree that food in general should be of high quality, but should not necessarily be restricted to Nordic cuisine. As expressed by one man:

154

Harold: …I almost faint with desire whenever I pass by an Italian restaurant that smells good… Especially the tastiness of the meals and the surprise at how individual food products could taste when prepared correctly were common themes when participants talked about the NND. For example, the man who was so enthusiastic about the smell of Italian cuisine had this to say about the pumpkin soup in his NND cookbook: When you split the pumpkin and you smell it, then you think “hmmm”. But once you put it down into the pot with a little butter, and a little onion, and a little juice, and a little vegetable stock or whatever you put in, then it changes character completely. It becomes such a soft thing. It floats in your mouth. Then you end up having swallowed it – and then you just want more.

The perception of the sensory qualities of NND foods were very often articulated in gastronomic terms and in ways that linked the experiences of preparing and tasting them. In other instances, participants would present more reflected accounts of benefits following from the taste of the NND. For instance, there was the view that the excellent taste made them more full and satisfied, such that cravings for sweets were kept at bay. Others had reached the conclusion that eating more meals than usual during the day kept their blood sugar level stable, thereby reducing the likelihood of food cravings due to lack of energy or hunger. These views indicate that consuming the NND on a daily basis during the intervention had provided a basis on which to construct meaningful accounts of the relationship between food and health in everyday life.

5. Discussion Participants in this dietary intervention, who had made and consumed Nordic foods on a daily basis for at least one month, tended to be enthusiastic about the quality of these products and the taste of

155

the new Nordic diet. Although some had reservations about the sustainability of the diet, given a relatively high use of fuel energy, they generally viewed it as being healthy, satisfying and very tasty. Some had acquired a preference for the NND while others missed using common ingredients or longed for the flavour and smell of another favoured cuisine. More generally, it seems clear that particular dishes had been received with an enthusiasm that suggests they will remain a part of the household’s repertoire after the intervention has ended. On this basis it would seem likely that new adherents would be attracted to the NND by its taste, if given an opportunity to try a dish or to try out a recipe. Participants found the work involved in preparing NND meals to be very demanding and time consuming. Some responded by changing their everyday routines in ways that accommodated these tasks and also became more efficient at accomplishing them. Others had a hard time coping with the demands of preparing NND meals and accomplishing this on an everyday basis. The latter experience was also reported by interviewees who had dropped out of the intervention. It was later confirmed to be the majority view among participants by a survey conducted among all who had participated in the intervention until its conclusion (Micheelsen, et al. in preparation). It would seem therefore that the tasks involved in preparing NND meals on a daily basis are likely to constitute one barrier to the continued consumption of this diet on the part of intervention participants, and therefore also a barrier to its appropriation by other consumers. It transpired that appropriation of the NND on the part of participants was not a passive process of compliance. Rather, it occurred in an innovative manner in which they became co-producers of the NND, changing menu-plans and dishes to accord with everyday demands and individual preferences. Innovative adaptation is a pattern identified in other studies regarding the appropriation of new practices, whereby these are adapted or changed in creative ways as new routines become established (Gram-Hanssen, 2011; Ilmonen, 2004; Shove et al., 2012; Silverstone

156

& Hirsch, 1992). This tendency to innovate was also identified in another Danish study in which consumers (N=33) in urban and rural areas were asked to test two NND prototype recipes in their own households and given all ingredients for this purpose. One quarter and one third had changed the respective recipes, mainly by using additional food products (Micheelsen et al. forthcoming). Cooking styles, including whether and how recipes are used, differ between households, within the household depend upon the social context at issue, and are sometimes used merely as sources of inspiration regarding possible dishes or uses of ingredients (Halkier, 2010; Short, 2003; Wansink, 2003). Moreover, their use is associated with socio-economic status and educational level, such that consumers with lower incomes and educational qualifications are less likely to use them (Caraher et al., 1999). In this light, it might be expected that a social gradient favouring those with higher incomes and educational levels would be found among new users of an NND cookery book and, given the tendency to innovate, it would seem likely that the NND as consumed by them would not comply with the dietary guidelines underlying the intervention explored in this study. The monitoring of new food procurement practices appears to have played an essential role in learning to comply with dietary guidelines among intervention participants. Dietary compliance is the factor that determines whether the NND consumed in the course of this intervention in fact accords with Nordic dietary recommendations. The extent to which such compliance might be maintained after the intervention has ended, on the assumption that former participants continued to make and consume NND meals, is not known. They would in that event be purchasing Nordic foods in usual shopping venues at market prices, while new adherents would be doing so without the benefit of the learning process entailed in a monitored programme of food procurement. Future developments on the market for NND products may improve availability, lower prices and raise current levels of processing. Such initiatives could affect the frequency with

157

which NND food products are consumed, but the extent to which such consumption would comply with dietary recommendations remains uncertain.

6. Conclusion Participants in this dietary intervention appropriated the NND by adopting new food practices regarding the procurement and preparation of Nordic foods, becoming co-producers of the NND in this process. Given the objective of making this diet widely available to Danish consumers, the results of this study suggest that while the taste of the NND is likely to appeal to wider groups, the tasks of appropriating new practices in the areas of food procurement and preparation are among the factors likely to constitute barriers to its more widespread adoption. The longer term objective of improving public health by this means is dependent upon whether future consumption of Nordic foods would in practice comply with Nordic dietary recommendations. Participants in this intervention learned compliance in a setting in which their food procurement was closely monitored. In order to assess the impact of the NND on public health, further studies are needed regarding whether more widespread consumption of the NND would in practice comply with dietary recommendations, and whether such consumption would reflect a socio-economic bias that favours households with relatively greater resources of income or education.

Acknowledgements The authors thank the intervention project manager, Research Fellow Sanne Kellebjerg Poulsen as well as the intervention work package leader, Associate Professor Thomas Meinert Larsen for their valuable contribution to the study. Finally, and most significantly, the authors would like to thank the informants for their participation in this study.

158

Role of the funding source The OPUS research project is funded by the Nordea Foundation. The article manuscript has been approved by the OPUS’ Management Team prior to its submission. For correspondence regarding OPUS: Eva Gleje, Administrative Manager, Department of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, Faculty of Science, University of Copenhagen, Rolighedsvej 30, 1958 Frederiksberg C, Denmark (e-mail: [email protected]).

159

References Becker, W., Lyhne, N., Pedersen, A., Aro, A., Fogelholm, M., Þhórsdottir, I., … Pedersen, J. (2004). Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2004 - integrating nutrition and physical activity. Scandinavian Journal of Nutrition, 48(4), 178–187. doi:10.1080/1102680410003794 Bere, E., & Brug, J. (2009). Towards health-promoting and environmentally friendly regional diets - a Nordic example. Public health nutrition, 12(1), 91–6. doi:10.1017/S1368980008001985 Caraher, M., Dixon, P., Lang, T., & Carr-Hill, R. (1999). The state of cooking in England: the relationship of cooking skills to food choice. British Food Journal, 101(8), 590–609. doi:10.1108/00070709910288289 Crabtree, B. F., & Miller, W. L. (1999). Using codes and code manuals: a template organizing style of interpretation. In B. F. Crabtree & W. L. Miller (Eds.), Doing Qualitative Research (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, California: Sage. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (1994). Handbook of Qualitative Research (p. 643). Thousand Oaks CA, London, New Delhi: Sage. Gram-Hanssen, K. (2011). Understanding change and continuity in residential energy consumption. Journal of Consumer Culture, 11(1), 61–78. doi:10.1177/1469540510391725 Halkier, B. (2010). Consumption Challenged - Food in Medialised Everyday Lives (p. 209pp). Ashgate Pub Co. Ilmonen, K. (2004). The Use of and Commitment to Goods. Journal of Consumer Culture, 4(1), 27–50. doi:10.1177/1469540504040903 Ingram, J., Shove, E., & Watson, M. (2007). Products and Practices: Selected Concepts from Science and Technology Studies and from Social Theories of Consumption and Practice 1. Design Issues, 23(2), 3–16. doi:10.1162/desi.2007.23.2.3 Meyer, C. (2012). The New Nordic Cuisine Movement. Retrieved July 18, 2012, from http://www.clausmeyer.dk/en/the_new_nordic_cuisine_.html Meyer, C., Mithril, C., Blauert, E., & Holt, M. K. (2010). Grundlag for Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad [The fundament for the New Nordic Diet]. The research center OPUS, Copenhagen University, Denmark. Retrieved from http://www.foodoflife.dk/~/media/Foodoflife/docs/pdf/opus/WP 1/100823_Grundlag for Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad_Pressem%C3%B8de.ashx Micheelsen, A., Havn, L., Poulsen, S. K., Larsen, T. M., & Holm, L. (n.d.). The acceptability of the New Nordic Diet among Danish participants in a prolonged, controlled dietary intervention. Micheelsen, A., Jensen, K. O. D., & Holm, L. (n.d.). Acceptance of the New Nordic Diet: An exploratory study from the OPUS project among Danish consumers. Appetite, forthcoming.

160

Mithril, C., Dragsted, L. O., Meyer, C., Blauert, E., Holt, M. K., & Astrup, A. (2012). Guidelines for the New Nordic Diet. Public health nutrition, 1–7. doi:10.1017/S136898001100351X Nielsen, A. (2005). Exercising freedom and control in the supermarket from an overweight perspective. In T.-A. Wilska & L. Haanpää (Eds.), Lifestyles and social change: essays in economic sociology (pp. 79–95). Turku: The Turku School of Economics and Business Administration. Nielsen, A. (2008). Keeping it down and getting it right: a sociological analysis of weight control and dietary change in an experimental setup - PhD theses (p. 146). Frederksberg: Københavns Universitet. Nissen, N. K., Sandøe, P., & Holm, L. (2012). Easy to chew, but hard to swallow – consumer perception of neutrally marinated meat. British Food Journal, 114(8), 1095–1105. doi:10.1108/00070701211252075 Niva, M. (2008). Consumers and the conceptual and practical appropriation of functional foods. National Consumer Research Centre, Helsinki. Retrieved from http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978951-698-174-4 Nordic Council of Ministers. (2012). New Nordic Food: Nordic Council of Ministers. Retrieved July 12, 2012, from http://newnordicfood.org/ OPUS. (2012a). Food of LIFE, OPUS – healthier food, better life, New Nordic Diet. foodoflife.dk. LIFE. Retrieved July 12, 2012, from http://www.foodoflife.dk/Opus/English.aspx OPUS. (2012b). OPUS Supermarket intervention, “SHOPUS”. foodoflife.dk. LIFE. Retrieved July 12, 2012, from http://www.foodoflife.dk/Opus/English/wp/supermarket.aspx Pedersen, A. N., Fagt, S., Groth, M. V., Christensen, T., Biltoft-Jensen, A., Matthiessen, J., … Trolle, E. (2010). Danskernes kostvaner 2003 - 2008 - Hovedresultater [Dietary habits in Denmark 2003-2008. Main results ]. Fødevareinstituttet, Danmarks Tekniske Universitet. Retrieved from http://www.foedevarestyrelsen.dk/SiteCollectionDocuments/25_PDF_word_filer til download/07kontor/DanskernesKostvaner2010.pdf Reckwitz, A. (2002). Towards a Theory of Social practices. A Development in Culturalist Theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5(2), 243–263. doi:10.1177/13684310222225432 Saxe, H., Larsen, T. M., & Mogensen, L. (2012). The global warming potential of two healthy Nordic diets compared with the average Danish diet. Climatic Change. doi:10.1007/s10584012-0495-4 Serra-Majem, L., Bach-Faig, A., Miranda, G., & Clapes-Badrinas, C. (2011). Foreword: Mediterranean diet and climatic change. Public Health Nutrition, 14(12A), 2271–2273. doi:10.1017/S1368980011002503

161

Short, F. (2003). Domestic cooking skills - what are they ? Journal of the HEIA, 10(3). Shove, E., Pantzar, M., & Watson, M. (2012). The Dynamics of Social Practice: Everyday Life and how it Changes (p. 208). SAGE Publications Ltd. Silverstone, R., & Hirsch, E. (Eds.). (1992). Consuming technologies: Media and information in domestic spaces. London and New York: Routledge. Skov, a R., Toubro, S., Raben, a, & Astrup, A. (1997). A method to achieve control of dietary macronutrient composition in ad libitum diets consumed by free-living subjects. European journal of clinical nutrition, 51(10), 667–72. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9347286 Wansink, B. (2003). Profiling nutritional gatekeepers: three methods for differentiating influential cooks. Food Quality and Preference, 14(4), 289–297. doi:10.1016/S0950-3293(02)00088-5 Warde, A. (2005). Consumption and Theories of Practice. Journal of Consumer Culture, 5(2), 131– 153. doi:10.1177/1469540505053090

162

Epilogue In the Acknowledgment, I write that it has not been an easy task to conduct my PhD study and that one reason for this concerns my personal reluctance about contributing to OPUS’ aim to renew Danish culinary culture by means of the New Nordic Diet. This calls for an explanation. Prior to undertaking my PhD study, I worked as a research consultant in the private sector conducting market research and public affairs studies for different clients – always with their aims and interests in mind. Essentially, clients would obtain my services in order to gain insights and results relevant for the advancement of their goals, such as setting a new agenda in public discourse or selling more frozen pizzas to over-worked parents. Thus, my research was a tool used for realizing my clients’ goals, and my findings showed how this could be done. Understanding the clients’ goals and interests is paramount in this kind of research, since it defines the purpose of the study and the relevant field of interest in regard to findings. When I entered the OPUS project and began my PhD study, I reckoned that I would be finished with all of that. Indeed, I thought that I was to study the New Nordic Diet in relation to the field of interest of the scientific community engaged in the sociology of food, and that the design of my studies and the conclusions I drew from them would only be subjected to criticism from my peers within this community. This was not entirely to be the case. The OPUS Research Centre is founded on the vision that the New Nordic Diet can improve public health (OPUS, 2009a). This vision is based first and foremost on the idea that dietary recommendations are easier to follow if they recommend foods that taste well. Secondly, the Research Centre sees it as its legitimate mission to improve public health by disseminating the New Nordic Diet. This is based on the ambition that our culinary culture should accord with the ideals of New Nordic Cuisine. The mission and vision for the Centre is given a very high priority in OPUS, and the question is how this priority is balanced with the interests and questions relevant for the scientific research conducted within the Centre. In my view, there are three important issues related to this: First, much is at stake for OPUS regarding public appreciation of the New Nordic Diet, since the mission was proclaimed in 2009 prior to any scientific findings about the possible benefits of this new diet. In other words, results that indicate, for example, that the New Nordic Diet will not improve public health may now potentially be interpreted as representing a public failure for OPUS. It has been my experience that there has indeed been a fixation on ensuring the success of the Centre and of the New Nordic Diet as scientific findings about the diet became available for

