Next Article in Journal
The Path to Green Development: The Impact of a Carbon Emissions Trading Scheme on Enterprises’ Environmental Protection Investments
Next Article in Special Issue
Digital Influencers Promoting Healthy Food: The Role of Source Credibility and Consumer Attitudes and Involvement on Purchase Intention
Previous Article in Journal
Attitudes and Behaviour towards More Sustainable Travel Options in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: An Emerging Social Change?
Previous Article in Special Issue
Factors Influencing the Knowledge Level of Fish Consumers: An Explanatory Analysis
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 16
10.3390/su151612549
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Perception of Food Quality and Food Value among the Purchasing Intentions of Street Foods in the Capital of the Philippines

by
Eric R. Tacardon
1,2,
Ardvin Kester S. Ong
1,3,* and
Ma. Janice J. Gumasing
1
1
School of Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, Mapúa University, 658 Muralla St., Intramuros, Manila 1002, Philippines
2
School of Graduate Studies, Mapúa University, 658 Muralla St., Intramuros, Manila 1002, Philippines
3
E.T. Yuchengco School of Business, Mapua University, 1191 Pablo Ocampo Sr. Ext, Makati 1203, Metro Manila, Philippines
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(16), 12549; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151612549
Submission received: 26 June 2023 / Revised: 3 August 2023 / Accepted: 17 August 2023 / Published: 18 August 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Consumer Analysis and Sustainable Food Consumption)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Transformations in modern lifestyles have caused changes in people’s food consumption, elevating the status of street foods to one of the favored choices. However, very few studies have been dedicated to investigating why street foods have become a popular choice among consumers. This study aimed to apply a modified version of the original theory of planned behavior (TPB), which includes domains affecting the intention to purchase while adding perceived food quality and value together with convenience. A total of 1361 respondents answered a survey based on the extended TPB constructs. Focusing on college graduates in the country, Structural Equation Modeling was utilized for the statistical analysis. Convenience proved to have the highest indirect effect on the intention to purchase street foods, explaining street foods’ ubiquitous and patronized image—which affected the TPB domains. This was followed by perceived food quality, which also had a significant direct effect on the behavioral domains and a higher indirect effect on street food purchase intention than perceived food value. Further discussion on the effect between behavioral domains was presented. This study also provided recommendations that street food vendors, the government, related private businesses, and consumers themselves can use to improve a sustainable community and businesses. In conclusion, this study contributes to the limited literature and promotion of purchasing and consuming street foods.

1. Introduction

The way people consume food has changed drastically over the past years. This has happened mainly due to the changing lifestyles within society [1]. Nowadays, people eat their meals or snacks according to their busy schedules [2]. Along with this, the popularity of convenience foods, fast foods, and street foods has risen considerably [3,4]. Street foods have over 2.5 billion daily consumers worldwide [5]. Attributed to this popularity are street foods that consumers deem as substitutes for homemade food, consumed due to their affordability, which exhibit a case for ease of consumption [6].
Street foods are any food with (and without) drinks offered on the streets and sold to the general public. Following the origin of the word, it is any food available on the streets that is on sale [7]. At present, there are a wide variety of street foods that are sold all over the world [8]. They can come from traditional local cuisine or modern and familiar processed products. Different street foods may range from sweet or savory foods to snacks or desserts, such as biscoitos de polvilho from Brazil or bagel and lamb doner from Turkey [9]. Some may provide drinks or coolers alongside the food consumed, such as iced syrup drinks or even soy (taho) drinks from Mexico and the Philippines [10]. Regardless of the country, street foods continue to be a popular food source for consumers.
There are many factors attributed to why street food continues to be popular, which has been sustained in trade despite the effects of widespread modernization in the current century. As explained in the study of Morano et al. [11], consumers have adopted eating street foods as part of their normal diet due to their social and economic impact. However, great emphasis has been placed on different street foods’ quality, safety, and value. Regarding social and economic aspects, the street food industry has flourished due to its link to tourism. Taking into account tourism in southeast Asia, street food is utilized as part of the cultural experience among tourists, thus increasing the customer base and income generation [12].
Likewise, street food can provide basic dietary needs to consumers regularly [13], which has resulted in continued support for street food businesses. These factors show how the street food industry is a thriving business. Nonetheless, the perceived food quality and values prevalent in street foods are among the challenges vendors encounter [11]. Given the street food industry’s role in both the informal sector and tourism, the favorable conditions it creates point to the thriving nature of the street food business. The need to further explore consumer intentions to consume street food should be assessed to highlight its importance and advantages among governing bodies for its economic and societal benefits. Especially in the Philippines, street foods are gaining appreciation and tourist visitation [5]. This has been evident on different social media sites in present times, which creates more recognition.
Little research is available, even with the long-standing operations of the street food business. Studies about street food in the Philippines are limited to the vulnerability of street vendors’ livelihoods due to typhoons (including street food vendors) [14], the livelihoods of street food vendors and interventions [15], food safety [16,17], food handling [18,19], nutrition and microbial quality [20], and nutrition quality [21]. From the study of Hidalgo et al. [14], the livelihood vulnerability index was used to assess loss of business, shelter, financial capital, and risk management among street vendors livelihoods in the Philippine province of Naga City. Their study focused on creating a framework and was limited to assessing the drivers of livelihood. Their study suggested covering more factors and different scenario evaluations to fully attest for the developed framework and its application. In the other hand, Tinker [15] focused only on income and food handling among street food vendors in the province of Iloilo. The study was able to establish a theoretical assumption challenge for the claims among economists on feminists and informal sectors. Both different studies [16,17] provided insights on the food safety of street food vendors among universities in the Philippines and evaluated only knowledge, attitudes, and practices—if compliant with the Microbiological Guidelines. On the other hand, different studies [18,19] have delved into the quality and food handling of the street foods available in the different provinces of the Philippines. Focusing only on food quality was also seen in other related studies performed in the Philippines and their relation to nutrition [20,21]. Much focus has been seen on food quality, nutrition, handling, and the formulation of theoretical assessments and measurements. Limited studies have been seen to investigate consumer behavior, especially in the Philippines.
A recent study investigating consumer behavior using the phenomenology approach was performed with only five respondents through a qualitative analysis [22]. Similarly, street food studies in other countries have focused on safety [9,23,24,25], street food perception [26], trade [27], tourism [28,29], and safe food purchasing [30]. From a developing country perspective, Alimi [23] provided further insights into the business perspectives and safe food practices among the vendors of street foods. They presented that the risk on consumers is quite evident when purchasing and consuming street foods, which should be focused on by regulating bodies. The study was able to provide insights on these matters, which could help to increase positive consumer behavior. This was the same focus in the studies conducted by Lues et al. [24] and Chukuezi [25]. The suggestion of which prompted a gap in terms of the evaluation of consumers upon their purchasing intentions. Both of these perspectives and this study knowledge are needed to provide a more holistic evaluation and encompass a better understanding of how vendors may sell and promote their products. Aligning with this is the study performed in [26,27,28,29], which showed that consumers are willing to purchase street foods. However, their study was focused only on urban food systems, psychological assessments of entrepreneurial aspects, the marketing mix for business development, and the promotion of tourism traffic. Only the study of Khongtong et al. [30] was deemed to be closely related to the objective of closing the gap in this study. They focused on consumer behavior, but only performed their decision-making investigation in Thailand. Studies investigating impact, behavior, and intentions were have been performed for other categories of food, such as fast food [31,32], convenience foods [33,34,35], functional foods [36,37], organic foods [38], and Halal foods [39]. Thus, the need to assess the behavioral aspects of consumers should be investigated to promote the consumption of street foods to boost livelihood, tourism, and a country’s economy.
The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) is one of the most used models in terms of predicting the likelihood of activity concerning a person’s beliefs, intentions, and positive or negative behavior. It explains that a person’s execution of a particular behavior through intentions relates to that behavior. This framework has flexibility in its usage, as it allows other factors to be involved in the model [40]. In terms of its application in the food consumer area, it has been previously used for fast food, takeaway food [41,42], and food choices [43,44]. However, these studies have suggested extending the TPB to holistically cover other behavioral aspects concerning food consumption and individual behavior. Thus, most studies have separately extended the TPB, including quality aspects, food and eating values, and convenience. No studies have been able to consider all these aspects as extensions to the TPB for a more holistic measurement.
This study aimed to apply a modified version of the original TPB. Specifically, this was extended to cover different quality and food value perceptions in order to holistically analyze the street food consumption in the capital of the Philippines. Structural equation modeling was utilized to simultaneously assess the causal relationship among the factors considered in this study. Identifying the factors and their relative influence on street food consumption will allow sellers to create strategies for the cultivation of conditions favorable for boosting consumption. The findings may lead to innovation in the street food industry, adopting practices based on the studied factors from other industries or fields. Likewise, consumers’ understanding of their behavior can lead them to enhance or modify their lifestyles appropriate to their behavior in terms of food consumption. In addition, the private sector and regulators (e.g., government) can also create business models or initiatives pointing towards a sustainable economic and food supply agenda.

