COLLEGE STUDENTS PERCEPTIONS OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CONSCIOUS EATING BEHAVIORS: A FORMATIVE EVALUATION

Objective: This study was a formative evaluation of modules related to Green Eating. Perceptions of the motivational value of the modules were assessed. Design: This study was a cross-sectional study using secondary data. Participants: 224 college students. Intervention: Participants completed one of three online modules. Participants established a goal for the module they viewed and determined their self-efficacy (SE) in meeting their goal. Main Outcomes: Motivational value was assessed using the Instructional Materials Motivation Survey (IMMS); IMMS scores were compared between modules. Goal congruency (relationship to module topic) and SE were compared between modules. Analysis: Differences in IMMS score and SE were compared between modules using Analysis of Variance. The proportion of IMMS scores ≥3.5 (defined as motivating) and the proportion of goals that were congruent to the module were compared using Chi-Square analysis. Differences between goal congruence and SE and differences in stage of change (SOC), IMMS score, and SE were assessed. Results: Average IMMS total score was ≥3.5 for each module, with no difference in IMMS score between modules. The majority of participants had an IMMS score ≥3.5. The majority of goals were congruent to the module that was viewed and participants were moderately to mostly confident in meeting their goal. Conclusion: The modules were motivating to participants and they were able to establish a goal that was congruent to the module that they viewed.


INTRODUCTION
College students are in a developmental stage in life in which they are becoming more responsible for themselves and making independent decisions 1 . This can lead to unhealthful choices; in general, college students have a poor diet quality including low intake of fruits, vegetables 2 and fiber 3 as well as a high intake of highfat fried foods 4 . Poor diet quality in young adulthood can persist leading to increased risk for chronic disease 3,5 . Web-based interventions have been shown to be an effective method of providing nutrition information to college students and are associated with significant dietary behavior changes, but dietary quality remained considerably below recommendations [6][7][8][9][10] . An innovative new approach is using "stealth" interventions which are designed to improve health related behaviors without appearing to be related to health 11 . For example, knowledge and attitudes about agricultural practices, food production and food distribution can influence individual dietary behaviors and food choices 12-14 .
College students who consider "alternative food production practices (eating organic, local or from sustainable sources)" to be important have a better diet quality (including consuming more servings of fruits and vegetables, consuming more dietary fiber and having a lower percent of calories from fat) compared to students who consider alternative food production practices to be of low importance 15 . A study with college students enrolled in classroom-based course about food-related social issues increased fruit and vegetable consumption and decreased consumption of high-fat meat, high-fat dairy and processed foods 16 . However, to the authors' knowledge, no study has used a web-based intervention with college students to increase motivation to become more sustainable eaters.
In addition to potentially improving diet quality, studies have suggested that adapting more sustainable eating behaviors can reduce the environmental impact of the food system 17,18 . Sustainable eating behaviors contribute to food and nutrition security and a healthy life for the present and future generations [18][19][20] . They are nutritionally adequate, safe and healthy; while optimizing natural and human resources [18][19][20] . Although general knowledge about the food system is important, specific dietary behaviors also related to sustainability need to be addressed. One behavior is eating locally produced food which is associated with a reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 21 , improved local economies 22 and improved food security within communities 23 . Another method to improve food system sustainability is to reduce edible food waste. Food waste represents a loss of energy invested into the production, transport and storage of food 24 as well as a loss of nutrition that could have been provided to one of the 17.6 million people in the United States suffering from food insecurity 25 . Additional areas of sustainable eating behavior such as increasing plant-based dietary choices 17 and choosing foods produced by sustainable farming methods 20 , are beyond the scope of this study thus will not be reviewed. This study will focus on the foods system, eating locally produced foods and reducing food waste.
Researchers at the University of Rhode Island (URI) are developing a series of web-based modules designed to motivate college students to increase sustainable "green" eating (GE) behavior 26 . These modules are based on the ARCS curriculum development motivational model which indicates that in order for motivation to be established and sustained, attention must be obtained and preserved throughout the lesson, relevance to learners' goals and needs must be made obvious, learners must feel confident in their ability to succeed in learning, and learners should feel satisfied about what they accomplished in the learning opportunity 27 . The Instructional Materials Motivation Survey (IMMS) is a validated survey that can be used to assess the motivational features of instructional materials based on the ARCS dimensions 28 .
It is designed to measure the learner's reactions and motivational attitudes to instructional materials 28 .
In order to improve the GE modules, it is important to assess the students' view of the acceptability and motivational value of the modules. Formative evaluation is a research methodology that has been used for these assessments 29 . The purpose of this study is to complete a formative evaluation of the modules in order to improve them for a future intervention.

