Cleaner and Responsible Consumption 6 (2022) 100072

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Cleaner and Responsible Consumption

journal homepage: www.journals.elsevier.com/cleaner-and-responsible-consumption

Migrant millennials & their food adoption perspective -A grounded

theory approach
Suchita Jha a, *, Komal Chopra a, b
a
Symbiosis International University Symbiosis Institute of International Business Pune, India
b
Symbiosis International University Symbiosis Institute of Management Studies, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Migration is a common phenomenon in the present lifestyle, where people move for jobs or education and other
Migrant reasons from one country to another. This kind of migration is more evident among the millennial population.
Millennials The purpose of this study is to understand the food adoption behavior of migrant millennials by proposing a
Food adoption
theory using a grounded theory approach. Qualitative methodologies in the form of the grounded theory
Grounded theory
approach were applied since the purpose of the study was to generate a contemporary theory to better under­
stand the food adoption perspective of migrant millennials. The participants underwent focus group discussions
and the sample size was considered based on theoretical saturation. Transcriptions of focus group discussions
were subjected to open coding, axial coding, and selective coding in order to unfold the concepts grounded in the
data. The concepts were then integrated into a theory of food adoption behavior by writing a summary memo.
The findings of the study indicate that the food adoption behavior of millennials is related to three constructs
namely consumption habits, food attributes, and service attributes. The consumption habits represent millennial
motivation, socialization, and food neophilia. The food attributes represent variety, popularity, hygiene, and
taste. The service attributes are related in the context of quick service. The proposed theory will enable marketers
and food services outlets to understand the food adoption behavior of migrant millennials and customize their
offerings to the specific needs of the customers. A contemporary theory on migrant millennials’ food adoption
behavior has been proposed which overcomes the limitations of existing theories.

1. Introduction
Migrants can be defined as individuals who changed their place of
residence for more than a year (Guyant et al., 2015). Migrants are
important contributors to the growth and development of the economy
within a country (Khan et al., 2019). A review of past and recent liter­
ature has shown that the main reason for migration has been social,
political, and economic welfare (Pytel et al., 2020; Dixon, 1950; Ma
et al., 1997). Migration is a common trend among the young population
who migrate from one city to another or one country to another for
acquiring better education and job. (Dustmann and Glitz, 2011; Kalan­
taryan & Salamońska, 2019; Granderath et al., 2021). The generation
born between 1980 and 2000 comprising primarily the children of the
baby boomers is typically perceived as millennials (Baur and Nyström.,
2017). Millennials are a class that is seen migrating the most due to jobs,
study, or marriage. This group is also spending most in food consump­
tion and the population which is going to give the business input.
Since the last decade, there has been a growing trend in migration
towards emerging economies like India for better education as a result of
the internationalization of higher education and liberal migration pol­
icies (Jacobs, 2020). This has also affected the food adoption patterns of
the country (Beckerman-Hsu et al., 2020). According to (Wandel et al.,
2008), migration has been seen as a reason for the change in food habits.
For example, South Asians who move to European counties have been
noticed to consume less fat content after migration. People within Indian
states also observed changes in their diet after moving from the eastern
part of the country to the western part of the country (Wandel et al.,
2008). When migrants move from low-income countries to high-income
countries, their dietary habits change significantly ().
Most of the literature on migrating population’s food consumption in
the last decade has been focused on health, education, and employment
(Spitzer, 2017; Lee & Lee, 2015). However, the preference for food
adoption among the millennial migrant population has shown very
limited research. Previous literature has highlighted the role of

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: suchita.jha@siib.ac.in (S. Jha), chopra.k@sims.edu (K. Chopra).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clrc.2022.100072
Received 11 November 2021; Received in revised form 23 June 2022; Accepted 17 July 2022
Available online 18 August 2022
2666-7843/© 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
S. Jha and K. Chopra
ethnocentric behavior on the food habits of migrants (Kilders et al.,
2021; Bowen and Devine, 2011; Khanna, 2020; Wang et al., 2014).
Literature on food choice may be referred to from the context of eating
out since millennial migrants stay at rented hostels and are not
permitted to cook (Wang et al., 2014). The current study focuses on food
preferences while eating out at food outlets.
Food is not only a source of energy or nutrition, it is a point of
connection between people and cultures (Dawson, 2020). Food con­
sumption behavior is drastically influenced by the lifestyle of the
country and the city of residence (Nicolaou et al., 2009; Thogersen,
2017). Food preference is also driven by geographic regions where
climate and the remoteness of location determine the availability of food
(Skerratt, 1999). Food choices are also get influenced by food habits. A
study (Cason et al., 2006) on the migrant population examined that
flavor, tradition, and pleasure affect food choice. Demographic and
socio-cultural factors result in modification of food habits after migra­
tion. (Edwards et al., 2010). Availability of food and globalization is
seen as major factor affecting food choices. (Raberg Kjollesdal et al.,
2011). This is particularly of great interest to marketers because the
increasing mobility of the population has shown changes in the purchase
and consumption patterns of consumers (Joy et al., 2017).