2. Literature Review and Hypotheses

The TPB Model is considered to be one of the most popular conceptual tools when studying consumer behavior. It focuses on three main factors—Attitude, Subjective Norms, and Perceived Behavioral Control, which influences Intention and, consequently, an individual’s behavior [31,44,45,46,47,48]. From related studies, an extended or modified version of the TPB has been used among other studies covering halal food purchases [39], organic food [45], street food [46], sustainable food [47], and Genetically Modified Food [48]. Related studies have justified lacking analyses and measurements of consumer behavior regarding food consumption. As explained in the study of Ashraf [39], the TPB domains were less influential than their extended factors such as self-efficacy, trust, and normative structures. Similarly, the study of Xing et al. [45] provided results with price being one of the prime factors affecting the purchasing intentions of street foods. Other studies [49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56] have added sustainability factors that affect consumers’ behavioral intentions toward street foods.
In relation to food consumption and the food industry, the TPB has been established as a framework for measuring behavioral intentions. The study of Vabo and Hansen [57] extended the TPB with consumer ethnocentrism and self-construal to assess the purchasing intentions toward domestic food. It was suggested that the growth and difference among individuals needed the extended latent which, in turn, can holistically measure the behavioral intentions among individuals. Their study showed that individuals were affected by their attitude (lowest significant effect), subjective norms (highest effect), and perceived behavioral control of their purchasing intentions toward domestic food. On the other hand, the study of Dorce et al. [58] highlighted the need for extending the TPB with perceived food health benefits, price, and sustainability. They highlighted and expanded on the need for and inclusion of other factors affecting the TPB. All three TPB domains were deemed to be significant in terms of purchasing intention. The TPB domains in their study provided insights on how these factors can act as mediating factors on their added variables. Lastly, Canova et al. [59] presented an extended TPB—with the domains being mediating factors for trust in organic food and assessing the buying behavior of organic food. Their study showed that all latent variables were significant—trust in the three TPB domains, then attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control of buying intention. Since the TPB has been established to be a theory that considers its domain to affect consumers’ purchasing intentions, this study hypothesized that:
H1. 
Perceived behavioral control has a significant direct effect on street food purchase intention.
H2. 
Subjective norm has a significant direct effect on street food purchase intention.
H3. 
Attitude towards the behavior has a significant direct effect on street food purchase intention.
Looking at the given studies applying the concept of the TPB, it is evident that the TPB can be applied to a wide scope of research in different fields of study, as suggested by Ajzen [49]. Similarly, the study of Dorce et al. [58] explained that the TPB was developed to be a model open for inclusion. They further explained that a growing number of studies on food purchase and consumption have utilized the TPB, extending it to further encompass a holistic measurement of the factors affecting behavioral intentions. Related studies have been challenged on the direct impact of adding latent variables affecting the behavioral intentions among individuals as a direct effect. Ajzen [49] explained this to be a ‘sufficiency assumption.’ It was further explained by Dorce et al. [58] that both health and environmental consciousness factors should be preceding factors affecting the TPB domains, rather than a direct effect on behavioral intention.
In addition, prior studies have shown that the TPB being utilized solely might limit findings. Thus, several extensions are needed to be made to enhance analyses and findings. This paper addressed this concern by extending the established TPB. In an attempt to holistically measure behavioral domains, the perception of consumers regarding perceived food value (PFV) and food quality (PFQ) was considered as part of the framework of this study. For this study, PFV is the consumer’s perception of what can be exchanged in a trade-off of their money. As explained in the study of Ackermann et al. [60], a positive effect is seen on the perceived value of consumers’ behavioral aspects if a direct proportion among trade-offs is seen. For example, the product price, availability, and demand lead to positive behavior among consumers in terms of purchasing products [61,62].
Focusing on the extended latent variables in this study, PFQ is defined as judgement among consumers regarding overall merit, supremacy, or distinction. Konuk [38] explained that food critics, scandals, and bad reviews or word-of-mouth can disrupt the food business. Especially in the early years, street foods were associated with unhealthy and dirty foods in terms of quality, consistency, nutrition, and preparation [63]. The study [38] related food quality and food values to having an indirect effect on intention, mediated by satisfaction. As presented, their study indicated that “this research is one of the first to clarify the mediation role of customer satisfaction on the linkage between PFQ, PFV, and behavioral intentions in an organic food restaurant setting”. Nonato et al. [63] explained that these quality perceptions affect the community, leading to negative perceptions and consumption of street foods in general. Thus, it could be deduced that PFQ is aligned with a consumer’s desire [64]. In this case, a particular street food may be of a high quality depending on its preparation, consumption, and societal demand [65]. In different studies [66,67], qualities will significantly affect the behavior among consumers when they are willing to pay for a certain product or service. As evident in present time, tourists make it a part of their experience to try the street foods of different countries [68]. However, Jeaheng et al. [68] explained that PFQ might be different among individuals due to the price and their perception, leading to different behavioral adoptions. Following the study of Morano et al. [11], PFQ and PFV may have disadvantages among vendors when they are perceived as being of a low quality or value among consumers. With this, consumers would look for credible vendors when consuming street foods to reduce the risk of consuming low-quality foods [69]. Therefore, PFQ is one of the key factors that may affect consumers’ behavioral domains in terms of the intention to consume street foods. As explained by Konuk [38], PFV and PFQ affect the behavior of individuals, leading to a positive perception of customer satisfaction. Therefore, both latent variables can be preceding factors affecting an individual’s behavior. Similar to the study performed by Dorce et al. [58], background latent variables such as perception affect intentions that are mediated by subjective norms, attitude, and perceived behavioral control. With this, it was hypothesized that:
H4. 
PFQ has a significant direct effect on perceived behavioral control.
H5. 
PFQ has a significant direct effect on subjective norm.
H6. 
PFQ has a significant direct effect on attitude.
In the study of Kim et al. [70], PFV was presented in advertisements to influence society to purchase it. This may also lead to tourist visitation, as street food represents a country’s culture [71]. This leads to a perception of value for food. People’s choices affect their behavior, and food choice has either a positive or negative impact depending on the consumer’s evaluation [72,73]. From the study conducted by Arjuna and Ilmi [66], perceptions of quality and values directly affected purchasing decisions. However, their study recommended assessing variables related to purchasing decisions. Following the explanation of Ajzen [49], no other latent variables should have a direct impact on intention, which eventually affects behavioral decisions. In this study’s case, PFV was redirected to affect attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control, since individuals may have different perceptions of their intention when consuming health-compromising foods [74]. A further explanation by McDermott et al. [74] proposed that the TPB domains are relatively mediating factors affecting intention when food consumption is being considered, as this depends on individual’s perception of the value obtained from foods.
The study of Hsu et al. [75] presented that customers perceive food as valuable when a positive experience is evident among people. It was explained that emotional, cultural, and health values play significant roles affecting the perception of value among people purchasing street foods. The different factors were explained to differ among different consumers and would affect their overall behavior. In another study by Thio et al. [76], it was explained that locals should enhance their food value to promote tourism, since the perception of food value among people affects their behavioral intentions. Plasek et al. [77] added that sensory perceptions among consumers affects their consumption of street foods, as these reflect the value of the foods being considered. These perceptions affect an individual’s behavior in terms of consumption [31,32,33,34,35]. The different studies presented how PFV may affect the behavioral domains of consumers; therefore, the following were hypothesized:
H7. 
PFV has a significant direct effect on perceived behavioral control.
H8. 
PFV has a significant direct effect on subjective norm.
H9. 
PFV has a significant direct effect on attitude.
In the following related studies [78,79], it is described that a person considers an experience or event to be convenient when performing a certain activity requires reduced effort and time. As expressed in the study of Roy et al. [79], consumers would have a positive outlook on the relationship between convenience and behavioral intention when the acquired service or product purchase is fast and needs less effort. It was added that consumers would enact positive behavior when a purchase is convenient. Aligning with the intent of this study, Imtiyaz et al. [80] presented that street food purchase relates to a positive significant effect from convenience. Consumers showed a significant positive effect between convenience and purchasing intention in the study of Naufal and Nelloh [81] and Xiao et al. [82]. Gupta et al. [83] expressed that both the perception of food value and convenience greatly affect the behaviors of individuals. They showed how these factors primarily affect attitude, while the study of Ham et al. [84] expressed convenience to influence behavioral control and subjective norms. Since convenience affects the different TPB domains in terms of purchase intentions [85], it was hypothesized that:
H10. 
Convenience has a significant direct effect on perceived behavioral control.
H11. 
Convenience has a significant direct effect on subjective norm.
H12. 
Convenience has a significant direct effect on attitude.
Studies and the related literature on street foods are relatively few. Furthermore, the application of extended versions of the TPB in local street food studies is seldom utilized [39,45,46,47,48]. Therefore, conducting a study using an extended version of the TPB is timely, and the results could provide insights related to street food consumption, which can be applied in different countries. The association between the variables and hypotheses is shown in Figure 1.