METHODOLOGY Overview
This project was a formative evaluation using data collected from an ongoing study, approved by the URI Institutional Review Board. Participants completed one of three online modules, (Introduction to Green Eating, Eating Local, or Waste-less Eating), and an evaluation of the module they viewed for class credit.

Participants
Students above the age 18 that were enrolled in participating courses were recruited as volunteers for this study and were granted extra credit in their course for study completion. Students chose whether to allow their data to be used for research, but received extra credit in their class regardless of their consent. Data reported in this study are from consenting participants only. Data for this study also restricted the sample to students between the ages of 18 through 24 to be consistent with previous research 30 .

Tasks Completed By The Participants
Participants completed demographic questions and a behavior quiz before viewing the module. After viewing the module, participants completed the knowledge assessment, the IMMS 31 , established a goal and completed additional evaluation items. Detailed information on the content of the modules is presented in Table 1.

Instruments
Participants selecting, "I choose not to answer", for any of the items on an instrument used in this study were excluded from analysis of that instrument.

IMMS.
Motivational value of the modules was assessed using the IMMS. The IMMS included 36 items which were answered on a five-point Likert scale with answers ranging from "not true" to "very true" with an option "I choose not to answer" 28 . The IMMS consists of four subscales; twelve items to measure Attention, nine items to measure Relevance, nine items to measure Confidence, six items to measure Satisfaction 28 . The IMMS was scored to assess individual subscale scores and averaged to find a total score 28 . The scores were averaged for each subscale score as well as the average total score. Higher scores indicate the material was motivating 28 .
IMMS scores were compared to a benchmark of ≥3.5, representing "moderatelymostly true"; this is consistent with previous research 30 .
Additional Evaluation Items-Self Efficacy (SE) And Goal Congruence. Seven additional evaluation questions 30 were answered by the participants. The first three questions used a 5-point Likert type response options. There questions including, "Rate the degree to which the module motivated you to change", "What was your overall opinion of the module?", and "How likely would you be to recommend the module to a friend?" Responses ranged from "not at all" or "not good at all" to "very much" or "excellent". Goals were assessed by the open-ended item, "What is a goal you can make associated with the module you viewed?" Goals were self-established.
Responses were coded then assessed as being congruent or incongruent to the module that was viewed. Following the goal, self-efficacy (SE) at meeting this goal was assessed: "How confident are you at meeting this goal?" Responses were anchored on a five-point Likert scale from, "not at all" to "very much". The final questions were open-ended: "What did you find really helpful/useful in this module?" and "What would you change to better reach college students?" The answers to the three openended items were coded to find common themes for descriptive purposes.
Behavior Quiz. The behavior quiz was included at the start of each module. The behavior quiz for the Introduction to GE module and the Eating Local module included five questions and the behavior quiz for the Waste-less module included four questions. These questions were used to look at the behaviors practiced by the participants related to the module that they viewed. An example of a behavior questions from each module was "How often do you consider the environmental impact when making food choices?" (Introduction to GE module); "When you purchase food, where do you go most frequently?" (Eating Local module); "When you go up to the serving line at the dining hall do you…" (Waste-less module). Answers to these the questions were scored from low to high in terms of their environmental friendliness. These scores were used to provide participants with feedback about the GE behaviors prior to viewing the module.
Knowledge Assessment. Questions on the knowledge assessment were based on the information that was provided in the module. Each question was scored as correct or incorrect. The Introduction to GE module and the Eating Local module knowledge assessment had five questions and the Waste-less module had four questions.
Participants who answered more than one question incorrectly on the knowledge assessment scored low and those missing no more than one question scored high on the knowledge assessment.
Demographic Data. Demographic data were collected including: age, gender, race, year in school, major, and Stage of Change (SOC) for GE 32 . For data analysis, race was coded as "white" or "other", (black or African American, Hispanic/ Latino, Asian, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, American Indian or Alaska Native, mixed race or other race). Major was recoded to health or science field (1) or other (2). For those who said they had two majors, the first major that was listed was chosen for analysis. SOC was classified as either pre-action (pre-contemplation, contemplation and preparation) or post-action (action and maintenance).

Hypothesis
Hypothesis 1: There will be no difference between modules in the proportion of students finding them motivating (defined by IMMS total score ≥3.5).