163

scrutiny. All research conducted within OPUS is subject to specific publication rules managed by OPUS. Prior to initiating any study, a synopsis of the research study has to be approved by the OPUS Management Team. Then, prior to submitting an article for publication, the Management Team will comment on the manuscript anonymously and finally approve it, if and when agreement on the content of the manuscript is reached. In the event that disagreement between authors and members of the Management Team remains unresolved, the Centre Director has the prerogative to “make the final decision” about changes made to the text of any article from OPUS (OPUS Publication Rules, Version 4.0, Bilag 22.5.1.). Obviously, rules and regulations for coordinating scientific work are vital to a multidisciplinary Research Centre such as OPUS, and I have no quarrel with this. However, in my case, the conclusions which I drew from my findings about the acceptability of the New Nordic Diet and its chances of achieving nationwide appropriation were met with comments which sought to steer my conclusions in a direction that was more positive as regards the perceived success of the New Nordic Diet. Thus, as I experienced it, I was once again trying to manage the interests of my client (i.e. the OPUS Management Team). Although familiar with such working conditions, I did feel that my work came head-to-head with other interests than my own. Secondly, the predefined field of interest, as given by OPUS’ mission of improving public health by means of the New Nordic Diet, was embedded in the original research proposal. This entails that all major tasks in the Centre are designed with this mission in mind. WP1 develops the New Nordic Diet, WP3 and WP5 tests its health potential, and WP7 disseminates it to the public (see Section 1.2). The sociological studies of adult Danes were therefore predefined as acceptability studies with reference to the New Nordic Diet since this diet’s acceptance had to be established with a view to its dissemination. Whether or not the New Nordic Diet is a sound idea is therefore not relevant in this context, since this question lies beyond the field of interest of the Centre. Instead, as part of the large OPUS project, the sociological studies were assigned specific tasks, organised in connection to the overall work package structure of the project and in accordance with the interest in developing, testing and disseminating the New Nordic Diet. This has limited the range of topics I could study and also entailed a number of methodological limitations, as illustrated in Section 3.2. Finally, in developing and disseminating the New Nordic Diet, OPUS has built the diet upon a specific understanding of culture, specifically ‘Nordic’ culture. This concept is arbitrary and only includes a historical understanding of culture, which, in turn, disqualifies foods that are commonly consumed within this region today, such as greenhouse tomatoes from being part of this

164

diet (see Section 1.3). This ‘Nordic’ culture is therefore OPUS’ construction, and has not been presented with any reflections regarding the possible consequences it might have when employed in the renewal of contemporary Danish food culture in accordance with OPUS’ mission. To centre the renewal of Danish culinary culture on one conception of culture – that being the historical heritage of Nordic culture – may carry the risk, in my view, of leading to cultural exclusion and unintended ethnocentrism. The question which I find relevant on ethical and political grounds is whether a public scientific research Centre should disseminate such a diet? Furthermore, since dissemination of the New Nordic Diet includes the scientific findings of research from OPUS, the scientific work undertaken within OPUS may well be perceived as providing support for the ideal of only consuming ‘Nordic’ food, even if the scientific results are relevant for Mediterranean and Asian diets or diets from elsewhere in the world. In my view, the issues I have addressed here call for reconsideration of the ends which scientific multidisciplinary research should pursue, and reconsideration of how such research should be organised and disseminated in order to minimize the risk of having unwanted interests and assumptions entangled in scientific research. Also, we need to (re-)consider our own position as social scientists when participating in such research projects since our findings may be employed in legitimizing interests and aims with which we may not agree, such as the proliferation of the New Nordic Diet including its underlying ideals drawn from New Nordic Cuisine (cf. Meyer & Astrup, 2012: 9). In my view, scientists should be cautious about participating in the dissemination of a specific understanding of culture with the intent of changing society, such as OPUS seeks to do. The findings of this PhD study strongly suggest that the ideal of a local, organic and seasonal cuisine primarily speaks to a privilege segment of the population in terms of level of education and available resources for investing in their food. Scientifically legitimising the New Nordic Diet’s healthiness and cultural supremacy as being acceptable and sustainable, may become, in my view, yet another way of seeking to impose the values of the privileged on the majority of Danes. Furthermore, seeking to employ these values as a means of improving public health among those who suffer most from dietary related lifestyle diseases verges, in my view, on the presumptuous.

165

Appendix: A. Exploratory study of Danish consumers’ acceptance of the NND Focus group schedule VELKOMST: 5 min. i alt Tak fordi I ville komme til denne rundbordssamtale i aften. Som I allerede ved, er rundbordssamtalen en del af et forskningsprojekt ved Københavns Universitet, der bl.a. omhandler danskernes hverdagsmad og madvaner generelt. Emner Vi skal i aften tale om: 1. den mad og de retter I spiser i jeres hverdag – og vil skal snakke om 2. en række fødevarer, som indgår i dette forskningsprojekt 3. og, I får også mulighed for at smage på en ret, som indgår i projektet. Baggrund Jeg vil i løbet af vores snak i aften komme ind på baggrunden for hele projektet, så det vender jeg tilbage til senere. Spilleregler I er inviteret her i aften, fordi jeg er interesseret i at høre jeres meninger om en række emner, som I skal snakke om med hinanden. Der er ikke nogen rigtige eller forkerte meninger i aften. I skal ikke holde jer tilbage, men sige det I har på hjertet. Det er ikke nogen eksamen. Så det er jer, der ved bedst! Vores snak i aften bliver sådan, at jeg har en række emner, som jeg godt kunne tænke mig, at I diskuterer med hinanden. I må meget gerne supplere, kommentere og spørge til hinandens holdninger og meninger. I må gerne uenige med hinanden og give udtryk for det. Det ville være fint, hvis I kunne få en dialog med hinanden rundt om bordet.

Anonymitet

Hygge

166

Det kan også være, at I gerne vil stille mig spørgsmål i løbet af i aften. Men hvis I venter med at stille dem til efter vores snak, vil det være fint. Som I kan se, bliver vores snak optaget på video og diktafon. Årsagen er, at jeg ikke kan huske alle jeres guldkorn. Derfor optager jeg vores snak, så jeg altid kan gå tilbage og check mine resultater. Så I må meget gerne tale en ad gangen. Det er kun mig, Louise – som jeg straks vil præsentere – og personen som I talte med, da I blev inviteret til rundbordssamtalen, der kender jeres navne. Alt hvad der bliver sagt i aften og i den videre undersøgelse bliver håndteret fortroligt, og I vil være anonymiseret i hele undersøgelsen. Men – det er meningen, at vi skal hygge os i aften. Der er allerede stillet lidt vådt og tørt frem til jer, så hold jer ikke tilbage.

BORDET RUNDT: 5 min. i alt Navn Alder Børn/kæreste Fritid

Lad os først starte med at præsentere os selv over for hinanden. Henne i hjørnet sidder Louise, som er studentermedhjælper og xx år gammel. Louise er studerende ved Københavns Universitet og bor i et kollegium i København. Og jeg hedder Arun, er 36 år gammel og bor også i København med min kæreste. Jeg har en lille dreng på 4 mdr. og er i øjeblikket ved at lave en phd. ved Københavns Universitet. I min fritid er jeg medlem i vores andelsboligforening. Vil du fortælle lidt om dig selv?

HVERDAGENS SPISEVANER/ AFTENSMAD: 20 min. i alt Jeg vil gerne starte med, at I alle bruger 1 min. på at skrive, hvad I spiste til aftensmad i går og hvorfor det lige blev dét, som I spiste? Bare skriv det ned som stikord på den blok I har foran jer. Når I er færdige, må I gerne lægge blyanten. Hverdagen vedr. aftensmåltidet hjemme [efter 2-3 min] [Spørger ca. to til fire deltagere – derefter næste spørgsmål]

Jeg når nok ikke at spørge jer alle, men XXX vil du fortælle, hvad du har skrevet ned? Hvad spiste du i går? Hvem spiste du sammen med? Hvorfor blev det lige dét, du/I til aftensmad?

Der fokuseres på følgende emner: Er der nogen, der oplever, at der er andre ting, som har Viden (Inspiration fra venner, betydning for det I laver til aftensmad? blader, kogebøger), Eksterne ønsker/krav (Familiemedlemmers ønsker og krav), Strukturelle forhold (Udbud og tilbud hos forhandleren), Begivenhed og Ressourcer (Tid, Bekvemmelighed,Pris) BILLED ØVELSE 1: 20 min. i alt

167

Nu vil jeg gerne have, at I arbejder sammen med jeres siddemand. Her er der 11 billedkort af forskellige retter. Jeg vil gerne have, at I sorterer dem i to bunker sammen. Én bunke med retter I ikke vil lave til aftensmad og én bunke med retter, I kunne finde på at lave til aftensmad. Tænk på alt det, vi lige har talt om og snak med jeres siddemand, om hvad I selv synes. Hvis I ikke er enige, så læg kortet i en tredje bunke. I får 5 min. til at sortere kortene og bagefter skal vi snakke om, hvorfor I har lagt de enkelte kort i de to bunker. Husk, der er ikke noget rigtigt eller forkert og hvis I ikke er enige, skal I bare lægge kortet i en tredje bunke. [Efter 5 min.]

Ok, I får lige 2 min til, til at blive færdige

Klassificering af måltider [Efter 2 min.] Der fokuseres på følgende emner: Mad/ikke-mad kategorier, Ukendt mad til kendt mad skala, Begivenhed, Bekvemmelighed/tid, Familiemedlemmers ønsker/præferencer, Madlavnings-kompetencer

Godt, vil I starte med at fortælle os, hvilke to eller tre bunker, I har lavet – og hvorfor I har valgt, som I har? Hvilke måltider kunne I finde at lave? Hvorfor? Var i enige? Er der en ret som I mener, mangler? Hvilken? Hvilke måltider vil I ikke lave? Hvorfor? Var i enige? Hvad talte I om, da I lavede bunkerne?

168

INDTRODUKTION AF NNK: 20 min. i alt Som en del af det forskningsprojekt jeg er involveret i, bliver der udviklet en ny hverdagsmad til danskerne, som består af nye retter og råvarer. Jeg vil gerne læse en beskrivelse op af denne nye hverdagsmad og høre jeres umiddelbare mening om det. I få den også her på et papir, så I kan læse med, hvis I vil. Igen – der er ikke noget rigtigt eller forkert. Jeg vil bare gerne høre jeres umiddelbare tanker. Jeg læser beskrivelsen op én gange – og I skal skrive tre til fire tanker ned, som falder jer ind, når I høre beskrivelsen. Måske har I lyst til at stille mig uddybende spørgsmål, efter jeg har læst beskrivelsen op. Desværre vil jeg ikke kunne besvare jeres spørgsmål – men skriv dem gerne ned, da jeg gerne vil høre, hvorfor lige de spørgsmål dukker op. [Del beskrivelse A. ud og læser derefter beskrivelse A. op] A. Umiddelbare opfattelser af NNK Der fokuseres på følgende emner: Betegnelsen Ny Nordisk Kost (NNK) Principperne for NNK Råvarerne i NNK [økologi?]

Godt, skriv tre til fire tanker ned, som falder jer ind – og læg så blyanten ned, når I er færdige.

B. Opfattelse af projektet, afsenderne samt hensigter [Del beskrivelse B. ud og læser derefter beskrivelse B. op] Der fokuseres på følgende emner: Baggrunden for

Her er lidt mere information om den nye hverdagsmad, som jeg vil læse op én gange – og I skal igen skrive tre til fire tanker ned, som falder jer ind, når I høre beskrivelsen. Igen: jeg vil ikke kunne besvare jeres spørgsmål – men skriv dem gerne ned, da jeg gerne vil høre, hvorfor lige de spørgsmål dukker op.

Hvad har du skrevet ned XXX? Hvorfor lige dét? Hvad har givet dig de tanker/spørgsmål? Er der nogen der har skrevet noget lignende ned? Hvad har givet dig de tanker/spørgsmål? Er der nogen der har skrevet nogle andre tanker, ord eller spørgsmål ned? Hvad har givet dig de tanker/spørgsmål? [Vil det betyde noget, hvis størstedelen af fødevarerne er økologiske?]

Hvad har du skrevet ned XXX? Hvorfor lige dét? Hvad har givet dig de tanker/spørgsmål?

169

NNK Målet med NNK

Er der nogen der har skrevet noget lignende ned? Hvad har givet dig de tanker/spørgsmål? Er der nogen der har skrevet nogle andre tanker, ord eller spørgsmål ned? Hvad har givet dig de tanker/spørgsmål?

Hvis deltagerne Hvad tænker I om, at kokke og forskere udvikler et sådan køkken til ikke kommer ind på danskerne? emnerne, spørges der direkte Hvorfor tror I, at et sådan projekt bliver sat i søen? Hvorfor tror I, at Meyers Madhus, Nordea Fonden og danske Universiteter deltager i projektet? Synes I, at det er en god idé, at de udvikler en ny hverdagsmad? SMAGE NNK: 20 min. i alt Nu har vi talt en del om Ny Nordisk Kost. Så hvad med at vi prøver at smage en lille ret? Palabilitet [Del spørgeskema ud]

Her er et stykke papir med to spørgsmål, som jeg gerne vil have at i svare med et par stikord, imens I smager retten.