3. Methodology

3.1. Demographics

Convenience sampling was performed to gather the needed respondents for the study due to the COVID-19 pandemic evident and rising in the country. An online survey made available from October to November 2022 was distributed to invite participants from the Philippines, specifically in the National Capital Region. During the online survey collection, in-person surveys using pen and paper were considered. After asking whether people purchased street foods and were willing to answer a survey for 10–15 min, the survey form was given. A total of 1361 valid responses were collected among people from the National Capital Region of the Philippines, mostly with college degrees. Since this study used an online survey due to limited access and health protocols, it could be posited that this representation of the population is limited to those having access to the internet, those having college degrees, and those with more spending capability than some of the population. This was because 75% of the collected data were from the online survey (1021 out of 1361). In addition, a highlight could be made for the respondents as being able to choose other types of food but still opt to consider the purchase intention toward street food, which can highlight several findings.
As the country’s capital, German et al. [86] expounded on the minimum number of respondents being 399 to represent the country. In addition, according to Hair [83], 500 respondents would be enough to cover participation in a study with more than eight latent variables. Table 1 shows the demographic summary of the participants with the habitual eating of street foods (frequency of eating)—eating at least once a week (53.56%) to eating daily (1.910%). The items assessed to measure the purpose of the study were evaluated for normality and bias. Following the study of German et al. [86], the Shapiro–Wilk test for normality showed a result within ±1.96, while the common method bias using Harman’s Single Factor test resulted in 32.68%. A threshold of less than 50% indicates no common method bias, which was achieved in this study. Therefore, the collected data were utilized to assess purchasing intentions of street foods in the capital of the Philippines.

3.2. Questionnaire

The questionnaire for the survey utilized in this study was adapted from several works of literature that considered the same latent variables. Upon the survey adaptation, the Mapua University Directed Research for Innovation and Value Enhancement Review Board assessed the items and subjected them to preliminary testing. Only the accepted items were retained and tested before dissemination among 150 respondents. A total of 37 questionnaire items passed the preliminary state with a total Cronbach’s alpha value greater than the 0.70 thresholds [87]. Upon dissemination, a 5-point Likert Scale survey was utilized to assess the items considered in this study [88]. The different items are presented in Table 2. As part of clarity among the responses, the term street food in the questionnaire was presented with examples upon collecting the ethical consent form, such as duck embryo (balut), egg waffles or orange egg (kwek kwek), fish balls, and so on.

3.3. Structural Modelling Equation (SEM)

SEM is a union of different statistical approaches that allow researchers to study multivariate models [95]. It is a combination of the compact analysis of the associations between variables and the validation of the inferred relationships among constructs [87]. According to Prasetyo et al. [96], SEM is a measuring instrument generally used in marketing for understanding behaviors to confirm calculations and test designs. Katt and Meixner [97] used SEM to study the constructs and variables around food purchase intention. In this study, the SEM tool was used to assess the factors that simultaneously influence the purchase intention of street foods by consumers in the Philippines.

4. Results

Figure 2 shows the initial SEM analysis with the factor loadings corresponding to the relationships between the item indicators to their respective latent variables and the coefficients between the constructs, resulting in the intention and purchase of street foods. Following the suggestion of Hair [87], items should be greater than 0.50 to indicate a significant measurement, while the beta coefficient should have a p-value less than or equal to 0.05. This study’s initial SEM, as seen in Figure 2, presents insignificant relationships (PFV on ATT and SN). Moreover, the model fit needed to undergo modification indices to provide an acceptable measurement, as seen in Table 3.
Table 4 presents the initial and final factor loadings and descriptive statistics of every item measure. All of the loadings were deemed as significant [87,96]. To further assess the reliability and validity of the constructs, Hair [87] suggested measuring the average variance extracted (AVE), Cronbach’s alpha, and Composite Reliability. The threshold was greater than 0.50 and 0.70, respectively, which this study achieved, as seen in Table 5.
Presented in Figure 3 is the final SEM after the modification indices analysis. All the items were deemed significant, with a p-value within the threshold. The model fit of the different items was clearly within the threshold, as seen in Table 6. Following the literature [98,99], all the parameters for the SEM were within the minimum acceptable threshold. This promotes that the final SEM considered in this study was acceptable.
Lastly, Table 7 presents the causal relationship of this study. The direct effects showed that CON and PFQ had the highest impact among the behavioral domains, compared to PFV. However, PFV showed diverse differences in the impact with the domains—PBC was the only significant direct relationship, while ATT and SN were insignificant. On the other hand, ATT greatly affected INT, followed by SN and PBC.