Hypothesis 2:
There will be no difference in in total IMMS score between the modules.

Secondary 1:
Most goals, (≥75%), will be congruent to the module that was viewed.

Secondary 2:
There will be no difference in IMMS total score or subscale score between modules.

Secondary 3:
There will be no difference in total IMMS score after adjusting for gender.

Exploratory 1:
Participants who establish a goal that is congruent to the module that was viewed will have higher SE in meeting their goal than students who establish a goal that is not congruent with the module.

Exploratory 2:
Participants who are in a post-action SOC will have a higher IMMS total score and higher SE in meeting their goal than those in a pre-action SOC.

Analysis
Statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 22.0. Armonk, NY. Normality of the continuous variables was assessed and all were normally distributed. Descriptive data were presented as a mean ± standard deviation and categorical data was assessed as frequency and percent.
Categorical data were assessed using Chi-Square analysis. This was done to determine the proportion of IMMS total scores for each module that were categorized as motivating (≥ 3.5) and not motivating (<3.5). Chi-Square analysis were also used to assess the proportion of goals that were congruent and not congruent between modules.
Continuous data were assessed using Analysis of Variance. This was done to assess differences in IMMS total scores and subscale score between the modules.
Significant univariate results were followed up by Tukey-Post Hoc tests. To control for potential effect of gender on IMMS scores, Analysis of Covariance was used.
An Independent T-test was used to determine the relationship between goal congruence (yes/no) and participant's confidence at meeting their goal. Additionally, two Independent T-tests were used to determine the relationship between SOC and IMMS score and SE.
Significance was set at a p-value of .05.

Participants
Demographic data are presented in Table 2. Participants in this study were a convenience sample of students (n=345) from three classes in a Northeastern university; 224 participated. The mean age of the participants was 19.2 ± 1.3 years.
The majority of the participants were female (77.1%). More than half the participants were freshmen (58.9%) and the majority of the sample reported their race as "white" (88%). More than half of participants (56.6%) were majoring in a field related to health or science. Descriptive analysis of participants revealed that most participants (81.4%) were in a pre-action SOC for GE.

IMMS Score
Differences in IMMS subscale score and total score between the modules is presented in Table 3. Ninety-eight participants (57%) had an IMMS total score greater than or equal to 3.5. As indicated by a Chi-Square analysis, there was no difference in this proportion between modules (χ 2= 2.

Behavior Quiz And Knowledge Assessment
Data on the behavior and knowledge scores are presented in Table 5. Overall, the majority of participants (53.6%) scored in the medium range for environmentally friendly behavior practices. Eating Local had the greatest amount of participants in the highest environmentally friendly behavior category (37.9%) and the Waste-less module had the highest amount of participants receiving low environmentally friendly behavior scores (21.4%). Overall, 72% of the participants missed no more than one question, therefore, scored high on the knowledge assessment. There was no significant difference in participants scoring high on the knowledge assessment between modules (χ 2 [df=2] = 2.9, p=.23).

Additional Evaluation Items:
Data on the additional evaluation items are presented in in Table 6 "Honestly, to better reach college students it may be best to show more negative effects of not eating green" and "adding pictures of other young people".

DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to conduct a formative evaluation of three GE modules to assess if the modules were motivating to college students. Results from this study showed the GE modules were moderately motivating to participants.
Additionally, most of the participants established goals that were congruent to the module that was viewed and were moderately to mostly confident in their ability to attain their goal. However, as expected from formative evaluations, this study found areas to improve in future interventions.
The majority of participants found the GE modules to be motivational as indicated by 57% of participants scoring the total IMMS score ≥3.5. This was consistent with another study using the IMMS to assess motivation of a web-based health promotion intervention with college students 30 , and higher than another study using IMMS to assess motivational difference in two web-based courses related to asthma and depression 33 . Unlike other studies 30,33 , there was no difference in IMMS total score between males and females, suggesting the GE modules were equally motivational to both gender groups.
There was no difference in IMMS total score between the modules assessed continuously and categorically, but there was a significant difference in the continuous subscale score between modules for Relevance. Relevance was higher in the Wasteless module than the Introduction to GE module. Keller recommended that in order for students to be motivated to learn, they must first believe the content is related to their personal goals or motives 34 . Successful instruction is able to close the gap between the subject matter and the learners needs, wants and desires 34 . It is possible that the participants found the Waste-less module more relevant to their lives based on the information that was provided. The majority of participants fell in the medium range for practicing GE behaviors related to the specific module that they viewed which is consistent with their being in a pre-action SOC for GE. It appears most participants were practicing some GE behaviors but did not meet the criterion for being in the action SOC for GE.
However, the behavior quiz items were not validated. Future studies that wish to explore more about participants GE behaviors should use validated items.
Overall, the majority of participants (72%) had one or less incorrect responses on the knowledge assessment. The Eating Local module had a lower proportion suggesting this assessment was more difficult than the other modules. For example, one of the questions was to define of the term "locavore", but the definition of locavore could only been seen if the participant placed his or her mouse over the term in the module. Additionally, the participant was asked to select the exact number of farmers markets that existed in the US in 2012. The answer to the question was included as a graph within the module; if the participant analyzed the graph only to assess the trend they may not have noticed the exact number included in the graph.
Future research should modify the knowledge assessment to assess only the content from the module that is made clear to the student and use validated questions to assess knowledge acquired from the module.
Overall, the participants rated the modules as being slightly to moderately effective at motivating change, had a positive opinion of the module, and would recommend the module to a friend. The ability to motivate change was significantly higher for the Waste-less module compared to the Introduction to GE module. This is similar to IMMS results. This suggests the Introduction to GE module should be modified to increase its' motivational ability.

