Sustainable living, also called green living, refers to a lifestyle of individuals, societies or countries trying to use limited natural resources to achieve a goal of sustainability, trying to minimize pollution to a maximum extent. Sustainable living is about making lifestyle choices and decisions that are mindful of the environment, societies, and future generations. Sustainable activities include recycling rubbish, conserving energy, using public transportation to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, and reducing food waste. The primary goal of smart cities is to improve the quality of citizens’ life in a way that would be helpful for future generations. Sustainable living, as one key aspect of smart cities, involves applying technologies to manage existing natural resources efficiently, reduce waste, promote economic development and improve the overall well-being of citizens. One vital aspect of sustainable living in smart cities is reducing food waste, a significant issue contributing to environmental problems. According to research conducted by Conrad in 2018, over 20% of food is lost or wasted each year in the US. The authors argue that food waste is an essential indicator of sustainability because it embodies the sum of resources used to produce uneaten food, including cropland, agricultural chemicals and irrigation water and reducing food waste. Our recipe recommendation application could be crucial in promoting sustainable living by suggesting recipes based on the user’s available ingredients. The application can help our users to utilize their food resources more efficiently, thereby reducing food waste and achieving sustainability. As Conrad suggests, understanding the complex relationships between diet quality, food waste, and environmental sustainability is crucial for improving long-term food security and achieving sustainable development goals.
The advancement of smart cities has brought transformation in our daily life from various aspects, one of which is the way we shop. Our Smart Recipe application shows a shopping list for the recommended recipe once the recipe is outputted. The shopping list in Smart Recipe not only enhances user convenience and efficiency but also integrates with online shopping platforms (Rakuten) and users’ preferences personalization. A shopping list could also be helpful for users’ purchasing experience and positively affect their finances. User-using experience is a significant factor in designing an application. A study conducted by Thomas and Garland in 2004 found that around 71% of over 1251 US citizens go to the grocery store at least once per week, and shopping lists contribute significantly to the efficiency of the shopping experience by reducing the time spent in stores(Thomas & Garland, 2004). Similarly, another study conducted by Block and Morwitz in 1999 showed that shopping lists could play a vital role. This study underscored that shopping lists could serve as an effective tool for enhancing memory during shopping(Block & Morwitz, 1999). It works as an external memory aid to help people remember what they need to buy. This result seems useless, but it is particularly crucial in smart cities’ fast-paced lifestyles, where time is valuable to smart cities’ citizens. In addition, this study highlighted that consumers tend to include items that offer discounts or coupons, and more than 80% of the things written on the shopping list are actually purchased. This indicates that shopping lists do not only serve as memory aids but are also helpful for consumers’ decision-making, and this would be greatly helpful for cost-saving. Shopping lists could also integrate with online shopping, which will be explained in the next section.
Block, L. G., & Morwitz, V. G. (1999). Shopping Lists as an External Memory Aid for Grocery Shopping: Influences on List Writing and List Fulfillment. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 8(4), 343–375. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp0804_01
Thomas, A., & Garland, R. (2004). Grocery shopping: List and non-list usage. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 22, 623–635. https://doi.org/10.1108/02634500410559015 https://doi.org/10.1108/02634500410559015