5. Discussion

This study utilized an extended TPB to holistically assess the purchasing intention toward street foods in the Philippines among respondents in the country’s capital. Presented in Table 8 are the summarized results among the hypotheses considered in this study. A total of 10 hypotheses were accepted out of 12. The discussion of which is presented in the succeeding section.
Aside from research indicating convenience as the biggest contributing factor affecting the purchasing intention and consumption of street foods, the current study was able to ascertain that perceived food quality and perceived food values also closely affected the behavioral domains. Based on the SEM analysis, CON presented the greatest influence on street food purchase intention through ATT (β = 0.746 and p = 0.007), SN (β = 0.696 and p = 0.016), and PBC (β = 0.477 and p = 0.008). The indicators, similar to other studies [100,101,102], showed that street foods are easily available with a lot of variety, and streets are filled with vendors selling street foods that fit consumers’ schedules. In people’s fast-paced environments, convenience plays a key role in making decisions [100], such as eating street foods rather than cooking at home or dining out in restaurants [101,102]. These studies also provided insights into the significant positive indirect influence of CON on INT (β = 0.711 and p = 0.013). However, a highlight by Morano et al. [11] presented how street food is regarded as risky due to its preparation, containment, or even cooking. Similarly, the FAO [5,8] also exerted efforts towards gaining knowledge regarding the consumption of street foods, their importance, and safety. Therefore, consumers should not solely rely on the convenience street foods provide and make an effort to consider them more of a snack or fun activity rather than a replacement for actual food.
The highlights of this study showed the direct and indirect effects (β = 0.406 and p = 0.005) of PFQ on the purchasing intentions of street foods, which greatly affected the behavioral domains. In terms of behavior, PFQ affected PBC (β = 0.590 and p = 0.021) more than ATT (β = 0.471 and p = 0.007) and SN (β = 0.373 and p = 0.003), but had close beta coefficients. Coinciding with other studies [90,103], the respondents provided insights through the indicators, such as knowing the quality of food based on the price, ingredients, and how the food looked, tasted, and was cooked or prepared. Food appearances are usually instigated as something of high quality among consumers [103]. Moreso, quality is also related to consumers’ behavior through price [4]. Because street foods are cheaper compared to other available foods, the correlation of quality can easily be deciphered by consumers. However, this does not necessarily mean that there is low quality among street foods. Consumers still perceive the quality as being good based on the ingredients and preparation of the foods, especially with the capability to identify types of food, quality, and food preparation. Relating to the studies of Nonato et al. [63], consumer perception of the quality of food can negate their purchasing intention and behavioral aspects [11,67]. It was indicated that consistency, preparation, and nutritional value are considered as quality attributes. In addition, other studies have justified the relation of food quality perception and behavioral domains [65,66].
The consumers of this study only addressed the direct effect of PFV on PBC (β = 0.304 and p = 0.009), which was insignificant with ATT and SN, while an indirect effect on INT (β = 0.113 and p = 0.018) through PBC was seen. Compared to PFQ, PFV had a higher difference in the behavioral domains. The consumers highlighted the cheaper alternative for food in street foods, which provide good value for money, and allows them to save while meeting their taste expectations. As expressed by Ackermann et al. [60], a direct relationship is seen between value and monetary aspects among consumers. The more people perceive that they get what they pay for, the more significant and positive the correlation is [72,73]. Similarly, Kroger et al. [103] explained how consumers present distinct control over their behavior in terms of buying intention. It could be suggested that, when people are more engaged in purchasing street foods voluntarily, their own attitude towards this behavior would be significant as well [104]. Contradicting with other studies [31,32,33,34,35,76], it could be deduced that behavioral intention on purchasing intentions in the Philippines is only based on their control, rather than other behavioral aspects. This means that the people in the Philippines are purchasing street foods based on choice. Encompassing the findings, relative to convenience, the value they see in street foods may not be a reflection on what others do. As explained in the study of Plasek et al. [77], people are reflective on their sensory factors when purchasing street foods, which justifies why PBC was the only significant relationship seen. Zadar et al. [105] explained that health-conscious people would be prompted to enact positive significant behavior on choosing the type of food. In their study, if the food they consume would affect their health, consumers would be more careful about this food based on their perception of its value and quality. This was further justified by the study of Kokthi et al. [106], who explained that sensory perception and awareness of brands, in this case, the type of street foods, affects consumers’ judgement. Since street food may not be perceived as being healthy overall [11,12,13], people would still choose the consumption of it based on their own control. Thus, the need for vendors and local government to promote healthy aspects and preparation may lead to a higher purchasing intentions among the community.
Among the behavioral domains, ATT presented the highest significant effect (β = 0.545 and p = 0.008), followed by SN (β = 0.461 and p = 0.005) and PBC (β = 0.142 and p = 0.037). From the indicators, consuming street foods provides good, comfortable, and fun feeling among consumers. In addition, the consumers presented that, whether it was beneficial or not, they would continue eating it and think that the consumption of street food was smart. This dictated the significant positive effect of the ATT latent variable. According to a recent study by Mukhevho [107], a lot of street foods nowadays are closely monitored by the government, which promotes their consumption. The cleanliness of street food preparation, cooking, and serving has been addressed throughout the years of selling it. This may provide the reason why a positive ATT was seen in the collected analysis among consumers eating street foods. In addition, other countries’ consumers have also stated how street foods provide them with enough nutrients to satisfy their hunger—especially in areas with little income [108,109]. In relation, considering that the Philippines is a developing country with a low-income status in regard to the way of living, street food provides better sustenance, leading to a positive ATT for consumption.
In terms of SN and PBC, consumers have the approval and support of people around them, even their community, to consume street foods. The influence provided by the whole community, where a lot consume street foods, provides the perception of a positive effect on street food consumption. They also have the option to eat, choose, and patronize the consumption of street foods. Similar to other studies [86,91], when the whole community engages in an activity, most individuals are affected by their behavior as well. It could be deduced that a growing community is attracted to street foods due to preference, relatability, and herd behavior [110]. This finding could be addressed in several kinds of research as well [110,111]. Overall, it could be deduced that people regularly consume street foods and are willing to purchase them, especially when they are accessible and would lead to the promote of consumption.

5.1. Theoretical Contributions

This study shows that SEM is a great statistical tool for analyzing the relationships between complex variables. In addition, this study also used the framework of the Theory of Planned Behavior as a reference in creating an extended version, considering new significant variables and showing how the framework is a reliable concept in the determination of specific behavior, particularly the intention to purchase street foods. In detail, it shows how the chosen indicators contributed towards the wholeness of the latent variables being evaluated. Moreover, the relationships between the latent variables were established, and these could be used to serve as a basis for the conduction of other studies utilizing such factors. The importance of this new framework is based on, but not limited to, the findings revolving around street food purchase intention. When dealing with food consumption and behavioral intentions, this study was able to encompass the related studies that separately discussed and confirmed the significance of perceived food quality and value. It could be deduced that both perceived food quality and convenience presented a close relation in the behavioral domains. This means that people, despite it being convenient, would still consider the quality of the food they are consuming. Since this study was able to justify that certain protocols are being considered by vendors, this led to a positive significant direct and indirect effects on behavior and purchase intentions. The framework can also be used in studies related to cuisine, more specifically in fast food, restaurants, and other businesses selling food or even beverages to consumers. This study could also be extended to other purchasing activities, such as the purchase of household items or other common products and even to essential goods and critical supplies, such as medication. Thus, this study provides a sound foundation with regard to giving valuable insight into purchasing activities.

5.2. Practical Implications

Based on the output of the study, it is suggested that governments may enhance safety through knowledge among vendors when it comes to cleanliness and food hygiene to promote a sustainable business and country. Despite the practice nowadays, there is still a need to continuously promote this behavior, as these are the main contributing factors towards the perception of food quality and food values. The government may also need to promote the availability of street foods not just locally, but also try to reach other countries to provide exposure to what the Philippines has to offer. This sustainable developing country practice may help in promoting tourism and the economy. In terms of economic aspects, the findings provided insights into why people have the intention to purchase street foods.
Apart from cleanliness and food handling, the government or similar agencies may highlight the cultural aspects of street foods through promotion to entice tourists to visit the country. The quality and value of food through money, preparation, and taste may be established through video content on different social media platforms and may reach different markets. This would promote the consumption of street foods, leading to higher purchase rates and, in turn, economic benefits for the country.

5.3. Limitations and Future Research

Though this study aimed to conduct a comprehensive investigation on the factors affecting the intention to purchase street foods, it is bound by some limitations. An online survey was used in the data collection over a limited period. The questionnaire was based on a framework using the extended version of the Theory of Planned Behavior, wherein constructs were predetermined from contemporary influences. An option for a more detailed method, such as individual interviews or group discussions, could be used to enrich the data, providing more composition to the inputs. Further studies could incorporate a combination of new constructs and the different configurations of their relationships, using the Theory of Planned Behavior or other related theories to create a framework that further investigates street food purchase intention. In addition, it is suggested to consider broader demographic characteristics of respondents in order to identify differences and similarities. Especially in developing countries like the Philippines, only 49% of people are female, and 51% are male with a lower income status [112]. Therefore, since the data were collected mostly through online survey, only those who were more well-off were the respondents. Similarly, as evident in the response result, college graduates who can utilize the internet were the respondents. This may not be well-represented Philippine data and may present some biases. Lastly, other statistical tools could also be used as an alternative or analyzed together with SEM to reinforce the findings from this study. Furthermore, it is also recommended to conduct a similar study among groups of different demographic profiles or use its application in related purchasing activities.

6. Conclusions

A framework was developed using an extended version of the TPB, and SEM was used as a tool for the statistical analysis of the factors affecting street food purchases. This study was able to determine factors that contribute to society’s continued patronage of street foods. Convenience was found to have the most significant direct effect on the behavioral domains and an indirect effect on intention to purchase street foods, a signal to stakeholders on how to capitalize the convenience aspect of street foods. The second-highest significant direct effect was shown between perceived food quality and the behavioral domains. The close relation of this latent variable with convenience showed how street food consumers are still decisive about the quality of food they purchase and consume. The important direct association between attitudes towards the consumption of street foods and convenience came in next, evident in the continued growth in street food consumption and rise of delivery services, of which other food categories also take advantage.
A significant direct effect between perceived food value and perceived behavioral control was also noted, suggesting improvements in product labels, quality certifications, and the quality of the food itself, removing barriers towards the purchase of street foods. The last of the top relationships with a significant direct effect were the behavioral domains in the purchase intention of street foods. This study also provided recommendations that street food vendors, the government, related private businesses, and consumers themselves can use to improve the marketability of street foods, increase government revenue, and help build a stable and reliable food supply in society. Other researchers can also build on the findings of this study to extend the other aspects related to food and beverages.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.K.S.O. and E.R.T.; methodology, A.K.S.O. and E.R.T.; software, A.K.S.O. and E.R.T.; validation, A.K.S.O., M.J.J.G. and E.R.T.; formal analysis, A.K.S.O. and E.R.T.; investigation, A.K.S.O., M.J.J.G. and E.R.T.; resources, A.K.S.O. and E.R.T.; data curation, A.K.S.O. and E.R.T.; writing—original draft preparation, A.K.S.O. and E.R.T.; writing—review and editing, A.K.S.O., M.J.J.G. and E.R.T.; visualization, A.K.S.O.; supervision, A.K.S.O. and M.J.J.G.; project administration, A.K.S.O. and M.J.J.G.; funding acquisition, A.K.S.O. and M.J.J.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Mapua University Directed Research for Innovation and Value Enhancement (DRIVE).