In the past various research done in the area of food adoption
behavior of millennials, those research’s revolves around food con­
sumption in general, (Blake et al., 2007). These papers lack the orien­
tation of migrating population, but as noted the migrating population is
maximum among millennials so is it important to understand the pro­
spective from that end. Other papers have independently worked on
food preference of migrating population, food choice behavior among
the migrating population (Seo et al., 2011) (Feil et al., 2020), social &
cultural behavior influencing food consumption (Tiu Wright et al.,
2001),but they lacked taking into consideration the millennials as prime
group of study. Other papers highlighted on the internal factors influ­
encing food consumption behavior. Consumer preference theory have
worked on the nutritional and aesthetic association of food but the other
aspect of emotion is not considered in this paper. Self-determination
theories influencing food consumption behavior of millennials (Sheikh
and Thomas, 1994) have individually looked on personality and internal
aspect that is perception, attitude of an individual influencing food
choices, again this paper has not discussed about the millennial pop­
ulation’s concerns. Combinedly none of these theories addressed
millennial migrants at one go (Liu et al., 2019). So, the present research
will address the migrant millennial food adoption behavior, and with the
use of grounded theory with which we tried to develop a new theory to
address the specific concerns.
The shortcomings of existing theories can be overcome by proposing
a new theory. The new theory can be developed by using a qualitative
and quantitative approach. A quantitative approach is a deductive
approach that does not completely capture insights of the phenomena
under study (Seppelt et al., 2011). According to researchers, a qualita­
tive approach to theory development would bring new insights since it is
an inductive approach. The most popular and widely used approach to
developing theories using the inductive approach is grounded theory
(Corbin and Strauss, 1990; Glaser and Strauss, 1967). Grounded theory
approach helps the emergence of theories from concepts grounded in the
data (Corbin and Strauss, 1990; Charmaz, 2020). Therefore, grounded
theory can better explain the occurrence of a phenomenon. Hence, the
researchers propose to use a grounded theory approach which will
provide a better understanding of food choice behavior.
1.1. Research question
How can food adoption behavior of migrant millennials be explained
by proposing a contemporary theory using a grounded theory approach?
2
Cleaner and Responsible Consumption 6 (2022) 100072
2. Review of literature
In addition to being a product that fulfills functional value, food
consumption is also related to symbolic, hedonic, and intangible goals.
Food consumption is based on the culture and subculture exposure of an
individual (Tiu Wright et al., 2001). The various factors notably
affecting the food choices are exposure, situation, gender, food craving,
the appeal of food, convenience, availability, health, eating habits, in­
fluence, and mood. (Sheikh and Thomas, 1994). Psychological and
cultural factors involved in the motives behind food choice
decision-making processes are also observed (Henderson, 2014). The
migration does impact the food consumption behavior (E. et al., 2013).
Social factors also influence eating behavior i.e. if we eat alone or in
public our eating habits differ. (King et al., 2007). This summarizes that
food selection is a combination of product, situation and eating habits of
a person. Habitual behavior like familiarity with food, prior experience
and food acceptance, environment and situation variables also
contribute towards food selection choices.
Other factors influencing food choices are food packaging, the in­
formation mentioned in the package, visual, décor design and auditory
and impact of location. (Edwards et al., 2010; Steptoe et al., 1995). In
food choice values (FCVs) analysis, several factors contribute to influ­
ence people’s food choices including health, mood, convenience, sen­
sory appeal, natural content, price, weight control, familiarity and
ethical concern which affects the food consumption behavior. (Blake
et al., 2007). In general, these theories are covering all the areas except
emotional, hedonic and influencers impact on food consumption. Five
major themes affecting the dietary choices of immigrants are de­
mographics of dietary change, psychosocial and cultural factors, home
food environment, physical food environment, and lifestyle change (Pha
et al., 2017). This theory gives a base to understand the migrant’s food
consumption habits but with different delivery model change and access
to food from different countries have drastically impacted the con­
sumption among millennials.
Food preference is also driven by geographic regions where climate
and the remoteness of location determine the availability of food
(Skerratt, 1999). Food choice may also be influenced by food habits. The
authors (Cason et al., 2006) in their study on migrant populations
examined that flavor, tradition, and pleasure affected food choice. De­
mographic and socio-cultural factors do modify the changes in food
habits after migration. (Edwards et al., 2010). It is been also seen that
millennials food choices also depend on social media posts, likes and
feedback of friends and trending food choices (Simeone and Scarpato,
2020). Non-availability of food and globalization is seen as a major
factor with food choices. (Råberg Kjøllesdal et al., 2011). Awareness and
testing of ethnic cuisine have increased in the past decades as a conse­
quence of the growing international trade, migration, tourism, and
globalization. According to Verbeke et al. (2005), length of residence
and immigrants’ age also has a role on food choice decision. Several
authors (Steptoe et al., 1995; E et al., 2017) in their paper related to food
choice and perceived psychosocial influences on eating behavior found
out three main constructs in impacting the food behavior as eating
pattern and lifestyle, social influences and environmental concerns
(Reddy and van Dam, 2020). Due to less familiarity with the food
available, dietary acculturation often occurs to adjust with sociocultural
environment of the country of migration (Terragni et al., 2014).
Several theories have addressed the food consumption behavior of
consumers. These are theory of planned behavior, theory of reasoned
action and social cognition theory (self-efficacy and self-determination
theory) (Dunn et al., 2011a,b). These theories have addressed food
consumption behavior (Seo et al., 2011); (Dunn et al., 2011a,b). (Pil­
grim,1957) worked on food consumption behavior and perception and
found migration as a major component driving food consumption.
Theory of planned behavior, theory of reasoned action have been looked
from three perspective that is attitude, subjective norms and perceived
values, Where as social cognition theory are more on the internal factors
S. Jha and K. Chopra
influencing food choices. (Shepherd,1990) identified property of food,
personal factors and environment affect the food consumption behavior.