Som I kan se, er spørgsmålene: 1. Hvad er det første du tænker på, efter du har smagt retten? 2. Hvad synes du om udseendet, duft og smag? Vent med at snakke sammen til alle har smagt og skrevet deres stikord ned. Når I er færdige med at skrive, skal I lægge blyanten ned. Giv jer god tid og smag på maden. [Mad deles ud – venter 5 min.]

Ok, er alle færdige? Hvad siger I så? Hvad tænkte I på, efter I smagte retten? Er der nogen, der har tænkt noget andet? Hvad?

Appropriation Direkte spørgsmål

170

Hvordan synes I om retten i forhold til udseendet, duft og smag? Er der nogen der kunne finde på at lave den ret, som I lige har smagt?

BILLED ØVELSE 2: 20 min Jeg vil gerne have, at I arbejder sammen med jeres siddemand igen. I skal bruge kortene med billeder af forskellige retter igen. Denne gang vil jeg gerne have, at I vælger to til tre kort, som I mener, ligner det, I lige har smagt. Hvis I ikke er enige, må I gerne vælge et kort hver. Snak sammen i et par minutter, vælg et kort og snak sammen om hvorfor I netop har valgt det kort? Klassifikation og skalaer [Efter 5 min.] [Spørg to til tre grupper og derefter fri snak]

Ok – hvilke kort har I valgt? Hvad snakkede I om, da I skulle vælge kortene? Hvorfor valgte I netop dét kort? Er der andre, der har valgt de samme kort? Hvorfor? Er der nogen, der har valgt andre kort? Hvorfor?

AFSLUTNING OG VIDERE INSTRUKTIONER: 10 min. i alt [Gennemgang af materiale samt vejledning for testugen]

Resultaterne af undersøgelsen [Skal kun siges hvis deltagerne spørger direkte til det]

Så er vi ved at være færdige for i aften. Men før jeg fortælle om næste skridt i undersøgelsen, vil jeg høre, om der er nogen der brænder inde med noget, som de gerne vil ud med? I den næste del af undersøgelsen, skal I … I får ikke tilsendt nogen resultater fra undersøgelsen. Men hvis I er interesseret i undersøgelsen, vil jeg meget gerne henvise jer til en hjemmeside efter I er færdige med at deltage i hele undersøgelsen.

171

Description of the New Nordic Diet A:

Ny Nordisk Kost er en ny hverdagsmad. Idéen bag Ny Nordisk Kost er at forene sundhed og velsmag med udgangspunkt i lokale råvarer så vel som nye og gamle kulinariske traditioner.

Den Nye Nordiske Kost følger en række principper, bl.a. at: • Der skal bruges lokale råvarer, som er produceret - og gerne har sin oprindelse - i Norden • Produktionen af råvarerne skal tage hensyn til miljøet og dyrevelfærd • Råvarerne skal være sæsonbestemte • Indholdet af måltiderne skal følge de nationale kostråd • Tilberedningen af maden skal følge de nordiske kulinariske traditioner

Maden i den Nye Nordiske Kost består bl.a. af: • Kål (fx grønkål, skvalderkål) • Bær (fx solbær, blåbær, ribs, stikkelsbær, hindbær, brombær, og hyldebær) • Nordiske kornsorter (fx rug, havre, byg, urhvede, Ølandshvede og perlespelt) • Svampe og vilde planter (ramsløg, hyldeblomst, brændenælder, Karl Johan, kantareller) • Vilde fisk fra vores lokale farvande (fx makrel, rødspætter, torsk og sandart samt tobis og brisling som er fiskearter, danskerne normalt ikke spiser) • Danske frugter (fx æbler, pærer, hyben, kirsebær, blommer, kvæde og rabarber) • Vildt kød (fx Rådyr, hjort, ænder, fasaner, osv.) • Kød fra fritgående græssende dyr (fx lam, geder og køer) • Tang

172

B:

I 2004 præsenterede en gruppe nordiske gourmet-kokke retningslinjerne for et nyt nordisk køkken, som det fx er kendt fra restaurant noma i København. Sidenhen har Nordisk Ministerråd støttet initiativet og i 2009 har Nordea Fonden givet 100 mio. kr. til et forskningsprojekt, som skal undersøge Ny Nordisk Kosts sundhedsfremmende potentiale ved at teste maden blandt voksne og børn i Danmark. Det er Meyers Madhus, som har ansvaret for at udvikle den Nye Nordiske Kost, og danske Universiteter skal efterfølgende teste den. Målet med projektet er at udvikle en velsmagende nordisk hverdagsmad, som - videnskabeligt set er sundere at spise og bedre for miljøet end den hverdagsmad, som danskerne spiser i dag.

173

Pictures for exercise

174

175

176

Instructions for photo-diary

Kære deltager Tak for din deltagelse i undersøgelsen om den Nye Nordiske Kost. Læs venligst følgende sider om resten af undersøgelsen.

7 dages undersøgelsen Denne del af undersøgelsen tager 7 dage. I løbet af de næste 7 dage skal du: 1. lave de to ”Ny Nordisk Kost aftensmåltider” med de ingredienser og opskrifter, som du har fået udleveret. 2. hver dag de næste 7 dage udfylde et kort ”aftensmåltidsskema” og tage billeder af den mad, du spiser. 3. udfylde et kort spørgeskema til hver af de 2 ”Ny Nordisk Kost aftensmåltid”, efter du har spist det. I løbet af uge 46 og 47 vil jeg ringe til dig og høre hvordan det går samt besvare eventuelle spørgsmål. Efter vi har talt sammen og du har sendt al materialet til mig, modtager du et gavekort på 300 kr.

Spørgsmål? Du er altid velkommen til at ringe til mig, hvis du har spørgsmål. Du kan kontakte mig på 35 33 35 53 mellem 10-12 og 13-15 alle hverdage eller på [email protected]

Hvad skal du gøre? Det er vigtigt, at du ikke ændrer dine daglige rutiner og gøremål pga. af undersøgelsen. Det eneste undersøgelsen kræver, er, at du laver de to ”Ny Nordisk Kost aftensmåltider”, husker at tage billeder af maden, udfylder dit ”aftensmåltidsskema” og besvarer skemaet ved hvert ”Ny Nordisk Kost aftensmåltid” opskrift. Når de 7 dage er gået, skal du lægge al besvarelsesmaterialet i den frankerede kuvert og sende den med posten. Hvis du har fået udleveret et engangskamera, skal det også lægges i den frankerede kuvert. Tager du billederne med et digitalt kamera, skal billederne vedhæftes en mail, som sendes til [email protected]

Vejledninger og skemaer

177

På de følgende sider finder du en vejledning til fotografering af din aftensmad. I kassen finder du ingredienserne til dine to ”Ny Nordisk Kost aftensmåltider” samt medfølgende opskrifter. Ved hver opskrift finder du et spørgeskema, som du skal besvare, efter du har spist det pågældende ”Ny Nordisk Kost aftensmåltid”.

Fortrolighed Al indsamlet materiale bliver behandlet fortroligt ligesom du bliver anonymiseret i undersøgelsen.

Om undersøgelsen og testen Undersøgelsen gennemføres af forskningscenteret OPUS ved Københavns Universitet. Fødevarerne er leveret af Meyers Madhus. Med venlig hilsen Arun Micheelsen, Ph.d.-studerende ved Københavns Universitet, LIFE/IHE

Vejledning til fotografering af din aftensmad

De næste 7 dage skal du fotografere alle aftensmåltider, som du spiser – inklusiv de to ”Ny Nordiske aftensmåltider”, som du har fået udleveret i forbindelse med undersøgelsen. Ved hvert aftensmåltid skal du fotografere følgende situationer: 1. To billeder af din mad på tallerkenen, før du spiser maden 2. To billeder efter du har spist maden på din tallerken

Sådan skal du tage billederne Først tager du et billede af tallerkenen med mad på. Stil dig hen over tallerkenen og fotografer lige ned på tallerkenen. Derefter tager du to skridt bagud og tager et billede af det sted, hvor du spiser din aftensmad. Når du er færdig med at spise, tager du igen et billede af tallerkenen ovenfra og går igen to skridt bagud og tager et billede af det sted, hvor du netop har spist din aftensmad. Billedet af tallerkenen skal kun vise den mad, som er på tallerkenen – før og efter. Derimod skal det andet billede vise det sted, hvor du spiser maden – før og efter.

178

FØR 1.

2.

EFTER 1.

2.

Du kan ikke tage for mange billeder. Så tag gerne flere billeder, hvis du er i tvivl. Endvidere er du også meget velkommen til at fotografere dit køkken, imens du laver mad, vasker op samt al alt andet som du mener, er relevant. Du bestemmer.

Inden for de 7 dage som undersøgelsen varer, bestemmer du selv, hvornår du vil lave de to ”Ny Nordisk Kost” aftensmåltider.

Send billederne når du er færdig Du skal tage billeder alle 7 dage. Når du er færdig med hele undersøgelsen (efter 7 dage), skal du sende billederne til Arun Micheelsen. Hvis du har fået udleveret et engangskamera, skal du blot lægge kameraet sammen med resten af undersøgelsesmaterialet i den frankerede kuvert og sende den med posten. Hvis du har taget billederne med dit eget digitale kamera, skal du sende dem som vedhæftede filer på en mail til: [email protected]

Efter du har sendt al materialet vil du modtage dit gavekort med posten.

Alle billederne bliver behandlet fortroligt.

179

Spørgsmål? Hvis du har spørgsmål er du meget velkommen til at kontakte mig på 35 33 35 53 mellem 10-12 og 13-15 alle hverdage eller på [email protected]

180

Seven day dinner-meal questionnaire

Aftensmåltidsskemaet udfyldes hele ugen. Der udfyldes ét skema hver dag. Dag 1/2/3/4/5/6/7. Besvar venligst følgende

Sæt ét kryds ved hvert spørgsmål

spørgsmål om den aftensmad du har spist: Hvilken dag er det?

 Mandag

 Torsdag

 Tirsdag

 Fredag

 Onsdag

 Lørdag  Søndag

Hvor lang tid tog det at lave

 Under 10 min.

maden?

 10-20 min.

(Vælg antal minutter fra

 21-30 min.

påbegyndelsen af

 31-40 min.

madlavningen til maden blev

 Over 40 min.

serveret) Hvor lang tid tog det at spise

 Under 10 min.

maden?

 10-20 min.

(Vælg antal minutter fra

 21-30 min.

maden blev serveret til du/I

 31-40 min.

havde spist op)

 Over 40 min.

Hvilken aftensmad spiste du?

 ”Ny Nordisk Kost” (udfyld venligst skemaet ved opskrifterne de dage, du spiser ”Ny Nordisk Kost”)

 Anden aftensmad  Spiste ikke aftensmad

181

Hvor spiste du aftensmad?

 Hjemme  Privat hos venner/familie  Restaurant el.lign.  Andet sted, notér venligst hvor:

Sæt gerne flere kryds ved hvert spørgsmål Hvem lavede maden?

 Mig selv  Min partner (kæreste/mand/kone)  Mit barn/mine børn  Andre lavede maden, notér venligst hvem:

Hvem spiste du sammen

 Mig selv

med?

 Min partner  Mit barn/mine børn  Sammen med andre, notér venligst hvem:

182

New Nordic Diet meal questionnaire Efter du har tilberedt og spist dit ”nordiske” måltid, bedes du besvare nedenstående spørgsmål om måltidet. Til sidst i skemaet kan du skrive eventuelle kommentarer. Har du ændret på opskriften, suppleret med ingredienser og/eller ændret i det ”nordiske” måltid?

Nej Ja, venligst beskriv her: Skriv her

Hvor enig er du i følgende udsagn om det ”nordiske” måltid? (sæt venligst ét kryds ved hvert udsagn)

Helt enig

Enig

Hverken

Uenig

Helt uenig

enig eller uenig

1. Opskriften var nem at følge



















































2. Opskriften gav mig en klar opfattelse af, hvordan det ”nordiske” måltid skulle se ud 3. Det færdige ”nordiske” måltid blev anderledes end jeg havde forventet 4. Det var svært at lave det ”nordiske” måltid 5. Jeg havde ikke det nødvendige køkkenudstyr til at lave det ”nordiske” måltid

183

6. I forhold til andre nye måltider som jeg har prøvet at lave, tager det lang



















































tid at lave det ”nordiske” måltid 7. Det ”nordiske” måltid er fremmedartet 8. Det ”nordiske” måltid er sundere end den aftensmad, jeg spiser normalt 9. Det ”nordiske” måltid mætter mindre end den aftensmad, jeg spiser normalt 10. Jeg synes, at det ”nordiske” måltid smagte godt

Hvis du har spist det ”nordiske” måltid alene bedes du gå videre til spørgsmål 13. (sæt venligst ét kryds ved hvert udsagn)

Hverken Helt enig

Enig

enig eller

Uenig

Helt uenig

uenig

11. Dem jeg spiste sammen med synes, at det ”nordiske” måltid mætter mindre end den aftensmad,









































de spiser normalt 12. Dem jeg spiste sammen med synes, at det ”nordiske” måltid smagte godt 13. Jeg vil gerne lave dette ”nordiske” måltid igen 14. I fremtiden har jeg lyst til at lave retter, som ligner de ”nordiske” måltider

184

15. Alt i alt er jeg tilfreds med det ”nordiske” måltid, som jeg/vi har











spist

Hvilke situationer mener du, at det ”nordiske” måltid passer bedst til? (sæt gerne flere kryds)

Aftensmad hjemme i hverdagen Aftensmad hjemme i weekenden Aftensmad til gæster på besøg Aftensmad på restaurant Andet, notér venligst her:_________________________________________________

Afsluttende er du meget velkommen til at skrive eventuelle kommentar (fx til opskriften, ingredienserne, det færdige måltid eller andet): Skriv her

185

Interview guide: Personal interview Introduktion: Tak for at jeg måtte komme hjem til dig og høre om dine erfaringer vedrørende de to retter, som du har lavet efter fokusgruppen. Som du ved, er dette den sidste del af undersøgelsen. Ligesom til fokusgrupperne er du anonym [Fortæl om anonymitet + formål med undersøgelsen]. Jeg vil meget gerne høre, om alt hvad du har tænkt på og oplevet i forbindelse med den de to retter, du har lavet.