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was approved by Mapua University Research Ethics Committees (FM-RC-23-01-12) on 26 September 2022.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in this study (FM-RC-23-02-12).

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank all the respondents who answered our online questionnaire. We would also like to thank our friends for their contributions in the distribution of the questionnaire.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Saghaian, S.; Mohammadi, H. Factors Affecting Frequency of Fast Food Consumption. J. Food Distrib. Res. 2018, 49, 22–29. [Google Scholar]
  2. Spence, C. Explaining diurnal patterns of food consumption. Food Qual. Prefer. 2021, 91, 104198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Jackson, P. Familial fictions: Families and food, convenience and care. Eur. J. Mark. 2018, 52, 2512–2520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Atinkut, H.B.; Yan, T.; Bekele, G.; Shengze, Q.; Kidane, A.; Biruk, Y.; Taye, M.; Solomon, T.; Tadie, M. Factors influencing consumers choice of street-foods and fast-foods in China. Afr. J. Mark. Manag. 2018, 10, 28–39. [Google Scholar]
  5. FAO. Street Foods. A Summary of FAO Studies and Other Activities Relating to Street Foods; FAO: Rome, Italy, 1989. [Google Scholar]
  6. Verma, R.; Mishra, S. Nutritional and consumers behavior towards Street Foods. Eur. J. Nutr. Food Saf. 2020, 12, 64–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Rosales Chavez, J.B.; Bruening, M.; Ohri-Vachaspati, P.; Lee, R.E.; Jehn, M. Street Food Stand Availability, density, and distribution across income levels in Mexico City. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 3953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. FAO. Street foods. Report of an FAO Expert Consultation, Jogjakarta, Indonesia, 5–9 December 1988. FAO Food Nutr. Pap. 1989, 46, 1–96. [Google Scholar]
  9. Sezgin, A.; Şanlıer, N. Street Food Consumption in Terms of the Food Safety and Health. J. Hum. Sci. 2016, 13, 4072–4083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Fernandez, D.G. Balut to Barbecue: Philippine Streetfood. Budhi. A J. Ideas Cult. 2002, 5, 98. [Google Scholar]
  11. Morano, R.S.; Barrichello, A.; Jacomossi, R.R.; D’Acosta-Rivera, J.R. Street food: Factors influencing perception of product quality. RAUSP Manag. J. 2018, 53, 535–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Henderson, J.C. Street food and tourism: A southeast Asian perspective. Food Tour. Asia 2019, 45–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Abrahale, K.; Sousa, S.; Albuquerque, G.; Padrão, P.; Lunet, N. Street Food Research Worldwide: A scoping review. J. Hum. Nutr. Diet. 2018, 32, 152–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Hidalgo, H.; Cuesta, M.; Razafindrabe, B. Street vendors’ livelihood vulnerability to typhoons in Naga City, Philippines. Philipp. J. Sci. 2022, 151, 2191–2202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Tinker, I. Street Foods: Traditional Microenterprise in a Modernizing World. Int. J. Politics Cult. Soc. 2003, 16, 331–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Azanza, P.; Gatchalian, C.; Ortega, M. Food Safety Knowledge and practices of street food vendors in a Philippines University campus. Int. J. Food Sci. Nutr. 2000, 51, 235–246. [Google Scholar]
  17. Argente, M.; Gordoncillo, N.; Africa, L.; Barba, C. Assessment of Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices on Food Safety and Compliance to Microbiological Safety Guidelines among Vendors of Commonly Patronized Street Foods in Poblacion, Batangas City, Philippines. J. Hum. Ecol. 2020, 9, 56–70. [Google Scholar]
  18. Buted, D.; Ylagan, A. Street Food Preparation Practices. Asia Pac. J. Educ. Arts Sci. 2014, 1, 53–60. [Google Scholar]
  19. Elli, J.D. Assessment of Street Food in Catbalogan City, Philippines. J. Acad. Res. 2016, 1, 11–20. [Google Scholar]
  20. Manguiat, L.S.; Fang, T.J. Microbiological quality of chicken- and pork-based street-vended foods from Taichung, Taiwan, and Laguna, Philippines. Food Microbiol. 2013, 36, 57–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Barrion, A.; Hurtada, W.I. Nutritional and microbial quality of the street food chicken proven in Los Banos, Laguna (Philippines). AGRIS 2006, 89, 157–164. [Google Scholar]
  22. Ramirez, M. Enchantment In Out: A Perspective of Filipinos in Eating of Street Foods. Res. Gate 2022, 1, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Alimi, B.A. Risk factors in street food practices in developing countries: A Review. Food Sci. Hum. Wellness 2016, 5, 141–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Lues, J.F.; Rasephei, M.R.; Venter, P.; Theron, M.M. Assessing food safety and associated food handling practices in street food vending. Int. J. Environ. Health Res. 2006, 16, 319–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Chukuezi, C. Food Safety and Hygienic Practices of Street Food Vendors in Owerri, Nigeria. Stud. Sociol. Sci. 2010, 1, 50–57. [Google Scholar]
  26. Privitera, D.; Nesci, F.S. Globalization vs. local. The role of street food in the Urban Food System. Procedia Econ. Financ. 2015, 22, 716–722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hiemstra, A.M.; van der Kooy, K.G.; Frese, M. Entrepreneurship in the street food sector of Vietnam-assessment of psychological success and failure factors. J. Small Bus. Manag. 2006, 44, 474–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Praesri, S.; Meekun, K.; Lee, T.J.; Hyun, S.S. Marketing mix factors and a business development model for Street Food Tourism. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2022, 52, 123–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Alfiero, S.; Bonadonna, A.; Cane, M.; Lo Giudice, A. Street food: A tool for promoting tradition, territory, and tourism. Tour. Anal. 2019, 24, 305–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Khongtong, J.; Karim, M.S.; Othman, M.; Bolong, J.B. Reliability and validity of consumers’ decision making investigation of Safe Street Food Purchasing, Pilot Study in nakhon si thammarat, Thailand. Int. J. Soc. Sci. Humanit. 2015, 5, 306–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Dunn, K.I.; Mohr, P.; Wilson, C.J.; Wittert, G.A. Determinants of fast-food consumption. An application of the theory of planned behaviour. Appetite 2011, 57, 349–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Baek, S.-H.; Ham, S.; Yang, I.-S. A cross-cultural comparison of fast food restaurant selection criteria between Korean and Filipino College students. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2006, 25, 683–698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Sheely, M. Global adoption of Convenience Foods. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2008, 90, 1356–1365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Srinivasan, S.; Shende, K.M. A study on the benefits of convenience foods to working women. ATITHYA J. Hosp. 2015, 1, 56–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Contini, C.; Boncinelli, F.; Gerini, F.; Scozzafava, G.; Casini, L. Investigating the role of personal and context-related factors in convenience foods consumption. Appetite 2018, 126, 26–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Nystrand, B.T.; Olsen, S.O. Consumers’ attitudes and intentions toward consuming functional foods in Norway. Food Qual. Prefer. 2020, 80, 103827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Bakti, I.G.; Sumaedi, S.; Astrini, N.J.; Rakhmawati, T.; Yarmen, M.; Damayanti, S. Applying the theory of planned behavior in functional food purchasing: A young consumers perception. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2020, 722, 012024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Konuk, F.A. The influence of perceived food quality, price fairness, perceived value and satisfaction on customers’ revisit and word-of-mouth intentions towards organic food restaurants. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2019, 50, 103–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Ashraf, M.A. Islamic marketing and consumer behavior toward Halal Food Purchase in Bangladesh. J. Islam. Mark. 2019, 10, 893–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ajzen, I. Attitudes, Personality and Behavior; Open University Press: Milton Keynes, UK, 1988. [Google Scholar]