Limitations:
One of the limitations of this study was that there was an unequal distribution of participants that viewed each module. Additionally, most of the participants were

Behavioral Objectives
Increase awareness of GE.
Increase local food consumption.
Decrease edible food waste.

Introduction to GE Eating Local Waste-less
Behavior Quiz Description of their diet and consideration of environmental impact when making food choices.
Purchasing food and knowledge or where food comes from.
How often they waste food, purchase items in bulk, use reusable items and their familiarity with composting.

Knowledge Assessment
Definitions for GE and sustainability, description of food system, percentage of fossil fuels needed for food production.
Benefits of eating local; miles food travels; farmers market growth.
Web-based interventions can be an effective method of providing nutrition information to college students and are associated with dietary behavior changes 9-12 .
However, few studies have investigated the use of web-based interventions as a method of educating college students about sustainable eating behaviors, known as "Green Eating" (GE). Researchers at the University of Rhode Island (URI) have developed a series of web-based modules to promote and educate college students on how to become "Green Eaters". In order to improve the intervention, it is important to assess the students' view of the acceptability and motivational value of the modules.
Formative evaluation is a research methodology that has been used for these types of assessments 13 .
This extended literature review will provide the justification for the web-based GE intervention by reviewing and comparing agricultural practices of food production and food distribution to assess their impact on the environment and individual food choices 1,14 . Web-based interventions targeting college students 9-12,15 will be reviewed to identify important components that have been used to successfully modify nutrition related knowledge, attitudes and behaviors of college students. The intervention uses different models of instructional design 13,16,17 , therefore details about the models used will be examined. In order to ensure that the intervention is effective, it is important to assess how the participants perceive the lessons. Accordingly, the use of formative evaluation assessment instruments 13 will be discussed. Additional intervention components, including the Transtheoretical Model (TTM) 17 and goal setting 18 , will also be discussed.

Challenges of the Food System
The food system encompasses all aspects of food production 19 . The challenges of food system sustainability are broadly conceptualized into three main perspectives by Garnett 20 : 1) production efficiency, in which there is a need to make food production more sustainable by relying on fewer resources for food production, 2) demand restraint, which would require changes to dietary drivers that determine food production, and 3) system transformation, which requires changes in how the food system is administrated 20 . In order to fully address food system sustainability, all of these perspectives need to be considered, however, system transformation is beyond the scope of this research project, thus will not be discussed.
The demand for nutritious food is increasing to meet the needs for a growing population 21 . The need to make food production more efficient and sustainable for the environment and human health is eminent. Technological innovations, such as matching inputs to outputs and recovering energy from agricultural waste, could improve agricultural efficiency 20 . Technological innovations to improve production efficiency post-harvest would include making refrigeration, manufacturing and transportation of food more efficient or based on renewable resources 20 . Improving methods of waste management, such as modifying packaging and portion sizes, is another method to improve production efficiency 20 .
Foods that require a high amount of resource inputs for production and result in a high amount of undesired outputs, such as GHG emissions 20 , are a concern food system sustainability 20 . In order to reduce the environmental impact of food production, the demand for these foods needs to be reduced 20 . Demand restraint seeks to curb consumption and steer consumers towards diets that are more plant-based and contain less meat and dairy products 20 . It has been suggested that demand restraint is protective of the environmental and human health 20,22-24 .

Green Eating
Researchers at URI developed the term GE which includes the following GE Biodiversity Loss: The food system contributes to biodiversity loss as grassland and forestland that are converted for agriculture destroys natural habitats resulting in global extinctions of plant and animal species 48 . Ten to twenty percent of current grassland and forestland is projected to be converted to other uses by 2050, with agriculture projected to be the main consumer of this land 48 . Biodiversity loss as a result of increased agriculture can be seen throughout the food system: livestock farming affects biodiversity through heavy grazing and soil compaction; forest is lost when pastures and croplands are expanded; pollution of water with nutrients, drugs and sediments; and over-fishing resulting in extinction [49][50][51][52] .

Water Use and Water Pollution:
The different stages of the food system require water use and can contribute to water pollution 53 . Agriculture is a major consumer of surface water and ground water in the United States, accounting for 80% of the water used in the United States 53 .
Water is used in agriculture for irrigation, pesticide and fertilizer application, crop cooling and frost control 54 . One area of agriculture that uses a significant amount of water is livestock production; 29% of water used in the agricultural sector is used for livestock production [55][56][57] . Water is needed for livestock production to produce feed and drinking water for the animals, cleaning the animals and the animal's shelter, and for processing the animal's meat for human consumption [55][56][57] . One study shows that water consumption of animal products in an industrial food system is greater than water used for crop production even when equivalent nutritional value (calories, protein and fat) are taken into account 55 .
Agriculture can contribute to water pollution as phosphorous and nitrogen that are commonly found in fertilizers can run off into surface water 58 . This can lead to eutrophication resulting in algae blooms 59 . As mentioned previously, some of agriculture's effects on air pollution can cause water pollution, nutrients leaching from soil and acid rain 43,44 .
Conventional Agriculture: Effects on Health The farming methods described above that are used with conventional agriculture allow for greater yield when compared to more sustainable farming methods, making food more available and affordable to for a growing population 60,61 .
However, it is important to take what is being produced and the purpose of its production into consideration. Corn and soybeans are the two major crops produced in the United States 62 . These crops are used most commonly for animal feed products, as exports, and for production of sugar and oil including high fructose corn syrup and vegetable oil 62 which are commonly used to produce highly refined, processed foods 63 that are easily affordable, accessible and high in calories 64 . The United States Department of Research Services states that daily caloric intake has risen by 14.7% (over 300 calories) since 1984 with added fats, oils and sugar contributing to 7% of that increase 65,66 . Studies have shown diets high in these types of foods are detrimental to human health as they contribute to obesity and metabolic syndrome 67,68 .
Inefficiency of Conventional Agriculture The information presented above demonstrates some of the environmental effects of conventional methods of food production. In addition the current food system does not appear to accomplish its' principal function of feeding people effectively 20 . Many are suffering consequences of eating too much of the foods that are being produced 68 , many are wasting food 31 and others are going hungry 69 . With the expanding population growth 70 , it is critical that methods of food production become more efficient while causing less environmental damage. In addition the food system has to increase access to foods that enhance human health and alter consumer preferences so that less of the foods causing environmental damage are consumed 20 .
Sustainable Agriculture-Impacts on the Environment The environmental impact of our food system, including deforestation, water burger made with 100% pea protein, raw tomatoes, wheat bread and water) in two different countries in terms of their global warming potential, eutrophication potential, acidification potential, and the amount of energy needed to store and produce the meal. In both countries, the pea burger (meal four) had the lowest global warming potential, eutrophication potential and acidification potential. However, it needed a comparable amount of energy to produce the meal because they authors assumed it would be sold as a frozen product requiring energy to freeze the product at the industry site and keep it frozen until it was ready to be consumed. Kytzia  The Impact of Food Distribution on the Environment An analysis of the environmental impact of the food chain includes the mode of transportation that was used for distribution and the distance that the food item traveled 20,28 . "Food miles" is a term used to describe how far food travels between its production to the final consumer 27 . Most food in the United States travels 1,020 miles from farm or production facility to the retail store 27 in comparison to local or regional food which is consumed within 400 miles of its origin 26 . It has been suggested that long distance trade results in increased GHG emissions 49,51 . Consuming regionally produced meat and vegetables has less of an impact on the environment compared to these foods transported via airplane 89 . Therefore, diets composed of local and regional foods can reduce energy costs and pollution associated with transportation 22,26,89 .

Perceptions of Eating Locally
Consumers may find local foods to be of higher quality compared to foods grown from further distances and consume more fruits and vegetables than the general population 87 88 . However, when consuming a diet consisting of local foods they are limited by what foods are grown and produced in their region 95 . In a qualitative study involving participants following a 100-mile diet, participants found following the diet difficult because they had to forgo some foods they would commonly eat, such as beans and tofu, because they were produced outside their 100 mile radius 95 . Other challenges faced by the participants included: a higher cost associated with local food, perceptions of unhealthy diet restrictions (including inability to consume tofu and beans as they were produced outside their 100 mile radius), increased time spent preparing meals and avoiding eating at social situations or restaurants because the food that was served was not always sourced within a 100 mile radius 95 . Despite the challenges, the participants in this study generally reported having a positive experience in following a 100-mile diet; positive remarks made by the participants included: learning about the local food system; challenging themselves to eat locally; enjoying the freshness, flavor and quality of the food; and believing their food purchases improved the community 95 .

Conclusion-Eating Local
Consuming a local diet consisting of regionally produced food is a method that can be taken to reduce the environmental impact of the food system 89 , improve the local economy 26,92-94 and benefit social programs 94,98,99 . Consuming a local diet helps people to learn about the food system 95 and to consume more fruits and vegetables 87 , therefore, eating local can improve diet quality. Providing information about eating locally to young adults could be a valuable method used to educate this population on the food system and increase their fruit and vegetable consumption.

Classification of Food Waste
There are various definitions and classifications for food waste 100,101 .
Avoidable waste refers to food and drink that is thrown away because it is no longer wanted; these foods may have expired or perished 100 . Possibly avoidable waste refers to foods that some people eat while others do not (such as apple or potato peels), food that can be eaten when prepared a certain way (such as pumpkin seeds), or unavoidable losses which includes food that cannot be eaten in any way (such as apple cores, banana peels or tea leaves) 100 . Harvesting, storage, transportation and processing losses that can only be salvaged using the best available technologies and extra cost are classified as unavoidable 100 .
It has been suggested that over production of food contributes to both obesity and food waste 31 . Obesity is a result of excessive caloric consumption 102 ; calories that are consumed in excess can be considered wasted calories as they are not needed and contribute to weight gain 31 . The high production of cheap, processed, and readily available food in the United States has made more food accessible. Addressing the oversupply of food energy may help curb both the obesity epidemic and food losses due to waste and over consumption 31 .
In the university setting, dining halls are a primary source of food and food waste for thousands of college students 101 . It is suggested that food waste from these establishments may be as high as 20% 100 . One study conducted in a university dining  included: fruit, vegetables, dairy and prepared food. Some of the most common reasons why food waste occurred were because the food item had gone bad, the package that was purchased was too big and it was difficult to empty, too much food was prepared and it was not possible to save the leftovers, and because children in the household did not want to finish their meals. The attitude among 96% of the participants was that food waste is not good. In the group that received environmental education before participating in the study, 25% of participants agreed to a high extent that more of the packaging should be removed from foods. The authors acknowledge that food packaging represents only a small amount of the environmental impact of the food system 115 compared to food waste, therefore education about the importance of reducing food waste and methods of reducing food waste is important.

Conclusion-Food Waste
All food waste contributes to an unnecessary loss of resources needed in the production of that food 100 . Food waste also represents a loss of nutrition that could have otherwise been provided to people suffering from food insecurity 69 . Consumers are aware that wasting food is not good 114 , but often rate the importance of reducing packaging waste more important than reducing food waste 33 . Providing information about food waste and methods of how to reduce food waste could be a valuable method to reduce food waste.

Food Distribution and Food Waste-Increasing GHG
The food system produces GHG throughout its' entire process including how food is grown, distributed, preserved, sold, prepared, and disposed of 35  students who consider alternative food production practices to be of high importance had a better diet quality and practiced more healthful eating behaviors than their peers as they consumed more fruits and vegetables, more dietary fiber, less fat and were more likely to consume breakfast, less likely to eat fast-food and consumed fewer sugar sweetened beverages. Results from this study suggest promotion of environmentally conscious food choices with college students could be advantageous in improving diet quality and increasing healthy eating behaviors among college students.

Web-based Interventions with College Students
A variety of web-based interventions have been used among college students to motivate and educate students to improve dietary behaviors. Milan and colleagues 10 found a web-based intervention based on the TTM to be an effective method to improve self-efficacy and decisional balance to promote folic-acid containing multivitamin use among female college students. Poddar and colleges 11 found a webbased nutrition education course improved self-efficacy and self-regulation related to dairy intake with college students. Greene and colleagues 12 developed Project WebHealth, an experimental study which tested the impact of a web-based intervention for college students targeting increasing fruit and vegetable consumption and physical activity. Results showed this intervention to be an effective at increasing fruit and vegetable consumption and slowing the rate of decline in physical activity compared to the non-intervention group. These studies demonstrate the efficacy of web-based interventions as a method to modify the dietary behaviors of college students.
Researchers at URI are developing web-based interventions to promote GE.
The first generation of these interventions was a pilot study applying the TTM 17 and the Social Cognitive Theory 124 to promote GE in the college student population 125 .
The second generation of these interventions used the data collected from the first generation to make changes to and expand the lessons to better meet the needs of the college student population. It is important to assess the effectiveness of the second generation of the modules before the lessons can be finalized.

Instructional Design and Formative Evaluations
Gagnè and colleges 126 define instructional design as a teaching strategy to make the acquisition of knowledge and skills more effective and appealing. This process is used to determine the needs of the learner, define a goal to base instruction on and to create an intervention to assist in the transition. Formative evaluations are used to test educational materials with learners then make revisions to the materials as necessary before finalizing them 127  This survey can be scored as a whole to find the total score or each subscale can be scored independently to find the subscale score 13 . The preferred scoring method of the IMMS is to find the average total score and the average score for each subscale 13 ; scores greater than or equal to average (≥3.5) indicate motivational value 13,15 . If one of the subscales has an IMMS score lowing than 3.5, strategies can be used to make changes to the material to make it more motivational and acceptable to the student 130 . The IMMS has been used with a variety of interventions involving college students 15, 129,131 ; results from these studies show the interventions that were provided motivated participants to make behavior change. Some studies using IMMS have shown that females score significantly higher than males 15,131 . IMMS scores are most useful when they are used to make changes to courses; one method of doing this is by providing feedback about the course to instructors after taking the course 13 . throughout the stages. In order to advance through the stages, the perceived "pros" must out-weight the perceived "cons" of making the change 17 . In addition, selfefficacy (confidence in changing behavior) must increase. Helping participants to set realistic goals can increase "pros" and improve self-efficacy and can decrease "cons"; this facilitates participants progression through the stages 17 . The TTM has been used in web-based interventions with college students 10,12 .

Social Cognitive Theory (SCT)
The SCT can be used when developing interventions aiming to increase the likelihood of behavior change 133 . The SCT addresses the psychosocial dynamics influencing health behavior and provides methods for promoting behavior change 133 .
This theory takes into account the ways in which behavior, personal factors and environmental influences interact 133 . This theory specifies a core set of determinants, the mechanism through which they work, and the optimal ways of translating this knowledge into effective practices 134 . The core determinants included in the SCT include knowledge, perceived self-efficacy, outcome expectations and the goals one sets for themselves and perceived facilitators/ impediments to the changes they seek 134 . Knowledge is the groundwork for change, if a person is unaware of the risks and benefits associated with making a change, they are less likely to do it 134 . Beliefs in personal efficacy in making the desired change are crucial and are the foundation to motivation and action 134 . Goals provide incentive and guides for making behavior change; long term goals set the course for behavior change and short term goals aid in guiding action in the present moment 134 . This theory can be used when developing interventions to increase the likelihood of behavior change 133 and has been used in web-based interventions with college students 11,12 .

Goal Setting
Locke describes the three key concepts of motivation as needs, values and goals, goals being the desired outcome 9,18 . Goal setting has been found to be effective at increasing performance by leading to arousal and discovery of information relevant to the goal 18 . More specific and difficult goals lead to a higher level of performance so long as the goal is achievable and the individual is devoted to reaching that goal 18 .
O'Donnell and colleagues 9 explored the use of goal setting in Project Webhealth, an online intervention targeting increasing fruit and vegetable consumption and decreasing the rate of decline of physical activity in college students. This study found the use of goal setting contributed to increasing fruit and vegetable consumption. This is consistent with other studies that have shown goal setting can be an effective method in making behavior change 135,136 . Results from this study demonstrated that goal setting can be effective at improving dietary outcomes of young adults.

Self-Efficacy (SE)
SE is part of the SCT, it is the one's belief in their ability to succeed in a given situation 134 . SE influences goals and aspirations; the higher perceived self-efficacy, the higher the goals people set for themselves and the stronger their commitment is to meeting their goal 134 . Those with high SE view obstacles in meeting the desired goal as something they can overcome, whereas those with low SE may give up on trying to reach their goal 134 . SE can be an important measurement to assess when using the TTM to aid in progression through the stages of change 10, 137 . SE has been measured in other studies with college students 10-12 .

Conclusion
Agricultural practices, food production and food distribution impact the environment and individual food choices 1,14 . Food distribution impacts the environment by increasing GHG emissions. 49,51 , therefore consuming more local foods could be beneficial for the environment 89 . Wasted food represents a total loss of energy invested in the production, transport and storage of that food 100 ; thus decreasing food waste could reduce the environmental impact of the food system.
Reducing the distance food travels and reducing the amount of wasted food could reduce GHG emissions associated with the food sector.
Young adults are in a developmental stage in life where they are becoming more responsible for themselves and making independent decisions 4 such as making their own dietary choices. Studies have shown that college students, ages 18-24, have poor diet quality including low intake of fruits, vegetables 5 and fiber 6 as well as a high intake of high-fat fried foods 7 . Promotion of environmentally conscious food choices with college students could be an effective method used to improve diet quality and increasing healthy eating behaviors among college students 8 . Web-based interventions have been a successful method of providing nutrition information to college students and are associated with dietary behavior changes 9-12 .
Different models of instructional design exist which make the learning process more effective and interesting for the student. The ARCS model can be used to improve instructional design by finding a teaching strategy to instill motivation in the student throughout a series of lesions. Student motivation can be measured using the IMMS; this survey has been successfully used in the college student population 15 .
Knowledge can be presented to the student an appealing manner, however, increase in knowledge does not necessarily lead to behavior change. Goal setting can be effective at increasing performance and can be an effective method to aid in the progression through the stages of behavior change.

APPENDIX B
TABLES AND FIGURES Purchasing food and knowledge or where food comes from.
How often they waste food, purchase items in bulk, use reusable items and their familiarity with composting.

Knowledge Assessment
Definitions for GE and sustainability, description of food system, percentage of fossil fuels needed for food production.
Benefits of eating local; miles food travels; farmers market growth.
Largest source of food waste and the amount of food wasted. Choose not to answer 4 What is a goal you can make associated with the module you viewed?
This question was open-ended Choose not to answer 6 What did you find really helpful/useful in this module?
This questions was open-ended 7 What would you change to better reach college students?

Consent form for Research
You have been invited to take part in a research project described below. The researcher will explain the project to you in detail upon request. You should feel free to ask questions either in person or by email at gwg@uri.edu. If you have more questions later Professor Geoffrey Greene, the person mainly responsible for this study, 401-874-4028, will discuss them with you. You must be at least 18 years old to be in this research project.

Description of the project:
You have been asked to take part in a study that will ask questions to evaluate modules about pro-environmental eating choices, known as green eating. What will be done: If you decide to partake in this study, here is what will happen: You will fill out a survey, which should take about 15 minutes. All of the questions being asked have come from established survey instruments. If you complete the survey, in combination with viewing the module, you will receive class credit for your participation.

Risk or discomfort:
The questions being asked should not pose any discomfort. If any question poses discomfort, simply refrain from answering that question.

Benefits of this study:
Although there will be no direct benefit for you, the results from this study will be used to make changes to modules regarding content, application, appearance etc. The modules will be used during an intervention during the Fall semester of 2013.

Confidentiality:
Your participation in this survey will remain confidential. If you wish to receive extra credit you must complete viewing the module as well as completing the survey. Any information linking your name or personal information will be removed from your responses before data analysis and deleted once class credit has been provided.
You should understand that any form of communication over the internet does carry a minimal loss of confidentiality. None of the information will identify you by name. At the end of the study, the unidentifiable data will be stored on a password-protected computer.
Decision to quit at any time: The decision to take part in this study is up to you. You do not have to participate. If you decide to take part in the study, you may quit at any time. Whatever you decide will not affect your status as a student or your grade in this class. You will, however, only receive extra credit if you complete viewing the module and complete the survey. If you wish to withdraw from the study after submitting your survey, simply inform Professor Geoffrey Greene at 401-874-4028 of your decision before class credit has been provided and the link between personal information and survey responses has been deleted. Choose c) Eating foods that are produced using sustainable environmental practices.
2. Sustainability refers to a process that degrades resources as to not leave any for future generations.