Property of food means aesthetic value associated with food. Different
demographic factors, personality factors, psychological factors are part
of personal factors. Environmental factors are changes in GDP, macro
factors do impact the food consumption behavior.
Consumer preference theory related to food products reveals that
consumer preference for food is driven by nutritional values, aesthetic
values, as well as social setting which is an external factor not directly
related to the food item purchase, do make an impact on food con­
sumption behavior (Feldmann and Hamm, 2015). but this theory has not
looked into the emotional aspect of decision making. Utility theory has
achieved considerable attention in understanding consumer preferences
(FISHBURN, 1970). This theory helps to rationally evaluate consumer
decision-making. However, the theory suffers from the limitation of not
considering again the epistemic and emotional decision-making values.
The consumer preference may be stochastic resulting in a partial pre­
diction of choice behavior as stated by stochastic theory (Bass, 1974).
The food choice model (Furst et al., 1996) addressed life course, in­
fluences, and personal food system, whereas it has looked into aspects
that do make a big impact on food choice decision making but this model
has not addressed issues related to migration. According to (Sheth et al.,
1991) there are five consumption value dimensions - functional value,
social value, emotional value, epistemic value, and conditional value.
According to the author, the consumption dimension can encompass all
the values but again the orientation here is completely internal
value-driven. The study on local food consumption identifies two factors
that influence food adoption; (motivational factors like exciting expe­
rience, escape from routine, health concerns, learning knowledge,
authentic experience, togetherness, prestige, sensory appeal, and phys­
ical environment. (ii) The demographic factors and third physiological
factors like food neophilia and food neophobia affect the consumption
and adoption of local food (Kim et al., 2009). The theory of normative
social behavior revolves around social norms affecting food consump­
tion behavior (Varava, 2019).
The current published literature on consumer adoption of food does
not showcase any contemporary theory that can comprehensively
explain different aspects of choice behavior among migrant millennials.
Hence, the authors propose to develop a theory that will explain food
adoption behavior. Theories can be developed using inductive and
deductive approaches. Established literature confirms that in order to
better understand a recent phenomenon, it is better to develop theory
that relate closely to the ground situation (Thornberg and Charmaz,
2014; Strauss and Corbin, 1994). Grounded theory approach helps to
develop theories from concepts grounded in the data (Glaser and
Strauss, 1967). Hence, the current study proposes to develop a theory of
millennial food adoption using a grounded theory approach.
3. Research methodology
There are different research methods in qualitative approach such as
phenomenology, content analysis, ethnography, netnography and
grounded theory (Plonsey et al., 2007). The approach used depends on
the purpose and nature of the study. Since the current study is related to
generation of theory, grounded theory approach has been considered as
the most appropriate option (R.K. et al., 2019). The grounded theory
approach gives more flexibility to researchers to examine issues that are
not able to be identified through other methods, in this the researcher
can examine the verbatim in detail and look into the underlying reason
(Charmaz, 2020). The grounded theory approach was introduced by
(Glaser and Strauss, 1967). The purpose of the approach is to develop a
contemporary theory from concepts grounded in the current data
(Strauss and Corbin, 1994). This would help in a better understanding of
the concepts (Glaser and Strauss, 1967). The grounded theory is a very
effective tool for research inquiry as it involves systematic, inductive,
and comparative inquiry methods (R.K. et al., 2019). The theory can be
3
Cleaner and Responsible Consumption 6 (2022) 100072
generated from data related to observed or reported incidents or activ­
ities (Corbin and Strauss, 1990). According to (Charmaz, 2020), in the
grounded theory approach, researchers have the flexibility to select
those respondents who contribute to the emergence of theory. The data
is then analyzed through open coding, axial coding, and selective coding
to develop concepts. The concepts can then be integrated into a frame by
writing a summary coding.
The According to Charmaz (2020), in the grounded theory approach,
data analysis starts immediately after the collection of the first sample.
Using the constant comparison method, the data is analyzed to gather
new insights relating to the phenomenon under study. Further data
collection happens from samples where the analysis is directed towards
the emergence of a contemporary theory (Glaser and Strauss, 1967).
This method of sampling and analysis will continue till no new insights
for the development of theory are forthcoming for the samples. This is
called the point of theoretical saturation and the method of sampling is
called theoretical sampling (Corbin and Strauss, 1990; Charmaz, 2020).
The data can be collected in the form of interviews, memoirs, social
media posts, videos, and historical records.
The first step in the process was to develop suitable questions that
would bring out new insights into the food adoption behavior. The
questions were designed with the help of a review of the literature and
verified by academic experts. They were also pre-tested on a group of
migrant millennials to ensure that appropriate responses relating to the
food adoption behavior were received. Individual interviews, as well as
focus group discussions (FGDs), were conducted to find out which
method of data collection was more appropriate(Edmunds, 1999). It was
observed that the migrant millennials felt more comfortable in group
discussions and provided deeper insights. Published literature on FGDs
also confirms that discussions bring out better insights (Edmunds,
1999). Hence, it was decided to gather data through the mode of focus
group discussions in the final sampling.
The questions in grounded theory relate to whom, what when,
where, and how so that the respondents provide elaborate responses.
The main questions that were asked to the respondents were:
1. How often do you eat at a restaurant or any other food outlet?
2. What is the main purpose of eating at a restaurant or any other food
outlet?
3. How do you decide on your food choices?
4. Do your food preferences change over time?
5. How do your food habits in another region or country change over a
period of time?
6. How do you adapt yourself to the new food habits of another region
or country?
The data for the current study were collected from migrants who
came from different parts of India and abroad to Pune, (India) which has
a large migrant population of millennials migrants (Singla and Bendigiri,
2019). Though many of the students/professionals are of Indian origin
but even within India, each state is very different in food choices so they
are more or less migrants, when they move from one state to another
(Reddy and van Dam, 2020). Pune is the educational and IT hub of India
and students/professionals in the millennial age group from all across
the globe come here for educational/professional/personal reasons, so
the sample was a clear representation of the migrant population. It is
also been noted that income level has not much relevance to food con­
sumption so in the present study income level of the participants’ is not
considered. The FGDs were held at various educational campuses in
Pune using the process of theoretical sampling. Each group was
informed in advance about the purpose of the study. The cultural
sensitivity of the student was kept in mind during the FGDs. The FGDs
had a group size of 5–6 participants which are considered adequate
(Carlsen and Glenton, 2011).
The FGDs were audio-recorded with the permission of participants so
that the recordings could be referred to periodically to ensure that no
S. Jha and K. Chopra
information was missed during the data analysis. Immediately after the
first FGD, the recordings were transcribed and the data analysis started
using the constant comparison method by analyzing smaller pieces of
information to look for similarities and differences. The information was
analyzed using a three-step coding process:
(i) Open coding: During this process, meaningful properties were
derived from the pieces of information related to the context of
food adoption.
(ii) Axial coding: The properties created during open coding were
grouped together to form subcategories based on similarities and
differences.
(iii) Selective coding: The subcategories which showed similar prop­
erties were grouped under a common core category and given the
label of a concept.
The same process was repeated for the remaining FGDs. The coding
was done using NVivo software. The theoretical saturation was reached
at the end of 10 FGDs since no new insights were generated even after
repeating the questions. The 10 FGDs had participation from 56 re­
spondents. Twenty-six participants were migrants from different states
of India who came to Pune for studying and the rest of them were from
Nepal, Afghanistan, Germany, and UAE. The concepts created during the
process of coding were integrated to form a theoretical model. Accord­
ing to Boddy (2016), a sample size of 56 in qualitative research is suf­
ficient since the sample size depends on the scope and nature of the
study.
4. Results and discussion
Based on the data analysis, it can be inferred that the food adoption
behavior of migrant millennials is related to their consumption habits,
service attributes, and food attributes.
(i) Consumption habits
Consumption habits relate to the following behavioral elements of
millennials:
Socialization
“We consume food that is quick service and can eat out with friends”
(FGD1).
Food provides a motive for socialization among migrant millennials.
They would prefer eating out with friends so that it leads to social
engagement. However, they would prefer to have food from quick-
service restaurants which is an indication that time and quality of
service become an important factor in the adoption of food. The
results are in congruence with previous literature on food adoption
which indicates the role of personal factors in adoption (Shepherd,
1990).
Food neophilia
“Whenever we get to know a new restaurant is opening up or any
place where new kind of food is offered, we go there” (FGD 8).
The migrants find the consumption of their existing food monoto­
nous and want to try out new stuff. Hence, they look forward to new
places of eating where different kind of food is offered and this be­
comes a reason for their choice and adoption. This also indicates that
migrants would no longer be interested in their traditional food and
would like to adopt newer dishes. Previous literature on food
neophilia indicates the same (Kim et al., 2009).
Motivation
“To pep up the mood from any pressure food comes a way out” (FGD
9)
4
Cleaner and Responsible Consumption 6 (2022) 100072
“We are always bothered about budget whenever we order food or is
there any kind of offer going on” (FGD 10)
“With the change in weather like when it’s raining, we order fried
food or order something hot and spicy” (FGD 6).
“Usually how food is served also makes the choice sometime sizzlers
are served with sound and nice aroma around, the decor of the place
sitting arrangement is very cozy, when we go there with a special
friend no one disturbs the privacy” (FGD 5)
Adoption of food by millennials is related to their rational and he­
donic motivation. The rational motives relate to the purchase
behavior but hedonic motives relate to the consumption behavior.
The millennials consume food based on their mood and weather
conditions which may cause temptation of food. Sometime the con­
sumption motivations are driven by environment profile of the food
(Esteve-Llorens et al., 2021). The aroma of food also adds to the
temptation. The ambience of the eating outlet further adds to the
temptation. Rational behavior relates to pricing of the food which
becomes a determinant factor for purchase. Theories on motivation
confirm similar kind of behavior (Kim et al., 2009)
(ii) Food attributes
The food attributes relate to the different aspects of food such as
variety, popularity, hygiene, and taste.
Variety
“We keep on trying new dishes of different states and new places to
eat since we are bored of college canteen food” (FGD 1).
Millennials would have a greater inclination the adoption of food
when they get a variety of cuisines. The variety may be in terms of taste,
culture, preparation, ingredients, novelty, and consumer satisfaction
(Tseng et al., 2013). This is because the millennials want a change from
monotony. This clearly indicates that monotony is a driver of future
choices, which are decided by variety (Sheikh and Thomas, 1994).
Popularity
“We prefer dishes from Maharashtra since we don’t get them in our
state. We also prefer Chinese and Italian cuisines” (FGD 2).
“The Punjabi food is most popular being tasty and spicy” (FGD 3).
The popularity of food provides an inclination for consumption and
adoption of food. The participants had a greater propensity for the
adoption of food that was popular across regions as well as globally.
Hence, popularity becomes an important driver of adoption. Published
literature has indicated the importance of popularity (Rokicki et al.,
2017).
Hygiene
“We are always bothered about the kind of the stuff they use, the oil
which they use, should not be used one, everything should be kept
cleanly” (FGD 7).
The migrant participants are exposed to different types of food which
may or may not be healthy and hygienic. The quality of food plays a very
important role in food choice. The adoption of food will be faster if they
are convinced of health and hygiene. This clearly indicates that the
migrants are very much concerned about their health. Health and hy­
giene contribute significantly to food adoption and the food industry
needs to be trained to cater to the taste of migrants (E. et al., 2013)
(Seaman, 2010).
S. Jha and K. Chopra Cleaner and Responsible Consumption 6 (2022) 100072

Taste Table 3
Data analysis using coding.
“We prefer spicy Indian dishes and daal and cooked vegetables since FGD Open coding Axial coding Selective coding
we don’t get this in our country. We also try to cook these dishes on our No
own” (FGD 4). 1 We keep on trying new trying out new food food variety
The response indicates the importance of taste as a driver for food dishes of different states socialization while consumption
adoption. The migrants are willing to taste food that is not available in and new places to eat eating preference for habits
their country. This also indicates that migrants are willing to forego their since we are bored of quick service service
college canteen food. We attributes
traditional cuisine and adopt a new cuisine based on the geographic area consume food that is quick
of residence. This can also be understood from the fact that If the par­ service and can eat out
ticipants like the taste, they will be willing to cook it on their own. It is a with friends
well-known fact that taste impacts food adoption (Seaman, 2010). 2 We prefer dishes from Exclusive food of food exclusivity
Maharashtra since we Maharashtra Preference popular global
don’t get them in our based on globally food
(iii) Service attributes state. We also prefer popular foods
Chinese and Italian
“We consume food that is quick service and can eat out with friends” cuisines
(FGD 1). 3 The Punjabi food is the Popular cuisines popular food
most popular being tasty
Food adoption is also dependent on the service attributes apart from and spicy
food. Participants prefer to adopt food where the service is quick in 4 We prefer spicy Indian temptation of taste taste
terms of faster presentation and availability. This is a non-consumption- dishes and daal and
related factor. Service attributes as a driver for food adoption have been cooked vegetables since
we don’t get this in our
extensively covered in many studies. It is interesting to note that migrant
country. We also try to
millennials also consider it an important attribute (Nield et al., 2000; cook these dishes on our
Zanin et al., 2021; Tuomi et al., 2022). own.
(Insert Table III: Analysis of FGD with open, axial, and selective 5 Usually how food is served serving, décor, aroma hedonic
coding). also makes the choice motivation
sometime sizzlers are
served with sound and
5. Theory development nice aroma around, the
decor of the place sitting
The main theme of the study is food adoption behavior. Each gath­ arrangement is very cozy,
when we go there with a
ered interview was transcribed and then fragmented into smaller
special friend no one
statements, which provided significant insights related to the context disturbs the privacy
and phenomenon under study. The repetitive statements and statements 6 With the change in Consumers’ motive hedonic
not related to the context of the study were discarded. The axial coding weather like when it’s driven by climatic motivation
of insights from the interview process led to the emergence of concep­ raining we order fried conditions and
food or order something geographic conditions
tual labels such as variety, popularity, hygiene, taste, motivation, so­
hot and spicy
cialization, food neophilia, and quick service. Analysis of these concepts 7 We are always bothered healthy and hygienic food attributes
using selective coding led to the emergence of further subcategories. about the kind of the stuff food
Concepts related to variety, popularity, hygiene, and taste could be they use, the oil which
they use, should not be
categorized as food attributes (Goyal and Singh, 2007). Concepts related
used one, everything
to motivation, socialization, and food neophilia were classified under a should be kept cleanly
common category of consumption habits (Dimitrovski and 8 Whenever we get to know food neophilia consumption
Crespi-Vallbona, 2017). Quick service could be classified under a a new restaurant is habit
separate category called service attributes (Mathe-Soulek et al., 2015). opening up or any place
where new kind of food is
Hence, the process of selective coding led to the emergence of three
offered, we go there
9 To pep up the mood from food improves mood hedonic motive
any pressure food comes a of consumer
Table 1 way out.
Demographic profile of respondents. 10 We are always bothered price of food rational motive
about budget whenever of consumer
Variable Item Frequency Percentage
we order food or is there
Gender Female 27 48.1 any kind of offer going on
Male 29 51.7
Age 20–25 33 58.2
26–30 15 26.7 subcategories i.e. food attributes, consumption habits, and service at­
31–35 8 14.2
tributes. The three attributes were then labeled under the common core
Education Level Undergraduate 33 58.2
Post Graduate 23 41
category i.e. food adoption behavior, which was the central theme of the
Country UAE 11 19.6 study. Fig. 1 highlights the emergence of conceptual labels, their linkage
Afghanistan 13 23.2 to the subcategories, and, the linkage of subcategory to the core category
India 26 46.4 which is the central theme of the study (Mak et al., 2012).
Germany 2 3.5
Nepal 4 7.1
6. Implications
Inference: The percentage distribution for female & male is 48.1 & 51.7
respectively. The population break up of FGD are following under three cate­ Theoretical implications: The theoretical implication of the paper
gories with breakup of 20–25(58.2 percent) 26–30 (26.7 percent) & 31–35 (14.2
comes in the form of contribution to the existing literature in terms of
percent). The population has 58.2 percent undergraduate & 41 percent post
proposing a contemporary theory for adoption of food by the migrant
graduate. The country representation is from India (46.4 percent), Afganistan
(23.2), UAE (19.6), Nepal (7.1) & Germany (3.5) in percentage. millennials. Literature on food aspects of migrant millennials is scant

5
S. Jha and K. Chopra
Fig. 1. (Food Adoption behavior Model: Developed by authors).
and the current study will bridge this gap in literature. Existing theories
related to food adoption are consumer preference theory, utility theory,
theory of planned behavior and self-determination theory. None of the
theories either individually or jointly addresses concerns about migrant
population food adoption behavior since consumption habits and food
attributes play a major role in the adoption process while migrating from
a different region and culture. The proposed theory has emerged from
concepts grounded in collected data, which makes it more suited for
needs of migrant population.
Practical implications: The results have practical implications for
the food and beverage industry. As migrant population constitutes a
sizeable population of any region, their food adoption behavior varies.
The migrants may perceive what may be seen as a traditional food for
the local population, as occasion-based food and they consume such
food on different occasions. They could create special occasions of so­
cialization at food outlets in order to attract the migrant population.
According to the findings, motivation for food adoption is rational and
emotional. The emotional aspect includes décor, aroma while rational
aspect includes price. Marketers need to consider both aspects. They
should focus on quick service that will help to serve more customers.
Marketers need to understand that food adoption is related to food at­
tributes and non-food attributes. Apart from taste and variety, the
popularity of food and its hygiene are important factors in making de­
cisions. The migrants would prefer branded food to non-branded food
due to the popularity and hygiene aspect. Marketers could focus on
branding of food products to make them more popular. Implementation
of proposed theory would help in faster and smooth adoption of food of
different regions and cultures by the migrant population.
7. Limitations and direction for future research
The study pertains to the millennial group and those who do not have
a cooking facility. The study with different generations and cooking
facilities may not show the same results. Future studies should focus on
the food preferences of migrants with cooking facilities and also on food
adoption in developed markets. The current study is based on qualitative
research and the proposed model is based on a qualitative approach. In
order to strengthen the external validity, a mixed-method approach can
be adopted. The model should be tested in different geographies to
further strengthen its validity.
Conflict of interest
This is an original piece of work, the conceptualization of the idea is
not copied from any, online or offline sources. All primary data collected
6
Cleaner and Responsible Consumption 6 (2022) 100072
are authentic & authors take all the responsibility for the originality of
the work.
While collecting the primary data, we informed the participants
beforehand and kept in mind the sensitive issues related to culture,
religion, and countries.
References
Bass, F.M., 1974. The theory of stochastic preference and brand switching. J. Market.
Res. 11 (1), 1–20.
Baur, T., Nyström, B., 2017. The Effect of eWOM Components on Brand Attitude and
Purchase Intention: a Cross Country Study between Germany and Sweden.
Beckerman-Hsu, J.P., Kim, R., Sharma, S., Subramanian, S.V., 2020. Dietary variation
among children meeting and not meeting minimum dietary diversity: an empirical
investigation of food group consumption patterns among 73,036 children in India.
J. Nutr. 150 (10), 2818–2824.
Blake, C.E., Bisogni, C.A., Sobal, J., Devine, C.M., Jastran, M., 2007. Classifying foods in
contexts: how adults categorize foods for different eating settings. Appetite 49 (2),
500–510.
Boddy, C.R., 2016. Sample size for qualitative research. Qualitative Mark. Res. 19 (4),
426–432.
Bowen, R.L., Devine, C.M., 2011. Watching a person who knows how to cook, you’ll
learn a lot.” Linked lives, cultural transmission, and the food choices of Puerto Rican
girls. Appetite 56 (2), 290–298.
Carlsen, B., Glenton, C., 2011. What about N? A methodological study of sample-size
reporting in focus group studies. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 11 (1), 1–10. https://doi.
org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-26.
Cason, K., Nieto-Montenegro, S., Chavez-Martinez, A., 2006. Food choices, food
sufficiency practices, and nutrition education needs of Hispanic migrant workers in
Pennsylvania. Top. Clin. Nutr. 21 (2), 145–158.
Charmaz, K., 2020. Grounded theory: Main characteristics. Qualitative Analysis: Eight
Approaches for the Social Sciences. Sage, London, pp. 195–222.
Corbin, J.M., Strauss, A., 1990. Grounded theory research: procedures, canons, and
evaluative criteria. Qual. Sociol. 13 (1), 3–21.
Dawson, L., 2020. Food will be what brings the people together’: constructing counter-
narratives from the perspective of Indigenous foodways. Indigenous Food Systems:
Concepts, Cases, and Conversations 83–100.
Dimitrovski, D., Crespi-Vallbona, M., 2017. Role of food neophilia in food market
tourists’ motivational construct: the case of La Boqueria in Barcelona, Spain. J. Trav.
Tourism Market. 34 (4), 475–487.
Dixon, G.I., 1950. Land and human migrations. Am. J. Econ. Sociol. 223–234.
Dunn, K.I., Mohr, P., Wilson, C.J., Wittert, G.A., 2011a. Determinants of fast-food
consumption. An application of the theory of planned behavior. Appetite. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2011.06.004.
Dunn, K.I., Mohr, P., Wilson, C.J., Wittert, G.A., 2011b. Determinants of fast-food
consumption. An application of the Theory of Planned Behavior”, Appetite. 57 (2),
349–357.
Dustmann, C., Glitz, A., 2011. Migration and education. In: Handbook of the Economics
of Education, 4. Elsevier, pp. 327–439.
Edmunds, H., 1999. The focus group research handbook. Bottom Line 12 (3), 46-46.
Edwards, J.S.A., Hartwell, H.L., Brown, L., 2010. Changes in food neophobia and dietary
habits of international students. J. Hum. Nutr. Diet. 23 (3), 301–311.
Esteve-Llorens, X., Van Dooren, C., Alvarez, M., Moreira, M.T., Feijoo, G., González-
García, S., 2021. Environmental and nutritional profile of food consumption patterns
in the different climatic zones of Spain. J. Clean. Prod. 279, 123580.
Feil, A.A., da Silva Cyrne, C.C., Sindelar, F.C.W., Barden, J.E., Dalmoro, M., 2020.
Profiles of sustainable food consumption: consumer behavior toward organic food in
southern region of Brazil. J. Clean. Prod. 258, 120690.
Feldmann, C., Hamm, U., 2015. Consumers’ perceptions and preferences for local food: a
review. Food Qual. Prefer. 40, 152–164.
Fishburn, P.C., 1970. UTILITY THEORY FOR DECISION MAKING,”. John Wiley & Sons,
Inc. https://doi.org/10.2307/3008003.
Furst, T., Connors, M., Bisogni, C.A., Sobal, J., Falk, L.W., 1996. Food choice: a
conceptual model of the process. Appetite 26 (3), 247–266.
Glaser, B., Strauss, A., 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory Chicago. Adelin,
London.
Goyal, A., Singh, N.P., 2007. Consumer perception about fast food in India: an
exploratory study. Br. Food J. 109 (2), 182–195.
Granderath, J.S., Martin, A., Froehlich, L., Stürmer, S., 2021. Identification through
education: exploring the effects of adult education on national and ethnic
identification of people with migration background in Germany. J. Community Appl.
Soc. Psychol. 31 (2), 198–212.
Guyant, P., Canavati, S.E., Chea, N., Ly, P., Whittaker, M.A., Roca-Feltrer, A., Yeung, S.,
2015. Malaria and the mobile and migrant population in Cambodia: a population
movement framework to inform strategies for malaria control and elimination.
Malar. J. 14 (1), 1–15.
Henderson, J.C., 2014. Food and culture: in search of a Singapore cuisine. Br. Food J. 116
(6), 904–917.
Jacobs, E., 2020. The homogenizing and diversifying effects of migration policy in the
internationalization of higher education. High Educ. 1–17.
Joy, E.J., Green, R., Agrawal, S., Aleksandrowicz, L., Bowen, L., Kinra, S., Macdiarmid, J.
I., Haines, A., Dangour, A.D., 2017. Dietary patterns and non-communicable disease
risk in Indian adults: secondary analysis of Indian Migration Study data. Publ. Health
Nutr. 20 (11), 1963–1972.
S. Jha and K. Chopra
Kalantaryan, S., Salamońska, J., 2019. In: Where migration meets education: case study
of policies referring to the mobility of the highly skilled. Education and public policy
in the European Union. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, pp. 47–66.
Khan, M.K., Teng, J.Z., Khan, M.I., 2019. The effect of migrant remittances on economic
growth: an ARDL approach. Eng. Econ. 30 (4), 434–441.
Khanna, S.K., 2020. Migration, gender, staple food choices, and food supplementation.
Ecol. Food Nutr. 59 (5), 459–461.
Kilders, V., Caputo, V., Liverpool-Tasie, L.S.O., 2021. Consumer ethnocentric behavior
and food choices in developing countries: the case of Nigeria. Food Pol. 99, 101973.
Kim, Y.G., Eves, A., Scarles, C., 2009. Building a model of local food consumption on
trips and holidays: a grounded theory approach. Int. J. Hospit. Manag. 28 (3),
423–431.
King, S.C., Meiselman, H.L., Hottenstein, A.W., Work, T.M., Cronk, V., 2007. The effects
of contextual variables on food acceptability: a confirmatory study. Food Qual.
Prefer. 18 (1), 58–65.
Liu, X., Zhou, J., Xue, Y., Qian, S., 2019. Analysis of property management ecological
behavior in China based on the grounded theory: the influencing factors and the
behavior model. J. Clean. Prod. 235, 44–56.
Ma, Z., Liaw, K.L., Zeng, Y., 1997. Migrations in the urban-rural hierarchy of China:
insights from the microdata of the 1987. National Survey”, Environ. Plann. A 29 (4),
707–730.
Mak, A.H., Lumbers, M., Eves, A., Chang, R.C., 2012. Factors influencing tourist food
consumption. Int. J. Hospit. Manag. 31 (3), 928–936.
Mathe-Soulek, K., Slevitch, L., Dallinger, I., 2015. Applying mixed methods to identify
what drives quick service restaurant’s customer satisfaction at the unit-level. Int. J.
Hospit. Manag. 50, 46–54.
Nicolaou, M., Doak, C.M., van Dam, R.M., Brug, J., Stronks, K., Seidell, J.C., 2009.
Cultural and social influences on food consumption in Dutch residents of Turkish and
Moroccan origin: a qualitative study. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav. 41 (4), 232–241.
Nield, K., Kozak, M., LeGrys, G., 2000. The role of food service in tourist satisfaction. Int.
J. Hospit. Manag. 19 (4), 375–384.
Pha, S., Berggreen-Clausen, A., Daivadanam, M., Berggreen-Clausen, A., 2017. Improving
understanding of food choices and dietary changes among migrants in host
countries. Eur. J. Publ. Health 26 (3), 247–265.
Plonsey, R., Barr, R.C., Bioelectricity, A., 2007. Quantitative Approach. Springer, New
York, NY.
Pytel, S., Rahmonov, O., Ruman, M., 2020. Internal and external migrations of
pensioners in Poland: a directional typology. Popul. Space Place 26 (7), e2330.
Råberg Kjøllesdal, M.K., Hjellset, V.T., Bjørge, B., Holmboe-Ottesen, G., Wandel, M.,
2011. Intention to change dietary habits, and weight loss among Norwegian-
Pakistani women participating in a culturally adapted intervention. J. Immigr.
Minority Health 13 (6), 1150–1158.
Reddy, G., van Dam, R.M., 2020. Food, culture, and identity in multicultural societies:
insights from Singapore. Appetite 149, 104633.
May Rokicki, M., Herder, E., Trattner, C., 2017. How editorial, temporal and social biases
affect online food popularity and appreciation, No. 1. In: Proceedings of the
International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 11, pp. 192–200.
Seaman, P., 2010. Food hygiene training: introducing the food hygiene training model.
Food Control 21 (4), 381–387.
Seo, H. sun, Lee, S.K., Nam, S., 2011. Factors influencing fast food consumption
behaviors of middle-school students in Seoul: an application of theory of planned
behaviors. Nutr. Res. Pract. 52, 169.
Cleaner and Responsible Consumption 6 (2022) 100072
Seppelt, R., Dormann, C.F., Eppink, F.V., Lautenbach, S., Schmidt, S., 2011. A
quantitative review of ecosystem service studies: approaches, shortcomings and the
road ahead. J. Appl. Ecol. 48 (3), 630–636.
Sheikh, N., Thomas, J., 1994. Factors influencing food choice among ethnic minority
adolescents. Nutr. Food Sci. 94 (5), 29–35.
Sheth, J.N., Newman, B.I., Gross, B.L., 1991. Why we buy what we buy: A theory of
consumption values. J. Bus. Res. 22 (2), 159–170.
Simeone, M., Scarpato, D., 2020. Sustainable consumption: how does social media affect
food choices? J. Clean. Prod. 277, 124036 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
JCLEPRO.2020.124036.
Singla, H.K., Bendigiri, P., 2019. Factors affecting rentals of residential apartments in
Pune, India: an empirical investigation. Int. J. Hous. Mark. Anal. 12 (6), 1028–1054.
Skerratt, S., 1999. Food availability and choice in rural Scotland: the impact of “place”.
Br. Food J. 101 (7), 537–544.
Spitzer, D.L., 2017. Engendering Migrant Health. University of Toronto Press.
Steptoe, A., Pollard, T.M., Wardle, J., 1995. Development of a measure of the motives
underlying the selection of food: the food choice questionnaire. Appetite 25 (3),
267–284.
Strauss, A., Corbin, J., 1994. Grounded theory methodology: an overview. In: Denzin, N.
K., Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research. SAGE, Thousand Oaks,
CA, pp. 273–285.
Terragni, L., Garnweidner, L.M., Pettersen, K.S., Mosdøl, A., 2014. Migration as a turning
point in food habits: the early phase of dietary acculturation among women from
South Asian, African, and middle eastern countries living in Norway. Ecol. Food
Nutr. 53 (3), 273–291.
Thogersen, J., 2017. Sustainable food consumption in the nexus between national
context and private lifestyle: a multi-level study. Food Qual. Prefer. 55, 16–25.
Thornberg, R., Charmaz, K., 2014. Grounded theory and theoretical coding. In: The SAGE
handbook of qualitative data analysis, 5, pp. 153–169.
Tiu Wright, L., Nancarrow, C., Kwok, P.M.H., 2001. Food taste preferences and cultural
influences on consumption. Br. Food J. 103 (5), 348–357.
Tseng, M.L., Tan, R.R., Siriban-Manalang, A.B., 2013. Sustainable consumption and
production for Asia: sustainability through green design and practice. J. Clean. Prod.
40, 1–5.
January Tuomi, A., Ashton, M., Ellonen, H.K., Tussyadiah, I., 2022. Innovation in high-
end food service during COVID-19 lockdowns. In: Proceedings of the 55th Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences.
Varava, K., 2019. Children and unhealthy food consumption: an application of the theory
of normative social behavior. Health Commun. 34 (10), 1183–1191.
Verbeke, W., 2005. Consumer acceptance of functional foods: socio-demographic,
cognitive and attitudinal determinants. Food Qual. Prefer. 16 (1), 45–57.
Wandel, M., Råberg, M., Kumar, B., Holmboe-Ottesen, G., 2008. Changes in food habits
after migration among South Asians settled in Oslo: the effect of demographic, socio-
economic and integration factors. Appetite 50 (2–3), 376–385.
Wang, C., Rada, N., Qin, L., Pan, S., 2014. Impacts of migration on household production
choices: evidence from China. J. Dev. Stud. 50 (3), 413–425.
Zanin, L.M., Stedefeldt, E., da Silva, S.M., da Cunha, D.T., Luning, P.A., 2021. Influence
of educational actions on transitioning of food safety culture in a food service
context: Part 2-Effectiveness of educational actions in a longitudinal study. Food
Control 120, 107542.