  41. Ali, M. An application of the theory of planned behavior to predict the behavior of international fast food restaurants’ guests towards negative publicity. Int. J. Tour. Hosp. Manag. 2018, 2, 180–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Pérez-Villarreal, H.H.; Martínez-Ruiz, M.P.; Izquierdo-Yusta, A. Testing model of purchase intention for fast food in Mexico: How do consumers react to food values, positive anticipated emotions, attitude toward the brand, and attitude toward eating hamburgers? Foods 2019, 8, 369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Nardi, V.A.; Jardim, W.C.; Ladeira, W.; Santini, F. Predicting food choice: A meta-analysis based on the theory of planned behavior. Br. Food J. 2019, 121, 2250–2264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Carfora, V.; Conner, M.; Caso, D.; Catellani, P. Rational and moral motives to reduce red and processed meat consumption. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2020, 50, 744–755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Xing, Y.; Li, M.; Liao, Y. Trust, price sensitivity and consumers’ organic food purchasing behaviour in China. Food Sci. Technol. 2022, 42, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Ukenna, S.I.; Ayodele, A.A. Applying the extended theory of planned behavior to predict sustainable street food patronage in a developing economy. J. Food Prod. Mark. 2019, 25, 404–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Alam, S.S.; Ahmad, M.; Ho, Y.-H.; Omar, N.A.; Lin, C.-Y. Applying an extended theory of planned behavior to sustainable food consumption. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Rabbanee, F.K.; Afroz, T.; Naser, M.M. Are consumers loyal to genetically modified food? evidence from Australia. Br. Food J. 2020, 123, 803–819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Rahman, A.; Ai Ping, T.; Mubeen, S.K.; Mahmud, I.; Abbasi, G.A. What influences home gardeners’ food waste composting intention in high-rise buildings in Dhaka megacity, Bangladesh? an integrated model of TPB and DMP. Sustainability 2022, 14, 9400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Ali, S.; Ullah, H.; Akbar, M.; Akhtar, W.; Zahid, H. Determinants of consumer intentions to purchase energy-saving household products in Pakistan. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Yuriev, A.; Dahmen, M.; Paillé, P.; Boiral, O.; Guillaumie, L. Pro-environmental behaviors through the lens of the theory of planned behavior: A scoping review. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 155, 104660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Japutra, A.; Loureiro, S.M.; Molinillo, S.; Ekinci, Y. Travellers’ mindsets and theory of planned behaviour. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2019, 30, 193–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. McLaughlin, C.; McCauley, L.B.; Prentice, G.; Verner, E.-J.; Loane, S. Gender differences using online auctions within a generation Y sample: An application of the theory of planned behaviour. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2020, 56, 102181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Sas-Nowosielski, K.; Nowicka, M. Understanding exercise intentions among women exercising in fitness classes: An application of the theory of planned behaviour. Cent. Eur. J. Sport Sci. Med. 2018, 21, 41–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Alam, S.S.; Sayuti, N.M. Applying the theory of planned behavior (TPB) in halal food purchasing. Int. J. Commer. Manag. 2011, 21, 8–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Vabø, M.; Hansen, H. Purchase intentions for Domestic Food: A moderated tpb-explanation. Br. Food J. 2016, 118, 2372–2387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Dorce, L.C.; da Silva, M.C.; Mauad, J.R.; de Faria Domingues, C.H.; Borges, J.A. Extending the theory of planned behavior to understand consumer purchase behavior for organic vegetables in Brazil: The role of perceived health benefits, perceived sustainability benefits and perceived price. Food Qual. Prefer. 2021, 91, 104191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Canova, L.; Bobbio, A.; Manganelli, A.M. Buying organic food products: The role of trust in the theory of planned behavior. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 575820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Ackermann, L.; Mugge, R.; Schoormans, J. Consumers’ perspective on product care: An exploratory study of motivators, ability factors, and triggers. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 183, 380–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Haryanto, B.; Purwanto, D.; Sukma Dewi, A. Product types in moderating the process of buying Street Foods. In Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium on Management (INSYMA 2018), Chonburi, Thailand, 1 March 2018. [Google Scholar]
  62. Kushwah, S.; Dhir, A.; Sagar, M.; Gupta, B. Determinants of organic food consumption. A systematic literature review on motives and barriers. Appetite 2019, 143, 104402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Nonato, I.L.; Minussi, L.O.D.A.; Pascoal, G.B.; De-Souza, D.A. Nutritional Issues Concerning Street Foods. Available online: https://clinical-nutrition.imedpub.com/nutritional-issues-concerning-street-foods.php?aid=8984 (accessed on 27 April 2023).
  64. Stylidis, K.; Wickman, C.; Söderberg, R. Perceived quality of products: A Framework and attributes ranking method. J. Eng. Des. 2019, 31, 37–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Wijaya, S. Indonesian food culture mapping: A starter contribution to promote Indonesian culinary tourism. J. Ethn. Foods 2019, 6, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Arjuna, H.; Ilmi, S. Effect of brand image, Price, and quality of product on the smartphone purchase decision. EkBis J. Ekon. Dan Bisnis 2020, 3, 294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Dwiarta, I.M.B.; Ardiansyah, R.W. The effects of price perception, quality perception, and location on purchase decision. Int. J. Econ. Bus. Account. Res. 2021, 5, 222–230. [Google Scholar]
  68. Jeaheng, Y.; Al-Ansi, A.; Chua, B.-L.; Ngah, A.H.; Ryu, H.B.; Ariza-Montes, A.; Han, H. Influence of Thai street food quality, Price, and involvement on traveler behavioral intention: Exploring cultural difference (eastern versus western). Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag. 2023, 16, 223–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Kusawat, P.; Teerakapibal, S. Cross-cultural electronic word-of-mouth: A systematic literature review. Span. J. Mark. ESIC 2022. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Kim, S.; Choe, J.Y.; Lee, S. How are food value video clips effective in promoting food tourism? generation Y versus non–generation Y. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2018, 35, 377–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Ellis, A.; Park, E.; Kim, S.; Yeoman, I. What is food tourism? Tour. Manag. 2018, 68, 250–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Rousta, A.; Jamshidi, D. Food tourism value: Investigating the factors that influence tourists to revisit. J. Vacat. Mark. 2019, 26, 73–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Choe, J.Y.; Kim, S. Effects of tourists’ local food consumption value on attitude, food destination image, and behavioral intention. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2018, 71, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. McDermott, M.S.; Oliver, M.; Svenson, A.; Simnadis, T.; Beck, E.J.; Coltman, T.; Iverson, D.; Caputi, P.; Sharma, R. The theory of planned behaviour and discrete food choices: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2015, 12, 162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Hsu, F.C.; Agyeiwaah, E.; Scott, N. Understanding tourists’ perceived food consumption values: Do different cultures share similar food values? Int. J. Gastron. Food Sci. 2022, 28, 100533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Thio, S.; Jokom, R.; Widjaja, D.C. The contribution of perceived food consumption value on destination attractiveness and revisit intention. J. Culin. Sci. Technol. 2022, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Plasek, B.; Lakner, Z.; Temesi, Á. Factors that influence the perceived healthiness of food—Review. Nutrients 2020, 12, 1881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Conner, M.; Norman, P. Understanding the intention-behavior gap: The role of intention strength. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 923464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Roy, S.K.; Shekhar, V.; Lassar, W.M.; Chen, T. Customer engagement behaviors: The role of service convenience, fairness and quality. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2018, 44, 293–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Imtiyaz, H.; Soni, P.; Yukongdi, V. Investigating the role of psychological, social, religious and ethical determinants on consumers’ purchase intention and consumption of Convenience Food. Foods 2021, 10, 237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Naufal, M.; Nelloh, L. The Antecedents of Purchase Intention of Millenials and Zillenials on Preloved Apps in Indonesia. Adv. Econ. Bus. Manag. Res. 2021, 198, 50–54. [Google Scholar]