Interviewet bliver sådan, at du fortæller mig hele historien fra da du kom hjem med råvarerne fra fokusgruppen og op til nu.

Fra Fokusgruppen: ”Lad os vi starte med at spole filmen helt tilbage, til da du sad i fokusgruppen.”

”Hvad tænkte du, at du skulle hjem og lave af mad, da du sad i fokusgruppen?”

”Hvad gjorde du, da du kom hjem efter fokusgruppen? ”

Ret 1 Tilberedning: ”Prøv at fortæl mig i detaljer; hvordan lavede du den første Ny Nordiske ret?” ”Her er et billede, kan du fortælle mig, hvad der er, vi ser?” (evt. billede af tilberedning)

186

Probe: ”Laver du/I normalt jeres mad som, du fortæller mig det nu?”

Servering: ”Og så spise I/du retten; hvordan serverede du den?”

”Her er et billede, kan du fortælle mig, hvad der er, vi ser?” (billede af serveringen)

Probe: ”Serverer du /I normalt jeres mad, som du fortæller mig det nu?”

Spisning: ”Derefter spiser du/I, hvordan gik det med det”?

”Her er et billede, kan du fortælle mig, hvad der er, vi ser?” (billede af maden på tallerkenen)

”Hvad synes du så om maden”? Probe: ”Spiser du /I normalt jeres mad, som du fortæller mig det nu?”

Efter spisning: ”Her er så billedet af bordet, efter I/du har spist: Kan du fortælle mig, hvad der er, vi ser?” Probe: Var du/I mætte efter maden?

187

Probe: Hvad synes du så om maden, i forhold til den mad du spiser til dagligt?”

”Her er billedet af din tallerken efter du har spist – kan du fortælle mig, hvad det er, vi ser på?”

”Hvornår spiste du/I så den anden ret?”

Anden ret: GENTAG SPR. FOR RET 2

Opsummering: ”Så hvis du skulle opsummere, hvad synes du så har været godt ved maden?”

”Hvad synes du ikke har været godt?”

”Hvad med dem, du spiste sammen med – hvad synes de?”

Appropriation 1: ”Efter du har lavet retterne, tænker du så, at du ville have ændret på opskriften?”

Daglige spisevaner: ”Her er de andre billeder, du har taget af din egen mad. Kan du fortælle mig hvad det er vi ser?”

188

Probe: Er det sådan I/du spier til dagligt?

Appropriation 2: ”Er der nogen af de retter, som vi ser på nu, som du kunne finde på at ændre, efter at du have lavet de to Ny Nordiske retter?” Probe: ”Har du ændret noget i forhold til din aftensmad, efter du har prøvet de to Ny Nordiske aftensmåltider?”

Appropriation 3: ”Hvad er det, som gør, at du bliver/ikke bliver inspireret af de to Ny Nordiske retter?”

Afslutning: ”Afsluttende vil jeg gerne høre, om du har et godt råd til dem, som er i gang med at udvikle den Nye Nordiske Kost?” [Gave kort + underskrift] Tak for din tid!

189

B. A quantitative study of intervention-participants’ acceptance of the NND

Baseline questionnaire

190

version 1.0 – d. 10. august 2010 Screenings nr.: __ __ __ - __ __ __ (udfyldes af SHOPUS-medarbejder)

DET BIOVIDENSKABELIGE FAKULTET FOR FØDEVARER, VETERINÆRMEDICIN OG NATURRESSOURCER

KØBENHAVNS UNIVERSITET

Sociologisk spørgeskemaundersøgelse blandt nye SHOPUS-deltagere

191

192

193

Om den sociologiske spørgeskemaundersøgelse Som deltager i SHOPUS skal du følge en bestemt kostplan i seks måneder. Det betyder, at din hverdag og hverdagsmad nok vil ændre sig. Kostplanen i SHOPUS indeholder muligvis råvarer, som du ikke plejer at spise. Tilberedningen af maden sker efter opskrifter, som du måske ikke kender, og dine ”indkøb” af madvarer er gratis.

Vi er en gruppe madsociologer uden direkte tilknytning til SHOPUS, som er interesseret i at vide, hvordan

din

hverdag

og

spisevaner

ændrer

sig.

Derfor

gennemfører

vi

denne

spørgeskemaundersøgelse. Dette spørgeskema handler om dine madvaner før SHOPUS-studiet starter samt hvorfor du ønsker at deltage i SHOPUS. Ved afslutningen af SHOPUS udleverer vi igen et spørgeskema, som blandt andet handler om dine erfaringer med at følge kostplanen. På den måde kan vi se, hvordan deltagernes hverdag og spisevaner ændrer sig.

Alle deltagere i SHOPUS får et ”screeningsnummer” (se øverste højre hjørne på forsiden). Derved er alle besvarelser anonymiseret. Med andre ord er det ikke muligt at identificere enkeltpersoner i de afleverede spørgeskemaer eller i undersøgelsens endelige resultater. Det er kun os, madsociologer, som har adgang til de anonymiserede besvarelser.

Spørgeskemaet skal afleveres ved Screeningsundersøgelsen. Din besvarelse har stor betydning for undersøgelsen, så det er vigtigt, at du udfylder skemaet grundigt.

Det tager ca. 30 minutter at udfylde skemaet. Ønsker du at uddybe dine svar og/eller kommentere spørgeskemaet, har du mulighed for det sidst i skemaet. Har du spørgsmål til undersøgelsen, er du velkommen til at kontakte Arun Micheelsen på tlf. 35 33 35 53.

Med venlig hilsen Professor Lotte Holm Ph.d.-studerende Arun Micheelsen Forskningsassistent Louis Havn

194

DEL 1: DIN MOTIVATION FOR AT DELTAGE I SHOPUS Spm. 1: Hvorfor vil du gerne deltage i SHOPUS? Vælg de 3 årsager som passer bedst. Skriv ’1’ ved den vigtigste årsag, ’2’ ved den næstvigtigste og ’3’ ved den tredjevigtigste.

a. Muligheden for at spise Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad

b. Muligheden for at lære mere om mad c. Muligheden for at lære mere om madlavning

d. Muligheden for at få diætist-vejledning om mad

e. Muligheden for at få vejledning om min livsstil generelt

f. Muligheden for at få gratis mad i en længere periode

g. Muligheden for at tabe mig

h. Muligheden for at få undersøgt min helbredstilstand

i.

Muligheden for at bidrage til den videnskabelige forskning på ernæringsområdet

j.

Muligheden for at få opbakning og vejledning til at ændre mine kostvaner

k. Min interesse for ernæring og sundhed generelt

l.

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

Andet? Beskriv venligst:

___

__________________________________________________

195

__________________________________________________

Spm. 2: Håber du på, at du har tabt dig, efter du har fulgt kostplanen i 6 måneder? (sæt kun et kryds)

 Nej  Gå til spørgsmål nr. 4  Ja

196

Spm. 3: Hvor mange kg. håber du at tabe ved at følge kostplanen i 6 måneder? (sæt kun et kryds)

 Under 1 kg.  1-2 kg.  3-4 kg.  5-6 kg.  7-8 kg.  9-10 kg.  11-12 kg.  13-14 kg.  Over 14 kg.  Ved ikke

197

DEL 2: DE MADVARER DU KØBER TIL DAGLIG De næste spørgsmål handler om dine daglige madindkøb. Når du besvarer spørgsmålene, skal du tænke på, hvad du normalt køber af madvarer.

Spm. 4: I hvilken grad er du optaget af, at de madvarer du køber, er årstidens madvarer (fx rodfrugter om vinteren og jordbær om sommeren)? (sæt kun et kryds)

a. I høj grad



b. I nogen grad



c. I mindre grad



d. Slet ikke



Spm. 5: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om årstidens madvarer? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Jeg synes at årstidens

eller

madvarer …

uenig

a. er sundere end andre varer b. er meget dyrere end andre varer c. smager bedre end andre varer

198

Ved ikke





































d. sjældent kan købes i

















































h. er bedre for klimaet













i.













de butikker, hvor jeg handler e. er af dårligere kvalitet end andre varer f. er bedre for miljøet g. er svære at kende fra andre varer i supermarkedet

er ofte ikke andet end snyd og bedrag

Spm. 6: I hvilken grad er du optaget af, at de madvarer du køber, er lokalt produceret (fx madvarer fra mindre, lokale producenter)? (sæt kun et kryds)

a. I høj grad



b. I nogen grad



c. I mindre grad



199



d. Slet ikke

Spm. 7: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om madvarer, der er lokalt produceret? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Jeg synes at lokalt

eller

producerede madvarer …

uenig

a. er sundere end andre varer b. er meget dyrere end andre varer c. smager bedre end andre varer

Ved ikke

































































































d. sjældent kan købes i de butikker, hvor jeg handler e. sikrer bedre dyrevelfærd f. er af dårligere kvalitet end andre varer g. er bedre for miljøet h. er svære at kende fra andre varer i supermarkedet i.

er bedre for klimaet













j.

er ofte ikke andet













end snyd og bedrag

200

Spm. 8: I hvilken grad er du optaget af, at de madvarer du køber, er økologiske (fx økologisk kød)? (sæt kun et kryds)

a. I høj grad



b. I nogen grad



c. I mindre grad



d. Slet ikke



Spm. 9: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om økologiske madvarer? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Jeg synes at økologiske

eller

madvarer…

uenig

a. er sundere end ikkeøkologiske varer b. er meget dyrere end ikke-økologiske varer c. smager bedre end ikke-økologiske varer

Ved ikke





























































d. sjældent kan købes i de butikker, hvor jeg handler e. sikrer bedre dyrevelfærd

201

f. er af dårligere kvalitet end ikke-





































økologiske varer g. er bedre for miljøet h. er svære at kende fra andre varer i supermarkedet i.

er bedre for klimaet













j.

er ofte ikke andet













end snyd og bedrag

202

Spm. 10: I hvilken grad er du optaget af, at de madvarer du køber, er klimavenlige (madvarer produceret med mindst negativ effekt på klimaet såsom lav CO2 udledning)? (sæt kun et kryds)

a. I høj grad



b. I nogen grad



c. I mindre grad



d. Slet ikke



Spm. 11: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om klimavenlige madvarer? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt enig

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Jeg synes at klimavenlige

eller

madvarer …

uenig

a. er sundere end andre varer b. er meget dyrere end andre varer c. smager bedre end andre varer

Ved ikke









































































d. sjældent kan købes i de butikker, hvor jeg handler e. sikrer bedre dyrevelfærd f. er af dårligere

203

kvalitet end andre varer g. er bedre for miljøet

















































h. er svære at kende fra andre varer i supermarkedet i.

rent faktisk er bedre for klimaet

j.

er ofte ikke andet end snyd og bedrag

204

Spm. 12: I hvilken grad er du optaget af, at de madvarer du køber, er sunde (fx madvarer der indeholder de næringsstoffer, som din krop har brug for)? (sæt kun et kryds)

a. I høj grad



b. I nogen grad



c. I mindre grad



d. Slet ikke



Spm. 13: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om sunde madvarer? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt enig

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Jeg synes at sunde

eller

madvarer…

uenig

Ved ikke

a. er light produkter













b. er meget dyrere end





























































usunde varer c. smager bedre end usunde varer d. sjældent kan købes i de butikker, hvor jeg handler e. sikrer bedre dyrevelfærd f. er af dårligere kvalitet end andre varer

205

g. er bedre for miljøet h. er fedtfattige produkter i.

er bedre for klimaet

j.

er uforarbejdede madvarer

k. er svære at kende fra andre varer l.

er uden tilsætningsstoffer

m. er ofte ikke andet end snyd og bedrag

206





















































































DEL 3: DEN MAD DU LAVER OG SPISER TIL HVERDAG Når du besvarer de følgende spørgsmål, skal du tænke på den mad, som du selv laver og spiser til hverdag.

Spm. 14: Foretrækker du traditionelle eller moderne madretter? Traditionelle madretter er fx flæskesteg og hakkebøf. Moderne madretter er fx wok- og pastaretter. (sæt kun et kryds)

 Jeg foretrækker traditionelle madretter  Jeg foretrækker moderne madretter  Jeg foretrækker ikke det ene frem for det andet  Ved ikke

Spm. 15: Vælg om du er mest enig i udsagnet til højre eller venstre.

(sæt kun et kryds i hver linje)

Enig

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

enig

eller

enig

Enig

Jeg synes selv, at jeg er god til at lave mad

Jeg synes ikke, at











den mad jeg laver, smager specielt godt

Enig

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

enig

eller

enig

Enig

207

Når jeg laver mad

Når jeg laver mad

efter en opskrift,

efter en opskrift,

er det vigtigt for mig at følge den











ret nøje

kan jeg ikke lade være med at improvisere og ændre i opskriften

Enig

Jeg laver tit nye retter



Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

enig

eller

enig







Enig



Jeg holder mig til de retter, jeg kender

Enig

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

enig

eller

enig

Enig

Jeg synes, det er nemt at lave sund mad

Jeg er usikker på,











Overvejende

Enig

hvordan man laver sund mad

Spørgsmål 15 fortsætter

Enig

Overvejende Hverken/ enig

eller

enig

Jeg kan selv finde på en ret, hvis jeg bare har en

Jeg skal have en











håndfuld råvarer Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

enig

eller

enig

Enig

Jeg vil gerne have,

overstås hurtigt i hverdagen

208

mig op ad, hvis jeg skal lave nye retter

Enig

at madlavningen

opskrift at læne

I hverdagen bruger











jeg gerne tid på at lave mad

Spm. 16: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om din madlavning? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Ved ikke

eller uenig a. Jeg prøver sjældent nye madvarer, fordi jeg ikke ved, hvordan de skal





























































tilberedes

b. Jeg går gerne på opdagelse i kogebøger eller blade for at finde nye retter, som jeg kan lave

c. Jeg har al det nødvendige køkkenudstyr til den mad, jeg laver i dagligdagen

d. Min hverdag er sådan indrettet, at jeg ikke har meget tid til at lave aftensmad

e. Hvis jeg skal være ærlig, så synes jeg, at det er nemmere at lave usund mad end sund mad

209

DEL 4: DEN MAD, DU SPISER I HVERDAGEN De følgende spørgsmål handler om den mad, du spiser i hverdagen. Tænk på, hvad du plejer at spise, når du besvarer spørgsmålene.

Spm 17: Hvor vigtigt er følgende udsagn om den mad, du spiser i hverdagen?

(sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Meget Den mad jeg spiser skal … a. smage godt

Vigtigt

vigtigt

Mindre

Ikke

Ved

vigtigt

vigtigt

ikke





















c. gøre mig mæt











d. dufte godt











e. være sund











f. kunne spises hurtigt











b. tage sig pænt ud på tallerkenen

Spm. 18: Hvordan plejer du at spise dig mæt i hverdagen? Sæt et kryds efter hvor enig eller uenig du er i følgende udsagn: (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje)

210

Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Jeg plejer at spise mig så mæt,

eller

at …

uenig

Ved ikke

a. jeg stadig har en let følelse i maven

















































b. jeg bliver dejlig træt og slapper af

c. jeg får en tung følelse i maven

d. jeg har energi og kan lave noget, efter at jeg har spist

Spm. 19: Nu skal du svare på, hvordan du bedst kan lide at spise dig mæt i hverdagen? Sæt et kryds efter hvor enig eller uenig du er i følgende udsagn (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Jeg kan bedst lide at spise mig

eller

så mæt, at …

uenig

Ved ikke

a. jeg stadig har en let følelse i maven

























b. jeg bliver dejlig træt og slapper af

211

c. jeg får en tung følelse i maven

























d. jeg har energi og kan lave noget, efter at jeg har spist

Spm. 20: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om den mad, du spiser i hverdagen? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

Ved

enig

enig

enig eller

uenig

uenig

ikke

uenig a. Jeg holder af at spise fisk til mit aftensmåltid

















































b. Hvis jeg spiser et varmt måltid uden kød, synes jeg at der mangler noget

c. Hvis jeg spiser et varmt måltid uden grøntsager, synes jeg at der mangler noget

d. Hvis jeg spiser et varmt måltid uden sovs, synes jeg at der mangler noget

212

Spørgsmål 20 fortsætter

Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

Ved

enig

enig

enig eller

uenig

uenig

ikke







uenig e. Hvis jeg skal være ærlig, så synes jeg, at usund mad smager bedre end sund







mad

Spm. 21: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om den mad, du tilbereder og spiser i hverdagen? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

Ved

enig

enig

enig eller

uenig

uenig

ikke

uenig a. Jeg kan bedst lide de måltider, hvor jeg spiser sammen med andre





































b. Hvis det står til mig, spiser jeg helst alene

c. Jeg elsker at lave mad til venner og familiemedlemmer

213

214

DEL 5: KOSTEN I SHOPUS SOM DELTAGERNE SKAL SPISE I 6 MÅNEDER Meyers Madhus har udviklet Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad til SHOPUS med inspiration fra det ”nye nordiske køkken”. Det ”nye nordiske køkken” er fx kendt fra Restaurant Noma i København. Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad følger en række principper, bl.a. at: Der skal bruges lokale, sæsonbestemte og gerne økologiske råvarer fra Norden Produktionen af råvarerne skal tage hensyn til miljø og dyrevelfærd Måltiderne skal følge de nationale kostråd og tilberedes efter nordiske kulinariske traditioner Råvarerne er bl.a. tang, bær, svampe, vilde planter, danske frugter, fisk, vildt-kød og kød fra fritgående dyr.

Spm. 22: Hvad forbinder du Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad med? Sæt kun et kryds i hver linje

Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

eller Moderne Mad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Traditionel mad

eller Hverdagsmad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Fin mad

eller Dansk mad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Ikke dansk mad

215

eller Fremmedartet mad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Almindelig mad

eller Sund mad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Usund mad

eller Forarbejdet mad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Uforarbejdet mad

eller











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Svær22 mad at Spørgsmål fortsætter tilberede

Nem mad at tilberede

eller Dyr mad at købe











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest





Billig mad at købe

eller Velsmagende mad







Mad der ikke smager godt

Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest





eller Mættende mad







Ikke mættende mad

Mest

216

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

eller Mad som jeg normalt spiser











Mad som jeg aldrig spiser

Andet? (Skriv venligst her):__________________________________________________________

217

I SHOPUS er Gennemsnitlig Dansk Hverdagsmad defineret på baggrund af undersøgelser om danskernes kostvaner. Den Gennemsnitlige Danske Hverdagsmad afspejler det, som danskerne i gennemsnit spiser. I SHOPUS følger Den Gennemsnitlige Danske Hverdagsmad en række principper, bl.a. at: Der bruges både danske og importerede råvarer fra alle sæsoner Der bruges almindelige råvarer og enkelte økologiske Råvarerne består bl.a. af grønsager, kartofler, ris, pasta, brød, okse-, kalve- samt svinekød, fisk, kylling, pålæg, mejeriprodukter og læskedrikke

Spm. 23: Hvad forbinder du Den Gennemsnitlige Danske Hverdagsmad med? Sæt kun et kryds i hver linje

Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

eller Moderne Mad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Traditionel mad

eller Hverdagsmad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Fin mad

eller Dansk mad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest





Ikke dansk mad

eller Fremmedartet mad

218







Almindelig mad

Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

eller Sund mad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Usund mad

eller Forarbejdet mad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Uforarbejdet mad

eller Svær mad at











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Spørgsmål 23 fortsætter

tilberede

Nem mad at tilberede

eller Dyr mad at købe











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Billig mad at købe

eller Velsmagende mad











Mad der ikke smager godt

Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest





eller Mættende mad







Ikke mættende mad

Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest





eller Mad som jeg normalt spiser







Mad som jeg aldrig spiser

219

Andet? (Skriv venligst her):__________________________________________________________

220

DEL 6: DIN HVERDAG GENERELT De næste spørgsmål handler om alle de ting, du gør og oplever i forbindelse med mad og måltider, for eksempel planlægger måltider, køber ind, laver mad, nyder måltider.

Spm. 24: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om din hverdag?

(sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt enig

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Ved ikke

eller uenig a. Mad og måltider er lyspunkter i mit liv





























































b. Generelt set er jeg meget tilfreds med min mad

c. Når det gælder mad og måltider, er mit liv tæt på at være ideelt

d. Når det gælder mad, har jeg en fortrinlig tilværelse

e. Mad og måltider giver mig en masse

221

tilfredsstillelse i hverdagen

De sidste spørgsmål handler om, hvor godt du har det i hverdagen.

Spm. 25: Hvor tilfreds er du med dit liv generelt set? (sæt kun et kryds)

 Meget tilfreds  Forholdsvis tilfreds  Forholdsvis utilfreds  Meget utilfreds  Ved ikke Spm. 26: Hvor god eller dårlig er din nuværende helbredstilstand som helhed, altså både fysisk (kropsligt) såvel som psykisk (mentalt)? (sæt kun et kryds)

 Meget god  God  Nogenlunde  Dårlig

Spm. 27: Føler du dig frisk nok til at gennemføre det, du har lyst til? (sæt kun et kryds)

222

 Ja, altid  Ja, for det meste  Ja, ind i mellem  Nej, næsten aldrig  Nej, aldrig

Hvis du har kommentarer til skemaet eller andre tilføjelser, kan du skrive dem her:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MANGE TAK for din hjælp med undersøgelsen

Aflever venligst spørgeskema udfyldt ved Screeningsundersøgelsen.

223

Concluding questionnaire

224

version 1.0 – d. 04. april 2011 Forsøgsperson nr.: __ __ __ - __ __ __ (SHOPUS-medarbejder sikrer at forsøgsperson nr. er oplyst)

DET BIOVIDENSKABELIGE FAKULTET FOR FØDEVARER, VETERINÆRMEDICIN OG NATURRESSOURCER

KØBENHAVNS UNIVERSITET

Sociologisk spørgeskemaundersøgelse blandt SHOPUS-deltagere

225

226

227

Om den sociologiske spørgeskemaundersøgelse Vi er en gruppe madsociologer uden direkte tilknytning til SHOPUS, som gennemfører en spørgeskemaundersøgelse om dine erfaringer fra SHOPUS-projektet. Som deltager i SHOPUS kan din hverdag og hverdagsmad havet ændret sig. Kostplanen i SHOPUS har måske indeholdt madvarer, som du ikke plejer at spise. Og maden du har spist, er måske efter opskrifter, du ikke kendte. Spørgeskemaet handler netop om dine erfaringer fra SHOPUS-projektet og hvordan SHOPUS måske har påvirket din hverdag og madvaner.

Notér venligst dit ”forsøgsperson nummer” på forsidens øverste højre hjørne. Derved er alle besvarelser anonymiseret. Med andre ord er det ikke muligt at identificere enkeltpersoner i de afleverede spørgeskemaer eller i undersøgelsens endelige resultater. Det er kun os, madsociologer, som har adgang til de anonymiserede besvarelser.

Spørgeskemaet skal returneres til SHOPUS-personalet, efter du har udfyldt det. Din besvarelse har stor betydning for undersøgelsen, så det er vigtigt, at du udfylder skemaet grundigt.

Skemaet indeholder en del spørgsmål om dine mange erfaringer med at købe, tilberede og spise din SHOPUS-kost i 6 måneder. Endvidere er der spørgsmål om den mad, du i fremtiden gerne vil spise. Derfor tager det ca. 40 minutter at udfylde hele skemaet. Du er selvfølgelig velkommen til at udfylde skemaet ad flere omgange. Ønsker du at uddybe dine svar og/eller kommentere spørgeskemaet, har du mulighed for det sidst i skemaet.

Med venlig hilsen Professor Lotte Holm Ph.d.-studerende Arun Micheelsen Forskningsassistent Louis Havn

228

DEL 1: DIN MOTIVATION FOR AT DELTAGE I SHOPUS Spm. 1: Hvorfor har du deltaget i SHOPUS? Vælg de 3 årsager som passer bedst. Skriv ’1’ ved den vigtigste årsag, ’2’ ved den næstvigtigste og ’3’ ved den tredjevigtigste.

(Vælg kun 3 årsager).

a. Muligheden for at spise Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad

b. Muligheden for at lære mere om mad c. Muligheden for at lære mere om madlavning

d. Muligheden for at få diætist-vejledning om mad

e. Muligheden for at få vejledning om min livsstil generelt

f. Muligheden for at få gratis mad i en længere periode

g. Muligheden for at tabe mig

h. Muligheden for at få undersøgt min helbredstilstand

i.

Muligheden for at bidrage til den videnskabelige forskning på ernæringsområdet

j.

Muligheden for at få opbakning og vejledning til at ændre mine kostvaner

k. Min interesse for ernæring og sundhed generelt

l.

Andet?

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ 229

Beskriv venligst: __________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

230

DEL 2: DIN HVERDAG GENERELT De næste spørgsmål handler om alle de ting, du gør og oplever i forbindelse med mad og måltider, for eksempel planlægger måltider, køber ind, laver mad, nyder måltider.

Spm. 2: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om din hverdag? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt enig

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Ved ikke

eller uenig a. Mad og måltider er lyspunkter i mit liv





























































b. Generelt set er jeg meget tilfreds med min mad

c. Når det gælder mad og måltider, er mit liv tæt på at være ideelt

d. Når det gælder mad, har jeg en fortrinlig tilværelse

e. Mad og måltider giver mig en masse tilfredsstillelse i

231

hverdagen

De sidste spørgsmål handler om, hvor godt du har det i hverdagen.

Spm. 3: Hvor tilfreds er du med dit liv generelt set? (sæt kun et kryds)

 Meget tilfreds  Forholdsvis tilfreds  Forholdsvis utilfreds  Meget utilfreds  Ved ikke Spm. 4: Hvor god eller dårlig er din nuværende helbredstilstand som helhed, altså både fysisk (kropsligt) såvel som psykisk (mentalt)? (sæt kun et kryds)

 Meget god  God  Nogenlunde  Dårlig

Spm. 5: Føler du dig frisk nok til at gennemføre det, du har lyst til? (sæt kun et kryds)

 Ja, altid 232

 Ja, for det meste  Ja, ind i mellem  Nej, næsten aldrig  Nej, aldrig

233

DEL 3: KOSTEN I SHOPUS Spm. 6: Hvad forbinder du den ’Nye Nordiske Hverdagsmad’ med, som indgik i SHOPUSprojektet? Sæt kun et kryds i hver linje

Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

eller Moderne Mad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Traditionel mad

eller Hverdagsmad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Fin mad

eller Dansk mad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Ikke dansk mad

eller Fremmedartet mad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Almindelig mad

eller Sund mad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

eller

234

Usund mad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Forarbejdet mad

Uforarbejdet mad

eller











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Svær mad at tilberede

Nem mad at tilberede

eller











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Dyr mad at købe

Billig mad at købe

eller Velsmagende mad

Mad der











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest





ikke smager godt

Spørgsmål 6 fortsætter

eller Mættende mad







Ikke mættende mad

Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest





eller Mad som jeg normalt spiser







Mad som jeg aldrig spiser

Andet? (Skriv venligst her):__________________________________________________________

235

Spm. 7: Hvad forbinder du ’Den Gennemsnitlige Danske Hverdagsmad’ med, som indgik i SHOPUS-projektet?

Sæt kun et kryds i hver linje

Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

eller Moderne Mad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Traditionel mad

eller Hverdagsmad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Fin mad

eller Dansk mad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Ikke dansk mad

eller Fremmedartet mad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Almindelig mad

eller Sund mad











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest





Usund mad

eller Forarbejdet mad

236







Uforarbejdet mad

Spørgsmål 7 fortsætter

Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

eller Svær mad at tilberede











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Nem mad at tilberede

eller Dyr mad at købe











Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

Billig mad at købe

eller Velsmagende mad











Mad der ikke smager godt

Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest

eller Mættende mad











Ikke mættende mad

Mest

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Mest





eller Mad som jeg normalt spiser







Mad som jeg aldrig spiser

Andet? (Skriv venligst her):__________________________________________________________

237

DEL 4: HVAD SYNES DU OM SHOPUS-PROJEKTET? De følgende spørgsmål handler om din opfattelse af SHOPUS-projektet samt den kost, du har fulgt.

Spm. 8: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om SHOPUS som helhed (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt enig

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Ved ikke

eller uenig a. SHOPUS-projektet har forandret størstedelen af









































































mine daglige rutiner b. Det krævede en meget stor indsats fra min side at deltage i SHOPUS c. At deltage i SHOPUS gjorde det svært, at være sammen med venner og familie d. SHOPUS-projektet passede fint ind i min hverdag e. SHOPUS-projektets formål er stadigt uklart for mig f. Jeg har tit savnet nogen, at udveksle erfaringer med om SHOPUSprojektet

238

g. Det har været en stor hjælp at få SHOPUS-

















































nyhedsbrevet h. SHOPUS-personalet har været lydhørere overfor mig i.

Meyers Madhus deltager i SHOPUS-projektet for at markedsføre sig selv

j.

Det er ikke universitetets opgave, at udvikle og testen en ny nordisk hverdagsmad til den danske befolkning

239

Spm. 9: Har du i løbet af SHOPUS-projektet haft seriøse overvejelser om at frafalde studiet? (Sæt kun et kryds)

 Ja  Nej, gå til spørgsmål nr. 11 Spm. 10: I følgende spørgsmål skal du angive de 3 vigtigste årsager til, at du har haft seriøse overvejelser om at frafalde SHOPUS-projektet.

Skriv 1 ved den vigtigste årsag, 2 ved den anden vigtigste og 3 ved den tredje vigtigste. (Vælg kun 3 årsager).

a. Jeg kom ikke i deltagergruppen med Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad

b. SHOPUS-projektet var for tidskrævende i forhold til min hverdag c. SHOPUS-projektet var en for stor belastning for min familie/sociale liv d. Uforudsete hændelser (fx dødsfald, sygdom, nyt job mv.) e. Run-in kosten i starten af SHOPUS-projektet var for dårlig

f. Min SHOPUS-kost var for tidskrævende at tilberede og spise

g. Min SHOPUS-kost smagte ikke godt nok

h. Min SHOPUS-kost var ikke sund nok for mig

i.

240

SHOPUS-projektet krævede for meget af mig

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

j.

Jeg har ikke haft det vægt tab, som jeg ønsker

k. SHOPUS-projektet krævede for meget planlægning af min hverdag l.

Udbuddet af madvarer i SHOPUS-butikken var for dårligt

___ ___ ___

m. Andet? Beskriv venligst:

___

__________________________________________________

241

Spm. 11: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om den kost, du har spist i SHOPUS (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt enig

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Ved ikke

eller uenig a. SHOPUS-personalet tillod slet ikke, at jeg afveg fra

















































min kost b. SHOPUS-kosten passede fint til min hverdag c. Retningslinjerne for min SHOPUS-kost blev mere frie i løbet af projektet d. Igennem projektet har SHOPUS-personalet givet mig modsatrettet oplysninger om min kost

De følgende spørgsmål omhandler dine indkøb i SHOPUS-butikken

Spm. 12: Hvor mange gange om ugen har du i gennemsnit købt ind i SHOPUS-butikken i løbet af SHOPUS-projektet? (sæt kun et kryds)

242

a. Mindre end 1 gang



b. 2 gange om ugen



c. 3 gange om ugen



d. 4 gange om ugen



e. 5 gange eller flere om ugen



f. Ved ikke



243

Spm. 13: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om SHOPUS-butikken. (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Ved ikke

eller uenig a. Kostregistreringen i butikken lærte mig, hvad

































































































jeg bør spise i hverdagen b. Det har været hyggeligt, at købe ind i SHOPUSbutikken c. Generelt har udbuddet af madvarer i SHOPUSbutikken været for lille d. Jeg har ofte blevet nød til at købe madvarer uden for SHOPUS-butikken e. Mine madvarer i SHOPUSbutikken, har været lavet af gode råvarer f. Jeg har generelt købt ind efter en madplan g. Jeg lærte at vælge mine madvarer i SHOPUSbutikken efter en fast indkøbsrutine h. Flere af mine madvarer fra SHOPUS-butikken, har al

244

for kort holdbarhed

Spm. 14: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om det din SHOPUS-diætist lærte dig. (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Ved ikke

eller Diætisten lærte mig, …

uenig

a. hvordan jeg skulle tabe mig













b. ingenting













c. hvordan jeg skulle variere

























min SHOPUS-kost d. at jeg skal spise flere end tre måltider om dagen

Spm. 15: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn, om den tid du har brugt i SHOPUSforsøget (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt enig

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

I forhold til den tid jeg har

eller

til rådighed i hverdagen, …

uenig

Ved ikke

a. har SHOPUS-projektet taget for meget tid, at





































deltage i b. har det taget for lang tid, at købe ind i SHOPUSbutikken c. er SHOPUS-butikkens åbningstider for korte

245

d. har det taget for lang tid at komme til og fra













SHOPUS-butikken

De følgende spørgsmål omhandler din SHOPUS-kogebog

Spm. 16: Hvor mange gange om ugen har du i gennemsnit brugt din SHOPUS-kogebog i løbet af SHOPUS-projektet? (sæt kun et kryds)

246

a. Jeg har ikke brugt kogebogen



b. Under 1 gang om ugen



c. 2 gange om ugen



d. 3 gange om ugen



e. 4 gange om ugen



f. 5 gange eller flere om ugen



g. Ved ikke



Spm. 17: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om din SHOPUS-kogebog? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt enig

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Opskrifterne i SHOPUS

eller

kogebogen…

uenig

Ved ikke

a. er meget gode













b. er nemme at lave













c. er varierede













d. er generelt til mere end

















































to personer e. indeholder ofte råvarer, som ikke fandtes i SHOPUS-butikken f. har været en stor hjælp for mig i forsøget g. er blevet fulgt til punkt og prikke

247

Følgende spørgsmål handler om den mad du tilbereder i SHOPUS

Spm. 18: Hvor mange minutter har du i gennemsnit brugt per dag på at tilberede aftensmad i løbet af SHOPUS-projektet? (sæt kun et kryds)

248

a. Under 20 minutter



b. 21-40 minutter



c. 41-60 minutter



d. 61-80 minutter



e. 81-100 minutter



f. 101-120 minutter



g. 121-140 minutter



h. Over 141 minutter



i. Ved ikke



Spm. 19: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om tilberedningen af din SHOPUS-kost? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt enig

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Ved ikke

eller Min SHOPUS kost ...

uenig





































d. er ensformigt













e. kræver megen

























a. er nem at tilberede b. kræver for mange køkkenredskaber (fx skåle, gryder, food processor, etc.) c. Medfører en for stor opvask

planlægning f. er meget tidskrævende at tilberede

Spm. 20: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn den måde du har tilberedt din SHOPUSkost? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt enig

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

uenig

uenig





Ved ikke

eller uenig a. Jeg har købt ekstra







 249

køkkenredskaber, for at kunne lave min SHOPUSkost b. Jeg har nogle gange brugt krydderier, som ikke hører til min





































SHOPUS- kost c. Jeg har manglet hjælp til at få varieret min SHOPUS- kost d. Nogen gange har jeg brugt madvarer, som ikke hører til min SHOPUS- kost

Følgende spørgsmål omhandler de måltider, du har spist i løbet af SHOPUS-projektet

Spm. 21: Hvor mange måltider om dagen (medregnet mellemmåltider) har du i gennemsnit spist i SHOPUS-projektet? (sæt kun et kryds)

250

a. 1 måltid



b. 2 måltider



c. 3 måltider



d. 4 måltider



e. 5 måltider



f. 6 måltider



g. 7 måltider



h. 8 måltider



eller flere i. Ved ikke



Spm. 22: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om den SHOPUS-kost, du har spist? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt enig

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Generelt synes jeg, at min

eller

SHOPUS kost er …

uenig

Ved ikke

a. velsmagende













b. mættende

























d. sund













e. fedende













f. en nydelse at spise













g. en stor gene for resten af













c. den samme mad, som jeg spiste til hverdag før SHOPUS-projektet

min familie

251

Spm. 23: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om din SHOPUS-kost? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt enig

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Ved ikke

eller uenig a. Generelt har det været uklart for mig, hvad jeg må spise ifølge min

















































SHOPUS-kost b. Råvarerne i min SHOPUSkost, er gode råvarer c. Det jeg spiste før SHOPUS er sundere, end min SHOPUS-kost d. SHOPUS’ Gennemsnitlige Danske Hverdagsmad er mere usund, end det danskerne spiser normalt

Spm. 24: Generelt set synes jeg, at min SHOPUS-kost passer bedst til: (sæt gerne flere kryds) a. Hverdagsmad b. Weekend mad c. Mad til gæster

252

d. Fest mad e. Restaurant mad f. Ved ikke



253

Spm. 25: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om din SHOPUS-kost? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt enig

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Ved ikke

eller uenig a. Run-in kosten i SHOPUS har lært mig, at spise flere end tre måltider om

































































































dagen b. Jeg har fået energi af at spise min SHOPUS-kost c. Min SHOPUS-kost har gjort mig fysisk dårlig tilpas d. Smagen af min SHOPUSkost er så god, at smagen i sig selv gør mig mæt e. Jeg har tit smidt madvarer ud fra min SHOPUS-kost f. Min SHOPUS-kost dækker ikke retter til en hel dag (fx frokost) g. Jeg har smidt mindre mad ud i løbet af SHOPUSprojektet end tidligere h. Jeg har generelt savnet at spise den mad, som jeg spiste før SHOPUS-

254

projektet i. Der er for meget syresmag (fx æble og eddike) i

















































min SHOPUS-kost j. Jeg ville anbefale andre, at spise min SHOPUS-kost k. Den mad jeg må spise på mine ”fridage” fra SHOPUS, smager dårligt l. Mad som ikke er min SHOPUS-kost, gør mig fysisk dårlig at spise

255

Det næste spørgsmål omhandler hvordan din SHOPUS kost passer til din smag og behov

Spm. 26: Tag stilling til, om du i forsøgsperioden gerne ville have mindre eller mere af følgende produkter, eller om det du har spist passer til dit behov. Du skal også markere, hvis spørgsmålet er irrelevant for dig, fordi du af en eller anden grund ikke spiser eller drikker produktet. (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Ville jeg

Passer til

Ville jeg

Irrelevant

gerne have

mit behov

gerne have

(indtager jeg ikke)

mere af Lokale fødevarer









Danske fødevarer









Nordiske fødevarer









Økologiske fødevarer









Sæson fødevarer









Ikke-nordiske fødevarer









Fødevarer med









Forarbejdet fødevarer









Vildtkød









Oksekød









Svinekød









Lammekød









Fjerkræ









tilsætningsstoffer

256

mindre af

Fisk









Skalddyr









Mælkeprodukter









Sukkerholdige produkter









Fedtholdige produkter









Fuldkornsprodukter









Frugter









Bælgfrugter









Grønsager









Kartofler









Rodfrugter









Bær









Ville jeg

Passer til

Ville jeg

Irrelevant

gerne have

mit behov

gerne have

(indtager jeg ikke)

Spørgsmål 26 fortsætter

mere af

mindre af

Kål









Nødder









Krydderier









Krydderurter









Planter/svampe









Tang









Eddike







 257

Sodavand









Juice









Æblemost









Øl









Vin









Spiritus









Færdigretter (fx forårsruller)









Pålæg









Slik









De næste spørgsmål omhandler det, du har lært af at deltage i SHOPUS

Spm. 27: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn, om det du har lært ved at deltage i SHOPUS-projektet? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt enig

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

At deltage i SHOPUS har

eller

lært mig …

uenig

a. at spise mindre potioner

Ved ikke

























b. at planlægge mine indkøb efter de måltider jeg ved, at jeg vil spise i løbet af ugen

258

c.Spørgsmål at spise27 mere fiberrigt fortsætter













Helt enig

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

Ved ikke

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

At deltage i SHOPUS har

eller

lært mig …

uenig

d. at smide mindre mad ud













e. at spise mere sukker end













f. at lave sund mad













g. at spise mere fedt end

























før SHOPUS-projektet

før SHOPUS-projektet h. ikke at blive fristet til at spise søde sager i.

at nyde mit måltid













j.

at spise mere lokal mad





























































o. at spise nye råvarer













p. at tilsmage maden













q. at værdsætte nye













k. at spise mere nordisk mad l.

at tænke over, hvordan madvarer produceres

m. at spise flere økologiske madvarer n. at være effektiv i et køkken

smagsoplevelser

259

r. at kunne smage helt nye smage s. at nyde at lave aftensmad hver dag t. at lave nye retter u. at spise råvarer efter årstiden v. at mærke efter, om jeg er mæt





















































































w. at følge min SHOPUSkost uden at skulle bruge min SHOPUS-kogebog x. ikke at blive fristet til at købe usunde varer

Disse spørgsmål omhandler tiden efter din deltagelse i SHOPUS.

Spm. 28: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om at forsætte med at spise din SHOPUSkost, efter din deltagelse i SHOPUS? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Ved ikke

eller uenig Det bliver for dyrt at følge min SHOPUS-kost De madvarer som jeg har spist i SHOPUS, er svære at få

260

























i mit lokale supermarked Jeg vil følge retningslinjerne for Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad Uden SHOPUS’ faste rammer, tager jeg på i vægt

























261

DEL 5: DE MADVARER DU VIL KØBE, EFTER DU HAR DELTAGET I SHOPUS-PROJEKTET De næste spørgsmål handler om dine kommende madindkøb efter din deltagelse i SHOPUS. Når du besvarer spørgsmålene, skal du tænke på, hvilke madvarer du i de kommende måneder vil købe i dit lokale supermarked.

Spm. 29: I hvilken grad er du optaget af, at de madvarer du køber, er årstidens madvarer (fx rodfrugter om vinteren og jordbær om sommeren)? (sæt kun et kryds)

a. I høj grad



b. I nogen grad



c. I mindre grad



d. Slet ikke



Spm. 30: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om årstidens madvarer? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt enig

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Jeg synes at årstidens

eller

madvarer …

uenig

a. er sundere end andre varer b. er meget dyrere end andre varer c. smager bedre end andre varer

262

Ved ikke





































d. sjældent kan købes i

















































h. er bedre for klimaet













i.













de butikker, hvor jeg handler e. er af dårligere kvalitet end andre varer f. er bedre for miljøet g. er svære at kende fra andre varer i supermarkedet

er ofte ikke andet end snyd og bedrag

Spm. 31: I hvilken grad er du optaget af, at de madvarer du køber, er lokalt produceret (fx madvarer fra mindre, lokale producenter)? (sæt kun et kryds) a. I høj grad



b. I nogen grad



c. I mindre grad



d. Slet ikke



Spm. 32: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om madvarer, der er lokalt produceret? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje)

Jeg synes at lokalt

Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Ved ikke

eller

263

producerede madvarer … a. er sundere end andre varer b. er meget dyrere end andre varer c. smager bedre end andre varer

uenig

































































































d. sjældent kan købes i de butikker, hvor jeg handler e. sikrer bedre dyrevelfærd f. er af dårligere kvalitet end andre varer g. er bedre for miljøet h. er svære at kende fra andre varer i supermarkedet i.

er bedre for klimaet













j.

er ofte ikke andet













end snyd og bedrag

264

Spm. 33: I hvilken grad er du optaget af, at de madvarer du køber, er økologiske (fx økologisk kød)? (sæt kun et kryds)

a. I høj grad



b. I nogen grad



c. I mindre grad



d. Slet ikke



Spm. 34: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om økologiske madvarer? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Jeg synes at økologiske

eller

madvarer…

uenig

a. er sundere end ikkeøkologiske varer b. er meget dyrere end ikke-økologiske varer c. smager bedre end ikke-økologiske varer

Ved ikke





























































d. sjældent kan købes i de butikker, hvor jeg handler e. sikrer bedre dyrevelfærd

265

f. er af dårligere kvalitet end ikke-





































økologiske varer g. er bedre for miljøet h. er svære at kende fra andre varer i supermarkedet i.

er bedre for klimaet













j.

er ofte ikke andet













end snyd og bedrag

266

Spm. 35: I hvilken grad er du optaget af, at de madvarer du køber, er klimavenlige (madvarer produceret med mindst negativ effekt på klimaet såsom lav CO2 udledning)? (sæt kun et kryds)

a. I høj grad



b. I nogen grad



c. I mindre grad



d. Slet ikke



Spm. 36: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om klimavenlige madvarer? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt enig

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Jeg synes at klimavenlige

eller

madvarer …

uenig

a. er sundere end andre varer b. er meget dyrere end andre varer c. smager bedre end andre varer

Ved ikke









































































d. sjældent kan købes i de butikker, hvor jeg handler e. sikrer bedre dyrevelfærd f. er af dårligere

267

kvalitet end andre varer g. er bedre for miljøet

















































h. er svære at kende fra andre varer i supermarkedet i.

rent faktisk er bedre for klimaet

j.

er ofte ikke andet end snyd og bedrag

268

Spm. 37: I hvilken grad er du optaget af, at de madvarer du køber, er sunde (fx madvarer der indeholder de næringsstoffer, som din krop har brug for)? (sæt kun et kryds)

a. I høj grad



b. I nogen grad



c. I mindre grad



d. Slet ikke



Spm.38: Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn om sunde madvarer? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt enig

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Jeg synes at sunde

eller

madvarer…

uenig

Ved ikke

a. er light produkter













b. er meget dyrere end





























































usunde varer c. smager bedre end usunde varer d. sjældent kan købes i de butikker, hvor jeg handler e. sikrer bedre dyrevelfærd f. er af dårligere kvalitet end andre varer

269

g. er bedre for miljøet h. er fedtfattige produkter i.

er bedre for klimaet

j.

er uforarbejdede madvarer

k. er svære at kende fra andre varer l.

er uden tilsætningsstoffer

m. er ofte ikke andet end snyd og bedrag

270





















































































DEL 6: DEN MAD DU VIL TILBEREDE EFTER DIN DELTAGELSE I SHOPUS-PROJEKTET De næste spørgsmål handler om den mad du vil tilberede og spise efter din deltagelse i SHOPUS. Når du besvarer de følgende spørgsmål, skal du tænke på den mad, som du i de kommende måneder vil lave og spise til hverdag.

Spm. 39: Foretrækker du traditionelle eller moderne madretter? Traditionelle madretter er fx flæskesteg og hakkebøf. Moderne madretter er fx wok- og pastaretter. (sæt kun et kryds)

 Jeg foretrækker traditionelle madretter  Jeg foretrækker moderne madretter  Jeg foretrækker ikke det ene frem for det andet  Ved ikke

Spm. 40: Vælg om du er mest enig i udsagnet til højre eller venstre. (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje)

Enig

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

enig

eller

enig

Enig

Jeg synes selv, at jeg er god til at lave mad

Jeg synes ikke, at











den mad jeg laver, smager specielt godt

Enig

Når jeg laver mad efter en opskrift,



Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

enig

eller

enig







Enig



Når jeg laver mad efter en opskrift,

271

er det vigtigt for

kan jeg ikke lade

mig at følge den

være med at

ret nøje

improvisere og ændre i opskriften Enig

Jeg laver tit nye retter



Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

enig

eller

enig







Enig



Jeg holder mig til de retter, jeg kender

Enig

Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

enig

eller

enig

Enig

Jeg synes, det er nemt at lave sund mad

Jeg er usikker på,











Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

Enig

enig

eller

enig

hvordan man laver sund mad

Spørgsmål 40 fortsætter

Enig

Jeg kan selv finde på en ret, hvis jeg bare har en

Jeg skal have en











håndfuld råvarer Overvejende

Hverken/

Overvejende

enig

eller

enig

Enig

Jeg vil gerne have,

overstås hurtigt i hverdagen

272

mig op ad, hvis jeg skal lave nye retter

Enig

at madlavningen

opskrift at læne

I hverdagen bruger











jeg gerne tid på at lave mad

Spm. 41: I de følgende udsagn vil jeg bede dig om at tænke på din hverdag og madlavning efter din deltagelse i SHOPUS-projektet. Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Ved ikke

eller uenig a. Jeg prøver sjældent nye madvarer, fordi jeg ikke ved, hvordan de skal





























































tilberedes

b. Jeg går gerne på opdagelse i kogebøger eller blade for at finde nye retter, som jeg kan lave

c. Jeg har al det nødvendige køkkenudstyr til den mad, jeg laver i dagligdagen

d. Min hverdag er sådan indrettet, at jeg ikke har meget tid til at lave aftensmad

e. Hvis jeg skal være ærlig, så synes jeg, at det er nemmere at lave usund mad end sund mad

273

DEL 7: DEN MAD, DU VIL SPISE I HVERDAGEN EFTER DIN DELTAGELSE I SHOPUS De følgende spørgsmål handler om den mad, du vil spise i hverdagen efter din deltagelse i SHOPUS. Tænk på, hvad du gerne vil spise i de kommende måneder, når du besvarer spørgsmålene.

Spm 42: Hvor vigtigt er følgende udsagn om den mad, du vil spise i hverdagen efter SHOPUS? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Meget Den mad jeg vil spise skal … a. smage godt

Vigtigt

vigtigt

Mindre

Ikke

Ved

vigtigt

vigtigt

ikke





















c. gøre mig mæt











d. dufte godt











e. være sund











f. kunne spises hurtigt











b. tage sig pænt ud på tallerkenen

Spm. 43: Hvordan plejer du at spise dig mæt i hverdagen? Sæt et kryds efter hvor enig eller uenig du er i følgende udsagn: (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje)

274

Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Jeg plejer at spise mig så mæt,

eller

at …

uenig

Ved ikke

a. jeg stadig har en let følelse i maven

















































b. jeg bliver dejlig træt og slapper af

c. jeg får en tung følelse i maven

d. jeg har energi og kan lave noget, efter at jeg har spist

Spm. 44: Nu skal du svare på, hvordan du bedst kan lide at spise dig mæt i hverdagen? Sæt et kryds efter hvor enig eller uenig du er i følgende udsagn (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

enig

enig

enig

uenig

uenig

Jeg kan bedst lide at spise mig

eller

så mæt, at …

uenig

a. jeg stadig har en let følelse i maven b. jeg bliver dejlig træt og slapper af c. jeg får en tung følelse i maven

Ved ikke





































275

d. jeg har energi og kan lave noget, efter at jeg har spist













Spm. 45: I de følgende udsagn vil jeg bede dig om at tænke på din hverdag og madlavning efter din deltagelse i SHOPUS-projektet. Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

Ved

enig

enig

enig eller

uenig

uenig

ikke

uenig a. Jeg holder af at spise fisk til mit aftensmåltid





























































b. Hvis jeg spiser et varmt måltid uden kød, synes jeg at der mangler noget c. Hvis jeg spiser et varmt måltid uden grøntsager, synes jeg at der mangler noget d. Hvis jeg spiser et varmt måltid uden sovs, synes jeg at der mangler noget

e. Hvis jeg skal være ærlig, så synes jeg, at usund mad smager bedre end sund mad

276

Spm. 46: I de følgende udsagn vil jeg bede dig om at tænke på din hverdag og madlavning efter din deltagelse i SHOPUS-projektet. Hvor enig eller uenig er du i følgende udsagn? (sæt kun et kryds i hver linje) Helt

Delvist

Hverken

Delvist

Helt

Ved

enig

enig

enig eller

uenig

uenig

ikke

uenig a. Jeg kan bedst lide de måltider, hvor jeg spiser sammen med andre





































b. Hvis det står til mig, spiser jeg helst alene

c. Jeg elsker at lave mad til venner og familiemedlemmer

Hvis du har kommentarer til skemaet eller andre tilføjelser, kan du skrive dem her:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

277

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MANGE TAK for din hjælp med undersøgelsen

Returnér venligst spørgeskema udfyldt til SHOPUS-personalet. Husk at notér dit ’Forsøgsperson nummer’ på forsidens øverste højre hjørne.

278

C. A qualitative study of the intervention participants’ appropriation of the NND

Focus groups schedule 5 min.: Introduktion Formål Tak fordi I ville komme til denne rundbordssamtale i aften. Som I allerede ved, er fokusgruppen en del af shopus. Jeg er ikke en del af selve kostundersøgelsen eller supermarkedet i shopus – men er derimod en phd studerende som skal undersøge: 1. Hvordan det er at deltage 2. Hvordan I synes maden er 3. Om I har lært noget af at deltage i shopus. Så det er det, vi skal snakke om i aften. I er inviteret her i aften, fordi jeg er interesseret i at høre jeres meninger om en række emner, som I skal snakke om med hinanden. Der er ikke nogen rigtige eller forkerte meninger i aften. I skal ikke holde jer tilbage, men sige det I har på hjertet. Det er ikke nogen eksamen. Så det er jer, der ved bedst! Reglerne Vores snak i aften bliver sådan, at jeg har en række emner, som jeg godt kunne tænke mig, at I diskuterer med hinanden. I må meget gerne supplere, kommentere og spørge til hinandens holdninger og meninger. I må gerne uenige med hinanden og give udtryk for det. Det ville være fint, hvis I kunne få en dialog med hinanden rundt om bordet. Anonymitet Som I kan se, bliver vores snak optaget på video og diktafon. Årsagen er, at jeg ikke kan huske alle jeres guldkorn. Derfor optager jeg vores snak, så jeg altid kan gå tilbage og check mine resultater. Så I må meget gerne tale en ad gangen. Det er kun mig, Sara – som jeg straks vil præsentere – og personen som I talte med, da I blev inviteret til rundbordssamtalen, der kender jeres navne. Alt hvad der bliver sagt i aften og i den videre undersøgelse bliver håndteret fortroligt, og I vil være anonymiseret i hele undersøgelsen. Men – det er meningen, at vi skal hygge os i aften. Der er lidt vådt og tørt frem til jer, så hold jer ikke tilbage. Bollerne fines allerede i shopus kostregistreringssystem under navnet ”Kiras solsikkeboller” – og er blevet serveret for til fællesaftner med deltagere i shopus.

279

10 min: Introduktion rundt om bordet. Lad os først starte med at præsentere os selv over for hinanden. Jeg hedder Arun, er 38 år gammel og bor med min kæreste på Østerbro i en andelslejlighed. Vi har en søn på 18 mdr., som gerne står op kl. 05 – og udover min phd bruger jeg gerne min fritid på familien og samle gamle pc’er. Jeg har jo ”været med” i shopus siden starten.

Navn, alder, startet i SHOPUS, laver i fritiden?

Øvelse 1 (Opfattelse af de to kost typer): Færdiggør de to sætningen på uddelte seddel, uden at sige noget: ”Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad er …” / ”Den gennemsnitlig Danske Hverdagsmad er …” Gem seddelsen til senere.

30 min: Motiv for deltagelse i SHOPUS Hvorfor deltager I i SHOPUS? Vægttab?/ Kosten? Andet? Hvad siger jeres familie/venner/kollegaer til, at I deltager i SHOPUS? Intervention – accept: Hvordan er det så at deltage i SHOPUS? Hvordan er det at ”købe” ind i butikken? Tid ”Oplevet” kvalitet af varerne At vælge varer (manglende) Mærkning af varerne Registrering af madvarer Personalet

Hvordan er det at lave maden fra SHOPUS-butikken? Bruge kogebogen

280

Tid Køkkenudstyr Opvask Lave mad til sig selv og resten af familien

Hvordan er maden så fra SHOPUS? Mættende Velsmagende Særlig smag Særlige ingredienser (æble) Særlige mængder af specifikke ingredienser (sukker, fedt)

Er maden fra SHOPUS anderledes end det I plejer at spise? Flere/færre grønsager, sukker, kød?

Hvordan er det at tale med diætisten i SHOPUS? Hvad taler I om? Planlægning / Opskrifter / Livsstil? 30 min: Øvelse 2 – specifikt accept af kosten: Vælg sammen med jeres siddemand to retter i jeres SHOPUS-kogebog, som I bedst kan lide og to I ikke kan lide Hvad har I så valgt? To bedste – hvorfor? To dårligste – hvorfor? Hvad kan I godt lide ved den mad I spiser i SHOPUS? Hvad kan I ikke lide ved den mad I spiser i SHOPUS? Hvordan er det at bruge kogebogen?

Har nogen af jer overvejet at stoppe i SHOPUS før tid? Hvorfor?

281

15 min: Opfattelse af kost som koncept – Øvelse 3: ”Læs seddel op fra øvelse 1” Opfattelse af ADD/NND Forskelle? Nordisk mad? Almindelig mad?/Hverdagsmad? Økologi? Sundt/usundt mad? Andet? Hvad synes I om, at der bliver udviklet en ”Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad” til den danske befolkning? Er det i orden at et universitet gør det? Hvad synes I om, at ADD i udgangspunktet ikke er mad, som man taber sig af at spise? Er det i orden, at deltagere skal spise det i et forsøg?

Appropriation: Hvis I tænker tilbage på den mad i spise, før I startede på shopus – hvad har ændret sig i jeres hverdags måltider? Har jeres opfattelse af jeres kost ændret sig, fra da I startede? 30 min 4: Øvelse – appropriation: Notér sammen med din siddemand tre ting, som har lært ved at deltage i SHOPUS

Har I lært noget af at deltage i SHOPUS? Indkøbsvaner? Kostplanlægning? Madlavning? Spisevaner? Fornemmelse for mæthed? Kendskab til råvarer? Holdninger til mad/sundhed/fødevareproduktion? Andet? Er der noget som I i fremtiden vil gøre anderledes, fordi I har deltaget i shopus Madlavning/indkøb etc.? Afslutning: Underskriv seddel til evt. opfølgende interview

282

283

In-depth interviews with intervention personnel: Interview guide Interviewguide til OPUS deltagere. Version 2 – marts 2010. Introduktion: Før vi starter på interviewet vil jeg kort fortælle dig lidt om formålet med interviewet og rammerne for vores snak. Som du ved, er jeg Ph.d.-studerende ved OPUS Centeret i Fødevaresociologi og er tilknyttet WP2 og WP3. Men jeg synes også, at selve OPUS-projektets arbejde i sig selv er så spændende, at jeg gerne vil skrive en artikel om det. Derfor interviewer jeg en række forskellige personer, som alle på forskellige måder er tilknyttet OPUS-projektet – ligesom jeg selv er. OPUS projektet er jo kan med rette siges at være et større forskningsprojekt med mange involveret – hvor udviklingen og det videnskabelige arbejde med den NND gør OPUS projektet særligt Jeg er meget interesseret i at tale med forskellige personer i OPUS om deres syn på OPUS Centerets arbejde samt deres syn på den NND. Anonymitet: Jeg interviewer enkelte deltagere to gange i løbet af min ph.d. Alle deltagere er anonyme. Det betyder, at det kun er mig og min medvejleder Katherine O'Doherty Jensen som ved, hvem I er. Min hovedvejleder Lotte Holm vejleder mig ikke i denne del af min ph.d., da hun selv er involveret i OPUS. For at jeg kan koncentrerer mig om interviewet og ikke glemmer alle dine pointer, optager jeg vores samtale. [Kun hvis de spørger: Det udskrevne interview udgør grundlaget for mit videre arbejde med interviewene. Du er velkommen til at se udskrifterne og kommentere dem, hvis du vil – men det er endnu uklart hvilke interview der vil indgå i mit videre arbejde.] I undersøgelsen bliver alle deltagere placeret i nogle generelle kasser alt efter arbejdsområde og placering i OPUS. I hver kasse er der flere deltagere, så man kan ikke gætte sig til, hvem der er i de enkelte kasser. Kasserne hedder Leaders og indeholder alle WP-ledere og sub-WP ledere. Så er der ’Project managers’ som indeholder personer med administrative opgaver eller delopgaver inden for en WP. Og Afsluttende er der ’Operationel personale’ hvilket kan indeholde ph.d.-studerende, forskningsassistenter, køkkenpersonale mv. På tværs af disse niveauer er der tre kategorier, som deltagerne også placeres i; Informanter med primært naturvidenskabelig baggrund/arbejde. Informanter som ikke har primært naturvidenskabelig baggrund/arbejde. Og Informanter uden videnskabelig baggrund/arbejde.

Resultatet af undersøgelsen bliver en artikel, der vil indgå som en del af min afhandling, hvor ingen af deltagerne vil kunne genkendes. Interviewet tager ca. 1 time – alt efter hvor meget du har på hjertet – og fungerer sådan, at jeg har en håndfuld spørgsmål, som jeg gerne vil stille dig. Jeg er interesseret i at høre din opfattelse – med dine ord. Så hold dig ikke tilbage med detaljer og tanker. Alt er relevant.

284

Før jeg fortæller lidt om mig selv, vil jeg høre, om du har nogen spørgsmål? Jeg er xx år og bor på Østerbro med min kæreste og lille søn xxx

Om informanten Vil du starte med at fortælle mig, hvad du generelt arbejder med her på XXX [LIFE, Meyers]? Hvad lavede du, før du var her? Rolle i OPUS Hvad er historien bag, at du er med i OPUS? Probe: (faglig-)interesser? Fortæl mig trin for trin, hvad har du lavet i OPUS, siden du startede? Hvad laver du selv i OPUS nu? Probe: Målsætning Samarbejder du med andre deltagere i OPUS Centeret? Probe: Hvordan er det? Mål i OPUS Har du nogen succeskriterier i dit arbejde i OPUS? Hvordan sikrer du dig, at du når dine mål i OPUS? Hvordan går det så med at nå dine mål?

Opfattelse af NNK Hvad er Ny Nordisk Kost? Probe: Prøv at fortæl mig hvad NND er med dine ord? Er der forskel for dig, om det hedder Ny nordisk kost eller Ny nordisk hverdagsmad? Hvordan arbejder du med NNK i dit arbejde i OPUS? Opfattelse af OPUS mål Hvad er OPUS Centerets mål Probe: i forhold til NNK?/ i forhold til egen rolle Evaluering Er der nogen særlige udfordringer i OPUS? Probe: Samarbejde, (forskellige)interesser? Hvis du skulle evaluere OPUS-projektet på nuværende tidspunkt, hvad er så din opfattelse?

285

Hvad vil være tegn på, at OPUS lykkes? Der har været snak om OPUS er et forskningsprojekt eller et forskningsprojekt. Hvad mener du? - AFSLUTNING -

286

Drop-out interviews: Interview guide Tegnforklaring

Kursiv markerer tekst, som intervieweren kan sige under interviewet.

Fed-understreget markerer særligt vigtige ting for intervieweren, fx formålet med hvert afsnit i interviewguiden.

Noter markerer det felt, hvor intervieweren kan tage noter til IP’s svar i løbet af interviewet mhp. at skrive resumé af interviewet efterfølgende samt udfylde Excel-indtastningsarket. Interviewer-instruks

Hvis man får fat i en anden end IP, så sig, at man ringer fra ”Institut for Human Ernæring på Københavns Universitet vedrørende kost-forsøget SHOPUS” og gerne vi tale med IP angående, hvordan det har været at deltage i forsøget. Sig at interviewet tager ”ikke mere end en halv times tid”.

Hvis IP ikke har tid til at blive interviewet, når man får fat i dem, så aftal et tidspunkt, der passer (Hvornår ville det passe dig, at jeg ringede og snakkede lidt med dig om, hvordan det har været at deltage i forsøget?). Intro

Formål: (1) At gøre det klart for IP, hvad det drejer sig om + at give IP lyst til at deltage

Goddag, du taler med [---] fra Institut for Human Ernæring på Københavns Universitet. Det drejer sig om kost-forsøget SHOPUS, som du har deltaget i. Jeg kan se her i mine papirer, at du er stoppet i forsøget – er det korrekt? Okay. Jeg ringer fra den sociologiske undersøgelse, fordi jeg gerne vil høre dig, hvordan det har været at deltage i forsøget. Har du tid til at svare på nogle spørgsmål? Det tager ikke mere end en halv times tid. Du er anonym i vores undersøgelse, så ingen kan bagefter se, hvad du har sagt.

287

Narration

Formål: (1) At få IP til at fortælle om forløbet fra vedkommende hørte om forsøget, til de stoppede. Dette skal hjælpe IP med at få genopfrisket sit eget forløb på forsøget og dermed bedre være i stand til at fortælle om det. (2) At give intervieweren indblik i IP’s forløb og dermed idéer til frafaldsårsager mv.

Jeg vil meget gerne høre om hele dit forløb i forsøget. Kan du starte med at fortælle om den dag, du hørte om undersøgelsen og så fortælle mig, hvordan du har oplevet forsøget frem til i dag?”

Bud på nedslagsspørgsmål, som man kan stille for at få dækket nogle væsentlige punkter: Hvordan hørte du om forsøget? Hvorfor fik du lyst til at deltage? Hvilke forventninger havde du til at deltage i forsøget? Hvordan var informationsmødet? Hvad tænkte du om forsøget efter informationsmødet? Hvordan var det at begynde at lave maden? o Fortæl mig om den første gang du lavede mad. Hvordan var de forskellige prøver, fx blodprøver, konditests mv.?

Tilbageblik / ”Look-back”

Formål: (1) At få sporet IP ind på at vurdere vedkommendes deltagelse i SHOPUS vedr. gode og dårlige ting samt årsager til frafald. (2) At få svar på nogle konkrete spørgsmål ang. IP’s opfattelse af gode og dårlige ting ved at deltage i SHOPUS samt årsager til at falde fra.

Spørgsmål til tilbageblik: Opfattelse. Hvad synes du om at deltage i forsøget? Overraskende. Var der noget, der kom bag på dig/overraskede dig? Særlig tilfreds. Er der noget, du har været særlig tilfreds med i forløbet? Utilfreds. Er der noget, du har været utilfreds?

288

Frafald. Hvad gjorde, at du valgte ikke længere at deltage i SHOPUS-forsøget?

Noter Opfattelse

Overraskende

Særlig tilfreds

Utilfreds

Frafald

Afprøvning/validering af frafaldsårsager

Formål: (1) At få tjekket, at intervieweren har forstået korrekt, hvad der var årsagerne til, at IP faldt fra.

Okay, jeg har hørt dig sige, at [beskriv de årsager til frafald, som er blevet nævnt]. Er det korrekt forstået?

Noter

Konkretisering / ”Overskrifter”

Formål: At få IP til at sætte nogle overskrifter på sine frafaldsårsager, så intervieweren kan få en fornemmelse af, hvilke kategorier årsagerne passer ind under.

289

Hvis du nu skulle sætte nogle overskrifter på de årsager til at droppe ud, som du har nævnt, fx [nævn 1-2 af de nævnte årsager på formen ”det der med at X”], hvad ville de så være?

Noter

Test af øvrige årsager

Formål: At afprøve relevansen af øvrige frafaldsårsager hentet fra litteraturen samt fra de øvrige frafaldsinterviews.

Nogen af de andre personer, vi har talt med, har nævnt nogle forskellige årsager til at droppe ud af forsøget, og jeg kunne godt tænke mig at høre, om nogen af dem også er relevante for dig. [nævn forslag fra listen] Ikke manipulere: Vær meget opmærksom på ikke at presse IP til at vælge nogle af årsagerne fra listen og sørg for at tjekke, at de valgte årsager faktisk er relevante (accepter ikke bare ukritisk et ”Tjøøh, tag også bare den årsag med!” – spørg ind og efterprøv!)

Noter

Prioritering

Formål: At få IP til at prioritere de nævnte frafaldsårsager i vigtigste, næstvigtigste og tredjevigtigste.

Hvis du nu skulle prioritere de årsager til at stoppe på forsøget, som du har nævnt, hvad ville så være den allervigtigste? Og hvad ville være den næstvigtigste? Og den tredjevigtigste?

290

Noter 1. årsag:

2. vigtigste årsag:

3. vigtigste årsag:

Afslutning

Formål: (1) At give IP en god afrunding af interviewet med mulighed for at stille uddybende spørgsmål eller komme med flere kommentarer. (2) At informere IP om, at vi sender vedkommende et spørgeskema inkl. frankeret svarkuvert, når SHOPUS er slut.

Mange tak for, at du var med i forsøget, og at vi måtte ringe til dig og høre om, hvordan det har været! Har du nogle spørgsmål eller er der noget, du gerne vil tilføje? Jeg skal også huske at fortælle dig, at vi sender dig et spørgeskema, når hele undersøgelsen er slut. Alle der har deltaget i SHOPUS får spørgeskemaet – det er en opfølgning på det spørgeskema, som I udfyldte efter informationsmødet. Der medfølger naturligvis en frankeret svarkuvert til skemaet, så du bare kan udfylde det og sende retur til os.

291

292