  82. Xiao, A.; Yang, S.; Iqbal, Q. Factors affecting purchase intentions in generation Y: An empirical evidence from fast food industry in Malaysia. Adm. Sci. 2018, 9, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Gupta, V.; Khanna, K.; Gupta, R.K. A study on the street food dimensions and its effects on consumer attitude and behavioural intentions. Tour. Rev. 2018, 73, 374–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Ham, M.; Jeger, M.; Frajman Ivković, A. The role of subjective norms in forming the intention to purchase Green Food. Econ. Res. Ekon. Istraživanja 2015, 28, 738–748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Chowdhury, R. Impact of perceived convenience, service quality and security on consumers’ behavioural intention towards online food delivery services: The role of attitude as mediator. SN Bus. Econ. 2023, 3, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. German, J.D.; Redi, A.A.; Prasetyo, Y.T.; Persada, S.F.; Ong, A.K.; Young, M.N.; Nadlifatin, R. Choosing a package carrier during COVID-19 pandemic: An integration of pro-environmental planned behavior (PEPB) theory and Service Quality (SERVQUAL). J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 346, 131123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Hair, J.; Black, W.; Babin, B.; Anderson, R.; Tatham, R. Multivariate Data Analysis; Pearson Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  88. German, J.D.; Ong, A.K.; Perwira Redi, A.A.; Robas, K.P. Predicting factors affecting the intention to use a 3PL during the COVID-19 pandemic: A machine learning ensemble approach. Heliyon 2022, 8, e11382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Carrillo, E.; Varela, P.; Salvador, A.; Fiszman, S. Main factors underlying consumers’ food choice: A first step for the understanding of attitudes toward “Healthy eating”. J. Sens. Stud. 2011, 26, 85–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Petrescu, D.C.; Vermeir, I.; Petrescu-Mag, R.M. Consumer understanding of food quality, healthiness, and environmental impact: A cross-national perspective. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 17, 169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Ong, A.K.; Prasetyo, Y.T.; Salazar, J.M.; Erfe, J.J.; Abella, A.A.; Young, M.N.; Chuenyindee, T.; Nadlifatin, R.; Ngurah Perwira Redi, A.A. Investigating the acceptance of the reopening Bataan Nuclear Power Plant: Integrating Protection Motivation Theory and extended theory of planned behavior. Nucl. Eng. Technol. 2022, 54, 1115–1125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Verbeke, W.; Vackier, I. Individual determinants of fish consumption: Application of the theory of planned behaviour. Appetite 2005, 44, 67–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Ortega Egea, J.M.; Román González, M.V. Explaining physicians’ acceptance of EHCR systems: An extension of TAM with trust and risk factors. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2011, 27, 319–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Talukder, M.S.; Sorwar, G.; Bao, Y.; Ahmed, J.U.; Palash, M.A. Predicting antecedents of wearable healthcare technology acceptance by elderly: A combined SEM-neural network approach. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2020, 150, 119793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Weston, R.; Gore, P.A. A brief guide to structural equation modeling. Couns. Psychol. 2006, 34, 719–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Prasetyo, Y.T.; Ong, A.K.; Concepcion, G.K.; Navata, F.M.; Robles, R.A.; Tomagos, I.J.; Young, M.N.; Diaz, J.F.; Nadlifatin, R.; Redi, A.A. Determining factors affecting acceptance of e-learning platforms during the COVID-19 pandemic: Integrating Extended Technology Acceptance Model and Delone & McLean is success model. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8365. [Google Scholar]
  97. Katt, F.; Meixner, O. A systematic review of drivers influencing consumer willingness to pay for organic food. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 100, 374–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Gefen, D.; Straub, D.; Boudreau, M.-C. Structural equation modeling and regression: Guidelines for Research Practice. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2000, 4, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Steiger, J.H. Understanding the limitations of global fit assessment in structural equation modeling. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2007, 42, 893–898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Rashaduzzaman, M.; Jorgensen, J.J. Amazon’s influence: The online apparel purchase intention of Amazon prime and non-prime shoppers. In International Textile and Apparel Association Annual Conference Proceedings; International Textile and Apparel Association: Cary, NC, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Sanlier, N.; Sezgin, A.C.; Sahin, G.; Yassibas, E. A study about the young consumers’ consumption behaviors of street foods. Ciência Saúde Coletiva 2018, 23, 1647–1656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Panse, C.; Rastogi, S.; Sharma, A.; Dorji, N. Understanding Consumer Behaviour Towards Utilization of Online Food Delivery Platforms. J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol. 2019, 97, 4353–4365. [Google Scholar]
  103. Kröger, T.; Dupont, J.; Büsing, L.; Fiebelkorn, F. Acceptance of insect-based food products in western societies: A systematic review. Front. Nutr. 2022, 8, 759885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Mudunkotuwa, M.A.D.M.; Arachchi, R.S.S.W. The Impacts of Tourists’ Perceived Risk on Attitude and Behavioral Intention Towards Street Food: A Case Study of Central Colombo. JTEAR J. Tour. Econ. Appl. Res. 2020, 4, 49–63. [Google Scholar]
  105. Zafar, M.Z.; Maqbool, A.; Cioca, L.-I.; Shah, S.G.; Masud, S. Accentuating the interrelation between consumer intention and healthy packaged food selection during COVID-19: A case study of Pakistan. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 2846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Kokthi, E.; Thoma, L.; Saary, R.; Kelemen-Erdos, A. Disconfirmation of taste as a measure of trust in brands: An Experimental Study on Mineral Water. Foods 2022, 11, 1276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Mukwevho, M.N. Compliance Level of Street Food Vendors Regarding Food Hygiene and Safety in Thulamela Local Municipality. Available online: https://univendspace.univen.ac.za/handle/11602/1142 (accessed on 6 April 2023).
  108. Mohammed, A.S.; Shehasen, M.Z. Street food consumption and associated health risk. Int. J. Res. Stud. Agric. Sci. 2020, 6, 8–18. [Google Scholar]
  109. Albuquerque, G.; Morais, I.; Gelormini, M.; Casal, S.; Damasceno, A.; Pinho, O.; Moreira, P.; Jewell, J.; Breda, J.; Lunet, N.; et al. Street food in Dushanbe, Tajikistan: Availability and nutritional value. Br. J. Nutr. 2019, 122, 1052–1061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  110. Chai, L.T.; Yat, D. Online Food Delivery Services: Making Food Delivery the New Normal. J. Mark. Adv. Pract. 2019, 1, 62–77. [Google Scholar]
  111. Wiatrowski, M.; Czarniecka-Skubina, E.; Trafiałek, J. Consumer eating behavior and opinions about the food safety of street food in Poland. Nutrients 2021, 13, 594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Philippine Statistics Authority GDP Expands by 6.4 Percent in the First Quarter of 2023. Available online: https://psa.gov.ph/national-accounts (accessed on 26 April 2023).
Sustainability 15 12549 g001
Figure 1. Theoretical research framework.
Figure 1. Theoretical research framework.
Sustainability 15 12549 g001
Sustainability 15 12549 g002
Figure 2. The Initial SEM analysis for the evaluation of the indicators and variables affecting the purchase of street foods.
Figure 2. The Initial SEM analysis for the evaluation of the indicators and variables affecting the purchase of street foods.
Sustainability 15 12549 g002
Sustainability 15 12549 g003
Figure 3. The Final SEM analysis representing the strength of the relationships between the factors influencing the purchase of street foods.
Figure 3. The Final SEM analysis representing the strength of the relationships between the factors influencing the purchase of street foods.
Sustainability 15 12549 g003
Table 1. Respondents’ demographic profile.
Table 1. Respondents’ demographic profile.
CharacteristicsCategoryN%
GenderFemale98572.37
Male37627.63
Age18–2423717.41
25–3474554.74
35–4422316.39
45–5414610.73
55–64100.730
More than 6500.000
Educational LevelElementary Graduate00.000
Junior High School Graduate100.730
Senior High School Graduate604.410
Technical–Vocational Graduate80.590
College Graduate126392.80
Master Graduate191.400
PhD Graduate10.070
Monthly Salary/
Allowance		Less than Php15,00016612.20
Php15,001–Php30,00057342.10
Php30,001–Php45,00052538.58
Php45,001–Php60,000674.920
Php60,001–Php75,00060.440
More than Php75,000241.760
Eating FrequencyDaily261.910
4–6 times a week876.390
3 times a week26419.40
2 times a week25518.74
Once a week72953.56
Table 2. Questionnaire.
Table 2. Questionnaire.
ConstructItemMeasurementReference
Perceived Food Value (PFV)PFV1Street Foods are not expensive.[35,89]
PFV2Street Foods are good value for money.[35,89]
PFV3Buying Street Foods allow me to save money.[35,89]
PFV4The overall value of eating Street Foods regularly is high.[38]
PFV5Street Food meets my taste expectations.[35]
Perceived Food Quality (PFQ)PFQ1I can tell the quality of Street Foods from the prices.[90]
PFQ2The ingredients used are of the quality I expected.[90]
PFQ3The appearance of Street Foods are good to look at.[90]
PFQ4Street foods are tasty and delicious.[90]
PFQ5The street foods are freshly made or cooked just before eating.[90]
Perceived
Behavioral
Control (PBC)		PBC1I have the capability to choose whichever Street Food I want to eat.[88]
PBC2I have the money to buy Street Foods.[88,91]
PBC3My schedule allows me to buy Street Food.[88,91]
PBC4Whether or not I eat Street Foods regularly is entirely up to me.[88,91]
PBC5Patronizing Street Foods are beneficial to our society.[88,91]
Subjective Norms (SN)SN1People who are closely related to me approve that I consume Street Foods.[36]
SN2People around me think that eating Street Foods regularly is fine.[36]
SN3People around me expect me to eat Street Foods regularly.[36]
SN4People around me influence me to eat Street Foods.[36]
SN5Eating Street Foods regularly has been a normal thing in my area.[36]
SN6People who are closely related to me eat Street Foods regularly.[36]
Attitude (ATT)ATT1Eating Street Foods make me feel good.[36]
ATT2I find eating street foods gives me comfort.[36]
ATT3I think eating Street Foods is smart.[36]
ATT4Whether eating Street Foods is beneficial would not hinder me from eating.[91]
Convenience (CON)CO1I readily find all the Street Foods I like.[35]
CO2There are a lot of choices/variety of Street Foods available to me.[35]
CO3The places I usually go to sell Street Foods.[35]
CO4When I want to eat Street Foods, I have no trouble buying them.[35]
CO5Eating street food fits the home/school/working schedule that I follow.
Purchase Intention (INT)INT1I am very likely to eat Street Foods on a regular basis[35,92]
INT2I plan on eating Street Foods regularly.[35,92]
INT3I am quite willing to eat Street Foods.[35,92]
INT4I will eat Street Food if it is accessible to me.[93]
INT5I will increase the quantity/volume of the Street Food that I regularly eat.[91]
INT6I will eat Street Food at every opportunity in the future.[91,94]
INT7I recommend the eating of Street Food to the general public.[94]
Table 3. Goodness of Fit of initial SEM.
Table 3. Goodness of Fit of initial SEM.
Goodness of Fit
Measures		Parameter
Estimates		Minimum
Cut-Off		Reference Studies
Incremental Fit Index (IFI)0.943>0.80[94]
Tucker Lewis Index (TLI)0.928>0.80[94]
Comparative Fit Index (CFI)0.941>0.80[94]
Goodness of Fit Index (GFI)0.837>0.80[94]
Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI)0.796>0.80[94]
Root Mean Square Error (RMSEA)0.066≤0.07[95]
Table 4. Indicators Statistical Analysis.
Table 4. Indicators Statistical Analysis.
Factor Loadings
FactorItemMeanStDInitialFinal
Perceived Food ValuePFV14.0421.0210.6370.638
PFV23.7291.0540.8650.866
PFV33.6391.1290.8220.822
PFV43.3141.0860.5740.574
PFV53.4850.9780.6840.683
Perceived Food QualityPFQ13.5811.0130.6900.690
PFQ23.1781.0340.7970.797
PFQ33.4660.9540.7930.792
PFQ43.6180.9450.8080.808
PFQ53.2311.0370.7840.784
Perceived
Behavioral Control		PBC13.8570.9940.6440.644
PBC23.8700.9760.7410.741
PBC33.3481.0220.6650.665
PBC43.7071.1410.7540.754
PBC53.4191.0470.7550.755
Subjective NormSN13.2371.0330.7500.750
SN23.0311.1000.7950.795
SN32.8811.0940.8040.804
SN43.1471.0740.7400.741
SN53.3151.0990.6980.698
SN63.0891.0350.8040.804
AttitudeATT13.1951.0340.8130.817
ATT23.2391.0280.8280.833
ATT33.0111.0670.7460.751
ATT43.1801.0000.7530.758
ConvenienceCON13.2761.0160.8310.831
CON23.4351.0030.8340.834
CON33.2111.0260.8290.829
CON43.3900.9880.8070.807
CON53.2531.0220.8390.840
IntentionINT12.9731.1000.8030.806
INT22.7901.1480.7980.800
INT33.2621.0170.7660.769
INT43.3991.0230.7170.720
INT52.8641.1170.7810.784
INT63.0921.0750.8050.807
INT73.1481.1090.7700.772
Table 5. Reliability and validity.
Table 5. Reliability and validity.
FactorCronbach’s αCRAVE
PFV0.8380.8440.526
PFQ0.8820.8830.601
PBC0.8500.8380.509
SN0.9200.8950.587
ATT0.9150.8690.625
CON0.9210.9160.686
INT0.9400.9160.609
Table 6. Goodness of Fit of final SEM.
Table 6. Goodness of Fit of final SEM.
Goodness of Fit
Measures		Parameter
Estimates		Minimum
Cut-Off		Reference Studies
Incremental Fit Index (IFI)0.945>0.80[98]
Tucker Lewis Index (TLI)0.931>0.80[98]
Comparative Fit Index (CFI)0.943>0.80[98]
Goodness of Fit Index (GFI)0.838>0.80[98]
Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI)0.802>0.80[98]
Root Mean Square Error (RMSEA)0.060≤0.07[99]
Table 7. Direct, indirect, and total Effects.
Table 7. Direct, indirect, and total Effects.
NoVariableDirect Effectp-ValueIndirect Effectp-ValueTotal Effectp-Value
1PFV→PBC0.3040.009--0.3040.009
2PFQ→PBC0.5900.021--0.5900.021
3PFQ→SN0.3730.003--0.3730.003
4PFQ→ATT0.4710.007--0.4710.007
5PBC→INT0.1420.037--0.1420.037
6SN→INT0.4670.005--0.4670.005
7ATT→INT0.5450.008--0.5450.008
8CON→PBC0.4770.008--0.4770.008
9CON→ATT0.7460.007--0.7460.007
10CON→SN0.6960.016--0.6960.016
11PFV→INT--0.1130.0180.1130.018
12PFQ→INT--0.4060.0050.4060.005
13CON→INT--0.7110.0130.7110.013
Table 8. Summarized results.
Table 8. Summarized results.
Hypotheses Number RelationshipDecision
1PBC→INTAccept
2SN→INTAccept
3ATT→INTAccept
4PFQ→PBCAccept
5PFQ→SNAccept
6PFQ→ATTAccept
7PFV→PBCAccept
8PFV→SNNot Supported
9PFV→ATTNot Supported
10CON→PBCAccept
11CON→SNAccept
12CON→ATTAccept
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Tacardon, E.R.; Ong, A.K.S.; Gumasing, M.J.J. The Perception of Food Quality and Food Value among the Purchasing Intentions of Street Foods in the Capital of the Philippines. Sustainability 2023, 15, 12549. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151612549

AMA Style

Tacardon ER, Ong AKS, Gumasing MJJ. The Perception of Food Quality and Food Value among the Purchasing Intentions of Street Foods in the Capital of the Philippines. Sustainability. 2023; 15(16):12549. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151612549

Chicago/Turabian Style

Tacardon, Eric R., Ardvin Kester S. Ong, and Ma. Janice J. Gumasing. 2023. "The Perception of Food Quality and Food Value among the Purchasing Intentions of Street Foods in the Capital of the Philippines" Sustainability 15, no. 16: 12549. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151612549

APA Style

Tacardon, E. R., Ong, A. K. S., & Gumasing, M. J. J. (2023). The Perception of Food Quality and Food Value among the Purchasing Intentions of Street Foods in the Capital of the Philippines. Sustainability, 15(16), 12549. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151612549

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop