research on online food delivery

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Please note you do not have access to teaching notes, online food delivery research: a systematic literature review.

International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management

ISSN : 0959-6119

Article publication date: 26 May 2022

Issue publication date: 26 July 2022

Online food delivery (OFD) has witnessed momentous consumer adoption in the past few years, and COVID-19, if anything, is only accelerating its growth. This paper captures numerous intricate issues arising from the complex relationship among the stakeholders because of the enhanced scale of the OFD business. The purpose of this paper is to highlight publication trends in OFD and identify potential future research themes.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors conducted a tri-method study – systematic literature review, bibliometric and thematic content analysis – of 43 articles on OFD published in 24 journals from 2015 to 2021 (March). The authors used VOSviewer to perform citation analysis.

Systematic literature review of the existing OFD research resulted in six potential research themes. Further, thematic content analysis synthesized and categorized the literature into four knowledge clusters, namely, (i) digital mediation in OFD, (ii) dynamic OFD operations, (iii) OFD adoption by consumers and (iv) risk and trust issues in OFD. The authors also present the emerging trends in terms of the most influential articles, authors and journals.

Practical implications

This paper captures the different facets of interactions among various OFD stakeholders and highlights the intricate issues and challenges that require immediate attention from researchers and practitioners.

Originality/value

This is one of the few studies to synthesize OFD literature that sheds light on unexplored aspects of complex relationships among OFD stakeholders through four clusters and six research themes through a conceptual framework.

• Online food delivery
• Sharing economy
• Systematic literature review
• Bibliometric analysis
• Content analysis

Acknowledgements

The authors thank three anonymous reviewers, the guest editor, and the editor-in-chief for their critical and valuable comments in developing the manuscript in stages.

Shroff, A. , Shah, B.J. and Gajjar, H. (2022), "Online food delivery research: a systematic literature review", International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management , Vol. 34 No. 8, pp. 2852-2883. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-10-2021-1273

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2022, Emerald Publishing Limited

Related articles

We’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

• Open access
• Published: 16 July 2022

Investigating experiences of frequent online food delivery service use: a qualitative study in UK adults

• Matthew Keeble 1 ,
• Jean Adams 1 &
• Thomas Burgoine 1  

BMC Public Health volume  22 , Article number:  1365 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

16k Accesses

17 Citations

60 Altmetric

Metrics details

Food prepared out-of-home is typically energy-dense and nutrient-poor. This food can be purchased from multiple types of retailer, including restaurants and takeaway food outlets. Using online food delivery services to purchase food prepared out-of-home is increasing in popularity. This may lead to more frequent unhealthy food consumption, which is positively associated with poor diet and living with obesity. Understanding possible reasons for using online food delivery services might contribute to the development of future public health interventions, if deemed necessary. This knowledge would be best obtained by engaging with individuals who use online food delivery services as part of established routines. Therefore, we aimed to investigate customer experiences of using online food delivery services to understand their reasons for using them, including any advantages and drawbacks.

Methods and results

In 2020, we conducted telephone interviews with 22 adults living in the UK who had used online food delivery services on at least a monthly basis over the previous year. Through codebook thematic analysis, we generated five themes: ‘The importance of takeaway food’, ‘Less effort for more convenience’, ‘Saving money and reallocating time’, ‘Online food delivery service normalisation’ and ‘Maintained home food practices’. Two concepts were overarching throughout: ‘Place. Time. Situation.’ and ‘Perceived advantages outweigh recognised drawbacks’.

After considering each of the accessible food purchasing options within the context of their location and the time of day, participants typically selected online food delivery services. Participants reported that they did not use online food delivery services to purchase healthy food. Participants considered online food delivery service use to be a normal practice that involves little effort due to optimised purchasing processes. As a result, these services were seen to offer convenient access to food aligned with sociocultural expectations. Participants reported that this convenience was often an advantage but could be a drawback. Although participants were price-sensitive, they were willing to pay delivery fees for the opportunity to complete tasks whilst waiting for delivery. Furthermore, participants valued price-promotions and concluded that receiving them justified their online food delivery service use. Despite takeaway food consumption, participants considered home cooking to be irreplaceable.

Conclusions

Future public health interventions might seek to increase the healthiness of food available online whilst maintaining sociocultural values. Extending restrictions adopted in other food environments to online food delivery services could also be explored.

Peer Review reports

Purchasing food that is prepared out-of-home and served ready-to-consume is prevalent across the world [ 1 ]. The neighbourhood food environment includes all physically accessible food outlets where individuals can purchase and consume foods, including food prepared out-of-home (often referred to as ‘takeaway food’) [ 2 ]. An increased number of outlets selling this food in the neighbourhood food environment may have contributed to normalising its consumption [ 3 ]. Purchasing formats represent ways to buy takeaway food. Although the opportunity to purchase this food was once limited to visiting food outlets in person or placing orders directly with food outlets by phone, additional purchasing formats such as online food delivery services now exist [ 4 ]. Unlike physically accessing outlets in the neighbourhood food environment or contacting outlets by telephone before collection or delivery, online food delivery services exist within a digital food environment. On a single online platform, customers receive aggregated information about food outlets that will deliver to them based on their location. Customers then select a food outlet, and place and pay for their order. Orders are forwarded to food outlets where meals are prepared before being delivered to customers [ 5 ]. Online food delivery services have been available in the UK since around 2006. However, widespread internet and smartphone access has increased their use [ 6 ], with global online food delivery service revenue estimated at £2.9 billion in 2021 [ 7 ]. The COVID-19 pandemic may have accelerated and perpetuated market development [ 8 ].

Food sold by takeaway food outlets, and therefore available online, is typically nutrient-poor and served in portion sizes that exceed public health recommendations for energy content [ 9 , 10 ]. More frequent takeaway food consumption has been associated with poorer diet quality and elevated bodyweight over time [ 11 ]. Although it is currently unclear, using online food delivery services might lead to more frequent and higher overall takeaway food consumption. In turn, this could lead to increased risk of elevated bodyweight and associated comorbidities. Since an estimated 67% of men and 60% of women in the UK were already considered overweight or obese in 2019 [ 12 ], the possibility that using online food delivery services increases overall takeaway food consumption is a major public health concern, as recognised by the World Health Organization [ 4 , 13 , 14 ].

With respect to the neighbourhood food environment, food outlet accessibility (number) and proximity (distance to nearest), food availability (presence of variety), and attitudinal dimensions (acceptability) contribute to takeaway food purchasing practices [ 15 ]. Each of these domains apply to takeaway food access through online food delivery services. In 2019, the number of food outlets accessible through the leading online food delivery service in the UK ( Just Eat ) was 50% greater in the most deprived areas compared with the least deprived areas [ 16 ]. Furthermore, adults living in the UK with the highest number of food outlets accessible online had greater odds of any online delivery service use in the previous week compared to those with the lowest number [ 17 ]. To our knowledge, however, attitudinal dimensions of online food delivery service use have not been investigated in the public health literature. Given the complexity of takeaway food purchasing practices, there are likely to be unique and specific reasons for using online food delivery services. Understanding these reasons from the perspective of customers could contribute to more informed public health decision-making and intervention, which is important since public health interventions that include online food delivery services may be increasingly necessary as their growth in popularity continues worldwide [ 13 , 18 ].

In our study, we investigated experiences of using online food delivery services from the perspective of adults living in the UK who use them frequently. We aimed to understand their reasons for using these services, the possible advantages and drawbacks of doing so, and how they coexist with other food-related practices.

Between June and August 2020, we used semi-structured telephone interviews to study experiences of using online food delivery services from the perspective of adults living in the UK. We used the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) checklist to guide the development and reporting of our study [ 19 ].

The University of Cambridge School of the Humanities and Social Sciences Research Ethics Committee provided ethical approval (Reference: 19/220).

Methodological orientation

We used a qualitative description methodological orientation to investigate our study aims. Qualitative description has been framed as less interpretative than other approaches [ 20 ]. However, it is theoretically and epistemologically flexible and can facilitate a rich description of perspectives [ 21 ], which matched our study aims.

Participants and recruitment

We used convenience sampling to recruit adults that used online food delivery services frequently. For the purpose of our study, we defined frequent customers as those who had used online food delivery services on at least a monthly basis over the previous year. We believed this level of use would make participants well-positioned to provide their experiences of using this purchasing format within established takeaway food purchasing practices. We also based participant recruitment on reported sociodemographic characteristics of online food delivery service customers [ 22 , 23 ]. As data collection progressed, we additionally considered level of education so that our sample included frequent customers who were less highly educated (see Table 1 ).

We used two social media platforms (Twitter and Reddit) to recruit participants. Participant recruitment through social media platforms can be fast and efficient [ 24 , 25 , 26 ]. If targeted advertising is not used (as in our study), participant recruitment in this way is also typically free. In our study, participant recruitment through social media was particularly appropriate, given that our aims were related to understanding experiences of using a digital purchasing format. Twitter users can publish and re-publish information, images, videos, and links to external sites. Reddit users can publish information, images and videos, and discuss topics within focused forums known as ‘Subreddits’. For Twitter, the primary researcher (MK) published recruitment materials using his personal account and relied on existing connections to re-publish them. For Reddit, MK created an alias account (he did not have a personal account at the time of our fieldwork) and published recruitment materials in Subreddits for cities in the UK with large populations according to the 2011 UK census, those related to online food delivery services, and those that discuss topics relevant to the UK [ 27 ]. See Additional file 1 (Box A1) for a complete list of Subreddits.

Recruitment materials asked interested individuals to contact MK by email. When contacted, MK responded by email with screening questions that asked about self-reported frequency of online food delivery service use over the past year, age, and level of education. When eligibility was confirmed, MK provided information about the study by email. This information included the study aims, details about researchers involved, the offer of a £20.00 electronic high street shopping voucher, and a formal invitation to participate. After five business days with no response to the invitation, MK sent a further email. After another five business days, we classified individuals that did not respond as ‘non-respondents’.

Data collection

Before data collection.

Before starting data collection, we planned to complete a maximum of 25 interviews. We did not target data saturation. Food purchasing and consumption are highly individual and influenced by previous experiences, cultural backgrounds, and preferences [ 28 ]. Therefore, we felt that it would be difficult to conclude data saturation was achieved based on the traditional conceptualisation of no new information being reported by participants [ 29 , 30 ]. Instead, we prioritised conceptual depth and information strength. This approach was aligned with the qualitative description methodological orientation of our study [ 30 ].

We wanted to investigate experiences of using online food delivery services from before the COVID-19 pandemic, when there were no restrictions on accessing multiple purchasing formats or consuming food on the premises. Therefore, we pre-specified that we would stop data collection if it became difficult for participants to refer to the time before March 2020, which is when pandemic related travel and food outlet access restrictions were first introduced in the UK. MK piloted an initial protocol with an eligible individual to confirm this would be possible, and made amendments based on their feedback.

Before starting data collection, MK reflected on his position as a population health researcher, and his previous training and experience in qualitative research [ 31 ]. MK also reflected on his own takeaway food consumption and previous use of online food delivery services. As of June 2020, MK consumed takeaway food infrequently and had previously placed one order with an online food delivery service. Although he was not a frequent customer according to our classification, MK was familiar with online food delivery services operating in the UK. MK concluded that despite having a broad understanding about why online food delivery services might be used, he could not use his own experiences to provide detailed reasons for favouring this purchasing format over alternative options.

Throughout data collection

MK completed one-off semi-structured telephone interviews with participants at a convenient time selected by them. At the start of the interview process, MK confirmed the rationale for the study, gave participants the opportunity to ask clarifying questions and asked them to provide verbal consent. MK used a topic guide that was developed based on a priori knowledge, pilot interview feedback and previous research related to takeaway food and online food delivery services [ 22 , 32 , 33 ]. MK amended the topic guide as data collection progressed so that points not initially considered could be discussed in future interviews. Interview questions focused on reasons for using online food delivery services, the perceived advantages and drawbacks of using these services, and how using them coexisted with other purchasing formats and food-related practices (see Box A2 in Additional file 1 for the final topic guide).

Although MK completed interviews during the COVID-19 pandemic, he did not ask questions related to this period of time, and prompted participants to think about the time before March 2020 so that pre-pandemic experiences could be discussed. MK digitally recorded interview audio and made field notes to track points for discussion within the interview.

After data collection

MK immediately reflected on topics discussed, data collection progress, possible links with existing theory, and the ability of participants to think about the time before the COVID-19 pandemic. We used these post-interview reflections to help inform our decision to stop data collection.

Data analysis

A professional company transcribed interview audio verbatim. Whilst listening to the corresponding audio, MK quality assured each transcript and anonymised it. Participants did not review their transcripts.

We used codebook thematic analysis. When using this analytic approach, researchers develop a codebook based on the final topic guide used during data collection and data familiarity that is achieved by reviewing collected data [ 34 , 35 ]. Codebook thematic analysis is aligned with qualitative description methodological orientations as it allows researchers to remain ‘close to the data’ and facilitates an understanding of a topic through the ‘spoken word’ of participants [ 36 ]. In practice, MK developed an initial codebook. MK, JA, and TB then reviewed three transcripts (a 10% sample). This number was manageable and allowed us to discuss a sample of collected data [ 37 ]. After discussion, MK refined the initial codebook to collapse codes that overlapped and to add new codes, which formed the final codebook. MK coded each transcript with the final codebook and reviewed reflections written after each interview. MK then studied the coded data to generate themes that were discussed and finalised with JA and TB. In the context of our study, themes summarise experiences of using online food delivery services from the perspective of participants. After discussion, we also identified that across the themes we generated, there were overarching concepts. For our study, concepts should be seen to offer an overall and consistent structure that capture the common and overlapping elements of each of the generated themes.

MK used NVivo (version 12) to manage the data and facilitate interpretation.

Participant and data overview

MK conducted interviews with 22 frequent online food delivery service customers between June and August 2020. Interviews lasted between 35 and 61 min. There were 12 male participants, 13 participants were aged between 20 and 29 years, and 15 had completed higher education. Since initial adoption, participants had typically used online food delivery services at least fortnightly but as often as daily, and during interviews they consistently referred to using the three most well-established online food delivery services operating in the UK ( Just Eat, Deliveroo, and Uber Eats ) (see Table 2 ).

During the 19 th interview, conducted in August 2020, it was difficult for the participant to think about the time before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020. MK completed three further interviews and then concluded that this difficulty was consistent so stopped data collection. We included data from all interviews in analyses. In addition to those who took part, three interviews were scheduled but cancelled by individuals without providing a reason, and there were nine non-respondents.

Summary and structure

We generated two concepts that were overarching throughout our data: ‘Place. Time. Situation.’ and ‘Perceived advantages outweigh recognised drawbacks’. Within these overarching concepts, we generated five themes: ‘The importance of takeaway food’, ‘Less effort for more convenience’, ‘Saving money and reallocating time’, ‘Online food delivery service normalisation’ and ‘Maintained home food practices’.

In the following sections, we present the findings for each of the overarching concepts, followed by each of the themes. Whilst we discuss each concept and theme in turn, all of their elements were present throughout the data and should be thought of as dynamic, overlapping, and non-hierarchical. For example, participants consistently reflected on features of online food delivery services within the context of their location at a specific time. The conclusion of this process dictated whether a feature was viewed as an advantage or a drawback, and in some cases whether an online food delivery service would be used. We provide examples of this comparison process at the end of our Results (Table 3 ).

Overarching concepts

Place. time. situation..

Participants described how their location and the time of day impacted their ability to access different types of food, including both ‘takeaway’ food and other types of food. When choosing one type of food over another, participants had a multi-factorial thought process that considered their food at home, immediate finances available for food, and the food already eaten that day.

Although data collection focused on takeaway food, participants were clear that this type of food was not always appropriate. As participant 10 (Female: 20–29 years) stated; “ I don’t always just go and get a takeaway; sometimes I’ll walk to the shop, get some food, and make something ”. This view was shared by participant 11 (Male 30–39 years); “ some days I’ll decide that it’s too expensive and I’ll either get something else direct from the restaurant or go to the supermarket and then make food ”.

Nonetheless, participants indicated that purchasing takeaway food was preferable in many situations. For example, when acting spontaneously, when meals had not been planned or if other types of food could not satisfy needs, then takeaway food was appropriate.

“ I think you’re more likely to get delivery and order online when it’s unplanned and you need a pick-me-up, or you need something quick, or you don’t have something and you’re really hungry .” Participant 15 (Male: 40-49 years)

When participants decided to purchase takeaway food, they recognised that their location and the time of day dictated the purchasing formats they could access and potentially use. Access to multiple purchasing formats created a second decision making process. Participants considered the cuisines they wanted, delivery times estimated by online food delivery services versus the time it would take to travel to a food outlet, the weather, their willingness to leave home, and previous experience with accessible food outlets. Alongside these influential factors, choosing one purchasing format over another was often based on what was most convenient.

“ If I’m out and about, on the way home and I’m passing via an outlet, then I’ll pick it up. If I’m at home and just kind of, don’t want to leave the house, then I’ll order via an app or online, just because it’s just convenient .” Participant 2 (Male: 20-29 years)

Despite having apparently decided how they would purchase takeaway food, participants stated that they could change their mind. In the case of online food delivery services, if estimated delivery times failed to meet expectations, this purchasing format would no longer be appropriate and another purchasing format or type of food would be selected. The need for food practices to align with other routines and schedules, and therefore meet expectations, was particularly clear when participant 8 (Female: 40–49 years) described that they used online food delivery services when they could “ relax on a Friday night with the whole evening free ”. However, if they do not have time to select a food outlet, place their order, and then wait for delivery they “ normally just have some spaghetti because that takes 10 min ”.

Participants also referred to online food delivery service marketing in their day-to-day environments, including branded food outlet signs and equipment used by delivery couriers. Participants stated that these things did not always trigger immediate use of online food delivery services, however, their omnipresence reminded them that these services were available.

“ I don’t know if I ever go onto Just Eat after seeing it advertised, I don’t think that’s ever directly led me to do it. But it certainly keeps it in your mind, it’s certainly at the forefront of your mind whenever you think of takeaway .” Participant 11 (Male: 30-39 years)

Perceived advantages outweigh recognised drawbacks

Throughout the data, participants recognised that a single online food delivery service feature could be an advantage or a drawback based on their location and the time of day. This was clearest when participant 2 (Male: 20–29 years) discussed the number of food outlets accessible online compared with those available through other purchasing formats. There was value in having access to “ 20, 30, 40 food outlets ” through online food delivery services as it meant more options, otherwise “ you’re more limited just by the virtue of where you are or what shops you’re passing ”. However, access to a greater number of food outlets was a drawback when it meant that making a selection was difficult. The constant comparison of advantages and drawbacks prompted MK to ask participants why they kept using online food delivery services. There was a consensus that features of these services were unique, mostly advantageous, and outweighed the instances where they were seen as drawbacks. Since participants continued to use online food delivery services to access unique features, this practice appears to be self-reinforcing, even if this means accepting that the same feature can sometimes be a drawback.

Participants favoured online food delivery services in many situations. Nevertheless, they acknowledged that if the overall balance between advantages and drawbacks changed then they would purchase takeaway food in other ways. This solution emphasises that takeaway food can often be accessed in multiple ways dependent on place and time. As it stands, participants anticipated that they would continue to use online food delivery services indefinitely.

“ I can’t see any reason why I would [stop using online food delivery services] , unless something went wrong with Just Eat, you know, the service had a massive problem, but at the moment I can’t see any reason why I would. ” Participant 16 (Male: 20-29 years)

Analytic themes

We now present each of the five themes generated from our analyses. As described, elements of each theme overlapped within the two overarching concepts presented above.

The importance of takeaway food

Participants emphasised that, ultimately, it was “ the food ” that they valued, and that directed them towards using online food delivery services.

“ It’s the food really, that leads me to use [online food delivery service] apps .” Participant 10 (Female: 20-29 years)

Participants reported that they did not use online food delivery services with the intent of purchasing healthy food. Participants told us that they expected takeaway food to be unhealthy and that online food delivery services facilitated access to this food. This perspective influenced the types of food that participants were willing to purchase through online food delivery services. For example, pizza (seen as unhealthy) was appropriate but a salad (seen as healthy) was not. Moreover, participants recognised that if they wanted to consume healthy food, they would most likely cook for themselves.

Participants stated that takeaway food had social, cultural, and behavioural value. For many, purchasing and consuming takeaway food at the end of the working week signified the start of the weekend, which was seen as a time for relaxation and celebration. This tradition was carried forward from childhood, with Friday night referred to as “ takeaway night ”. For participants, using an online food delivery service allowed them to maintain, yet digitalise, traditions.

“ It’s always a weekend thing, besides it being a convenient, really quick way of accessing food that is filling and tastes nice, for me, it marks the end of a work week .” Participant 4 (Female: 30-39 years)

Participants reported that in some situations consuming takeaway food as a group could be a way to socialise. This was especially the case during life transitions such as leaving home to start university.

“ When you move out you’re concentrating on making friends and getting a takeaway was quite an easy way for everyone to sit down around the table and socialise and to have drinks .” Participant 14 (Female: 20-29 years)

Participants did not value online food delivery services to the same extent that they did takeaway food. This perspective reinforced that online food delivery services were primarily used to satisfy takeaway food purchasing needs.

“ If Just Eat as an entity disappeared, or all online takeaways disappeared, I wouldn’t be upset […] it’s a luxury, it makes life easier .” Participant 9 (Male: 30-39 years)

Less effort for more convenience

Participants reported that it took little effort to use online food delivery services because they receive information about all food outlets that will deliver to them on a single platform. Additionally, participants valued the opportunity to save payment details, previous orders, and favourite food outlets for future use. Participants also informed us that they had a greater number of food outlets and a more diverse range of foods and cuisines to choose from compared with other purchasing formats. Due to the number of accessible food outlets, the selection process was not always fast. Nonetheless, participants indicated that online food delivery services make purchasing takeaway food easier and more convenient than other purchasing formats where information is less readily available.

“Y ou’ve got all of the different options laid out in front of you, it’s like one resource where everything is there and you can choose and make a decision, rather than having to pull out leaflets from a drawer or Google different takeaways in the area. It’s all there and it’s all uniform and it’s in one place .” Participant 3 (Female: 20-29 years) “ I can pick through a whole wide selection rather than being limited to the few takeaways down on my road or having to drive somewhere .” Participant 21 (Male: 20-29 years)

Participants emphasised that smartphone applications had been optimised to enhance this experience.

“ I guess it’s the convenience of just being able to open the app on my phone, and not have to go searching for menus or phone numbers and checking if places are open. So yeah, it’s the convenience .” Participant 15 (Male: 40-49 years) “ For me it’s just the ease of going on, clicking what you want, paying for it and it arriving. You don’t have to move, you don’t have to cook, you don’t have to think, it’s just there ready to go, someone’s doing the hard work for you .” Participant 1 (Female: 20-29 years)

However, greater convenience was not always advantageous. Some participants were concerned that convenient and easy access to takeaway food through online food delivery services might have negative consequences for health and other things.

“ It’s quite addictive in the way that it’s just so convenient to order. I’m not making stuff fresh at home, and I’m eating unhealthier .” Participant 21 (Male: 20-29 years) “ I think it adds to a general kind of laziness that is not good for people really. If you actually got up and went for a walk to go and get this food, at least there’s a slightly positive angle there .” Participant 17 (Male: 30-39 years) “ The convenience is not necessarily a positive thing, these apps can be abused because it’s so easy to access foods .” Participant 10 (Female: 20-29 years)

Saving money and reallocating time

Participants were price-sensitive and valued the opportunity to save money. When discussing financial aspects of online food delivery service use, participants referred to special offers they had received by email or through mobile device push notifications. Participants recognised that direct discounts (e.g. 10% off), free items (e.g. free appetizers on orders over £20.00), free delivery (e.g. on orders over £30.00), or time-limited price-promotions (e.g. 40% off all orders for the next three-hours) can justify takeaway food purchasing and online food delivery service use.

“ Getting a takeaway is always a treat, every time I do it I know I shouldn’t but then basically I’m convinced to treat myself, if there’s a discount I’m much more likely to do it because I don’t feel like it’s such a waste of money .” Participant 18 (Male: 20-29 years)

Participants recognised takeaway food as a distinct food category. Nevertheless, they appreciated that that they could use online food delivery services to purchase ‘restaurant food’. Since this food is usually accompanied by a complete dining experience that online food delivery services cannot replicate, participants expected to spend less on this food purchased online compared to when they dined inside a restaurant.

“ Some restaurants deliver through Deliveroo, [places] where you can sit down and have an experience, a dining experience, well that’s different […] you might go there for the dining experience .” Participant 4 (Female: 30-39 years) “ Sometimes I’m deterred from using Uber Eats because I noticed that the restaurants increase their prices if you buy it through them rather than directly […] I don’t want to pay over £10 for a takeaway dish, whereas I would pay that if I ate at a restaurant .” Participant 3 (Female: 20-29 years)

Although participants considered the price of food when deciding which outlet to order from, they traded money for time. Participants compared the time they would spend cooking or travelling to takeaway food outlets with the time taken to place orders through online food delivery services plus the tasks they could complete whilst waiting for meal delivery. Paying a delivery fee to have the opportunity to use time that would not have otherwise been available was acceptable.

“ Yeah, it costs money but at the same time we’re getting more time with the kids, and more time to do other stuff, so it’s absolutely fine as far as I’m concerned .” Participant 9 (Male: 30-39 years)

However, some participants were unsure about the appropriateness of paying to have food delivered as it might be unfair to delivery couriers.

“ I don’t feel like it’s necessarily right to make a delivery driver drive two minutes up the road just because I can’t be bothered to go and collect something that’s not very far away .” Participant 10 (Female: 20-29 years)

Online food delivery service normalisation

Participants had positive previous experiences of using online food delivery services. These experiences influenced future custom and contributed to an overall sense that using this purchasing format was now a normal part of living in a digital society. Some participants referred to watching television online to exemplify this point.

The normalisation of using online food delivery services was particularly evident when MK prompted participants to think about the term ‘takeaway food’. Participants often referred to online food delivery services in the first instance and saw them as synonymous with takeaway food.

“ If you were to say ‘takeaway food’ I’d pull out my phone and I’d open one of the apps and say ‘okay, what should we order’, I wouldn’t say ‘oh let’s go to this road’, or ‘let’s go to that road’, I’d say ‘yeah, let’s look on the app’ .” Participant 21 (Male: 20-29 years)

For participants in our study, using online food delivery services replaced purchasing takeaway food in other ways. This perspective was linked to habitual takeaway food purchasing and sociocultural values. Participants rarely purchased takeaway food outside of set routines (for example only doing so at the weekend) because they did not think it was appropriate. As a result, participants reported that they had a limited number of opportunities to use multiple purchasing formats and thus increase their existing levels of consumption.

Maintained home food practices

Most participants were responsible for cooking at home, enjoyed doing so, and said they were competent at it. Nonetheless, cooking at home required personal effort and being “ lazy ” or “ tired ” or “ having nothing in the cupboards ” was used as a justification for using online food delivery services.

“ I cook, when I’m not using these apps I cook and prepare food for myself , it’s just on the odd occasion I might be feeling tired or want something different […] the rest of the time, I’m quite happy to cook .” Participant 10 (Female: 20-29 years)

Despite the apparent normalisation of using online food delivery services, participants did not feel that they would ever completely eliminate cooking at home. Most participants consumed home cooked food daily, whereas they consumed takeaway food less frequently. This contributed to the view that these two types of food were different. As a result, participants used online food delivery services to purchase food they could not or would not cook at home; for a break from normality, and as a “ cheat ” or “ treat ”.

Summary of findings

To our knowledge, this is the first published study in the public health literature to investigate experiences of using online food delivery services from the perspective of frequent customers.

Participants recognised that their location and the time of day meant that they could often access different types of food through multiple purchasing formats, at the same time. Participants stated that purchasing takeaway food was appropriate in many situations and typically favoured using online food delivery services. For many participants, using these services was now part of routines in their increasingly digital lives. As such, using online food delivery services appeared to be synonymous with takeaway food purchasing. This meant that participants expected food sold online to be unhealthy and that it was inappropriate to purchase healthy food in this manner. Participants consistently thought about how features of online food delivery services were an advantage or a drawback within the context of their location at any given point in time. This was a complex and dynamic thought process. Participants described how the advantages of these services were a strong enough reason to continue use, overcoming drawbacks such as the acknowledged unhealthfulness of takeaway food. Participants reported that using online food delivery services involved little effort as they were provided with food outlet information, menus, and payment facilities on one platform that had been optimised for use. Moreover, although the cost of food was an important consideration for participants, they were willing to pay a fee in exchange for the opportunity to complete tasks whilst waiting for meal preparation and delivery. Finally, using online food delivery services substituted purchasing takeaway food in other ways. Nevertheless, participants reported that cooking at home was a distinct food practice that occurred more frequently and was irreplaceable.

Interpretations

Participants described sociocultural values assigned to takeaway food. These values are proposed to develop from previous experiences [ 38 , 39 ]. For our participants, purchasing takeaway food at the weekend was a traditional routine that celebrated the end of the working week. In the past, this tradition might have meant visiting food outlets in the neighbourhood food environment. However, online food delivery services are now used and favoured. Since participants reported that it was takeaway food in and of itself that was a fundamental reason for seeking out online food delivery services, it is reasonable to conclude that sociocultural values linked to this food exist, and transfer, across purchasing formats.

Food purchasing has been recognised as situational and made in the context of place and time [ 40 , 41 ], with convenience reported as a consistent consideration [ 42 ]. Participants in our study reported that takeaway food was appropriate in many situations and acknowledged that it could often be accessed through multiple purchasing formats. Using one purchasing format over another came after considering multiple factors, including the level of effort required to find a suitable food outlet and place orders. As using online food delivery services took little effort, this purchasing format was often most convenient. However, participants were clear that although their decision had seemingly been made, it could be changed, especially if an online food delivery service feature that was supposedly an advantage became a drawback. For example, if estimated delivery times were too long or delivery fees were too high an alternative option would be considered. Our findings support that the decision about if and how to purchase takeaway food is dynamic and influenced by place and time [ 32 ].

Food access has previously been summarised within the domains of availability, accessibility, affordability, accommodation, and acceptability [ 15 ]. Although Caspi and colleagues described these domains in the context of physical food access, they are applicable to digital food environments. Broadly speaking, our research investigated the ‘acceptability’ of using online food delivery services, and participants made explicit reference to the domains of food ‘accessibility’ and ‘affordability’.

For example, participants told us that one particularly valuable aspect of using online food delivery services was the ability to access a greater number of food outlets compared with other purchasing formats. This finding speaks to our previous research that found a positive association between having the highest number of food outlets accessible online and any use of online food delivery services in the previous week amongst adults living in the UK [ 17 ]. The experiences of using online food delivery services reported in the current study support the possibility that having more food outlet choice contributes to the decision to adopt, and maintain, use of these services rather than necessarily increasing the frequency in which they are used. Other features of online food delivery services, such as having information about each of the accessible food outlets on one platform, likely amplify the perceived benefit of greater food outlet access. Notably, however, access to an increased number of food outlets was not always advantageous. This finding recognises a general awareness about the negative aspects of takeaway food consumption, previously captured from the perspectives of young adults in Australia and Canada [ 38 , 43 ].

Participants also discussed how the price of food influenced their use of online food delivery services. This reflects that food affordability is a fundamental purchasing consideration [ 32 ]. Beyond this, our findings provide insight into actions that food outlets registered to accept orders online might take to attract customers. Given that online food delivery service customers can often select from multiple food outlets at the same time, food outlets might aim to compete with one another by lowering the price of food sold or by introducing price-promotions in an attempt to capitalise on customer demand. Particularly in the case of the latter, participants acknowledged the importance of price-promotions. Previous evidence shows that price-promotions contribute to unhealthy food purchasing practices [ 44 , 45 ]. Access to price-promotions through online food delivery services has not been systematically documented. However, it is possible that their availability is positively associated with the number of food outlets accessible online. Since both price-promotions and the number of food outlets accessible online appear to influence online food delivery service use, the possibility of interaction between them is concerning for overall consumption of food prepared out-of-home, and subsequently, diet quality and health.

In some cases, participants reported that they used online food delivery services because they did not have time to cook at home. A number of tasks, including household chores, work, travel, and childcare, can limit the time available for, and take priority over, home cooking [ 46 ]. Using online food delivery services (and paying associated delivery fees) instead of cooking at home allowed participants in our study to complete non-food related tasks whilst waiting for meal preparation and delivery. Due to sociocultural values and perceived ‘rules’ about how frequently takeaway food 'should' be purchased, participants did not see online food delivery services as a complete replacement for cooking at home. Nevertheless, even partial replacement has implications for diet quality and health, especially since the food available and purchased online was acknowledged as unhealthy by participants in the current study.

Possible implications for public health and future research

Participants reported that using online food delivery services had mostly substituted, not supplemented, their use of other purchasing formats. Given the perspectives of participants in our study, an increasing number of food outlets could be registering to accept orders online to supply an apparent customer demand. Further research is required to understand the extent to which customer demand is driven by food outlet accessibility, and vice versa.

Participants in our study reported that despite using online food delivery services frequently, their overall takeaway food consumption had remained the same. We do not yet know if this perception would be reflected in objective assessment of takeaway food consumption. Further research that quantifies the use of multiple purchasing formats and takeaway food consumption over time is required to understand the potential public health implications as a result of using online food delivery services. Although evidence from Australia suggests that food sold through online food delivery services tends to be energy-dense and nutrient-poor [ 47 ], this has not been established in the UK, to our knowledge. Nor does it necessarily reflect the balance of what food is purchased. Objective assessment of the nutritional quality of foods available, and purchased, through online food delivery services in the UK could be the focus of future research. This evidence will help to better understand the extent to which public health concern is warranted.

With a few exceptions, food sold through online food delivery services is prepared in food outlets that are also physically accessible in the neighbourhood food environment [ 13 ]. From a public health perspective, this reinforces the intrinsic link between neighbourhood and digital food environments [ 48 ]. Therefore, public health interventions adopted in the neighbourhood food environment may also influence the digital food environment. For example, urban planning policies have been adopted to prevent new takeaway food outlets from opening in neighbourhoods [ 49 ]. By extension, this stops new food outlets from becoming accessible online. Other public health interventions that operate synergistically between physical and digital food environments might be increasingly required in the future. It will also be vital for any future interventions to consider how the geographical coverage of online food delivery services expands neighbourhood food outlet access [ 50 ], potentially undermining the effectiveness of interventions adopted in the neighbourhood food environment. Doing so would help address concerns that these services increase access to food prepared out-of-home [ 4 , 13 ]. Interventions of this nature could be particularly important in more deprived areas that have the highest number of accessible food outlets across multiple purchasing formats [ 16 , 51 ].

Participants recognised that online food delivery services provide access to takeaway food that was associated with being unhealthy. Participants were aware that they could purchase healthy food through online food delivery services, but this did not mean that they would . From a public health perspective, this finding indicates that the success of interventions intended to promote healthier takeaway food purchasing through online food delivery services might be limited by existing sociocultural values if they are not taken into consideration. A possible way to navigate this would be to improve the nutritional quality of food available online without necessarily making any changes salient. Interventions of this nature include healthier frying practices and reduced food packaging size [ 52 , 53 ]. Although these interventions were acceptable and feasible when implemented inside takeaway food outlets [ 54 ], further investigation is required to understand the extent to which they are appropriate in the context of online food delivery services. Changing the types of food available to purchase through online food delivery services could also lead to improved food access for those with limited kitchen facilities at home or limited mobility.

Public health interventions intended specifically for online food delivery services could also be developed. Potential approaches include preferential placement of healthy menu items, introducing calorie labelling and offering healthier food swaps. Embedding these approaches within existing online food delivery service infrastructures would allow implementation to be uniform [ 55 ], and their implementation could be optimised to enhance customer awareness and interaction. The potential success of approaches of this nature requires exploration. Nevertheless, in February 2022, the UK Behavioural Insights Team (formerly of the UK Government) published a protocol to investigate approaches to promoting the purchase of lower energy density foods through a simulated online food delivery service platform [ 56 ].

Price-promotions influenced and justified the use of online food delivery services. Legislation to restrict the use of volume-based price-promotions (e.g. buy-one-get-one-free, 50% extra free) on less healthy pre-packaged food sold both in-store and online were due to be introduced in England in October 2022 [ 57 ]. However, the introduction of this legislation has now been delayed. Although hot food served ready-to-consume was due to be excluded, given what is known about the impact of price-promotions on purchasing other food [ 58 ], and our participants’ description of the importance of price-promotions on their purchasing practices, extension of these restrictions to hot food served ready-to-consume might be warranted. Understanding how price-promotions influence food purchased from online food delivery services represents a first step to understand the need for future regulation.

Limitations

We recruited participants through two social media platforms, which means that our study sample was formed from a subset of all social media users. However, online recruitment was appropriate since we wanted to understand experiences of using a digital purchasing format. Moreover, the participants we recruited were mostly highly educated, potentially reflecting reported online food delivery service use amongst this socioeconomic group [ 22 , 23 ]. After 12 telephone interviews we acknowledged this and adjusted our recruitment strategy to ensure a more balanced sample with respect to level of education. Nevertheless, future research should explore the perspectives of frequent online food delivery service customers with lower levels of education, since it is possible that they have different reasons for using these services. Although we did not recruit infrequent online food delivery service customers or non-customers, they would not have been well-positioned to help us investigate our study aims. However, since we have described experiences of using online food delivery services from the perspective of frequent customers, future work should seek to understand perspectives of non-customers, customers who use them less frequently, and customers who use them for specific reasons.

As the first study in the public health literature to investigate frequent customer experiences of using online food delivery services, we chose a descriptive methodological orientation. Our descriptive approach meant that we did not investigate the underlying meaning of the language used by participants, however, this was not aligned with our aims. Furthermore, our descriptive methodological orientation allowed us to use codebook thematic analysis and include multiple researchers in analysis. Coding a 10% sample of interviews transcripts and discussing analytic themes would have been less appropriate with reflexive approaches to thematic analysis [ 34 , 35 , 59 ], but assisted with our interpretations.

We conducted fieldwork during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, which might have altered the recent experiences of online food delivery service use and participant perspectives. However, MK asked participants to think about the time before the COVID-19 pandemic and reflected on their ability to do so. This reflexivity is in line with established practices regarding qualitative rigour [ 20 , 60 ], and allowed us to determine when it would be most appropriate to stop fieldwork. Nonetheless, we acknowledge the possibility that food-related practices have changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, it is possible that online food delivery services are now used for different reasons, both initially and over time, and by individuals with different sociodemographic characteristics than those in our study.

We used telephone interviews with frequent online food delivery service customers to investigate experiences of using this purchasing format. We found that the context of place and time influenced if and how takeaway food would be purchased. Online food delivery services were often seen as most appropriate. In part, this was due to the opportunity to access advantages not available through other purchasing formats, such as efficient and convenient ordering processes that had been optimised for customers. Fundamentally, however, online food delivery services provide access to takeaway food, which despite being acknowledged as unhealthy, has strong sociocultural value. There was a consistent awareness that some advantages of online food delivery services may also be drawbacks. Despite this, the drawbacks were not sufficiently negative to stop current or future online food delivery service use. Finally, price-promotions justified online food delivery service use and made this practice appealing. Public health interventions that seek to promote healthier food purchasing through online food delivery services may be increasingly warranted in the future. Approaches might include increasing the healthiness of the food available whilst maintaining sociocultural values and expectations, and extending restrictions on price-promotions to hot food prepared out-of-home.

Availability of data and materials

Processed and anonymised qualitative data from this study is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Additional raw data related to this publication cannot be openly released; the raw data contains interview audio containing identifiable information.

Wellard-Cole L, Davies A, Allman-Farinelli M. Contribution of foods prepared away from home to intakes of energy and nutrients of public health concern in adults: a systematic review. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2021.1887075 .

Lake A. Neighbourhood food environments: food choice, foodscapes and planning for health. Proc Nutr Soc. 2018;77:1–8.

Article   Google Scholar  

Burningham K, Venn S. “Two quid, chicken and chips, done”: understanding what makes for young people’s sense of living well in the city through the lens of fast food consumption. Local Environ. 2021;27:1–17.

Google Scholar  

World Health Organization: Regional Office for Europe. Digital food environments: factsheet. 2021. https://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/disease-prevention/nutrition/publications/2021/digital-food-environments-factsheet-2021 . Accessed 07 Mar 2022

Granheim SI, Løvhaug AL, Terragni L, Torheim LE, Thurston M. Mapping the digital food environment: a systematic scoping review. Obes Rev. 2022;23:e13356.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Maimaiti M, Ma X, Zhao X, Jia M, Li J, Yang M, Ru Y, Yang F, Wang N, Zhu S. Multiplicity and complexity of food environment in China: full-scale field census of food outlets in a typical district. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2020;74:397–408.

Mak G. Online food ordering and delivery platforms in the UK. 2021. https://my.ibisworld.com/uk/en/industry-specialized/sp0.040/about . Accessed 08 Jan 2022.

Chang M, Green L, Cummins S. All change. Has COVID-19 transformed the way we need to plan for a healthier and more equitable food environment? URBAN DES Int. 2020;26:291–5.

Jaworowska A, Toni MB, Rachel L, Catherine T, Matthew A, Leonard S, Ian GD. Nutritional composition of takeaway food in the UK. Nutr Food Sci. 2014;44:414–30.

Robinson E, Jones A, Whitelock V, Mead BR, Haynes A. (Over)eating out at major UK restaurant chains: observational study of energy content of main meals. BMJ. 2018;363:1–8.

Pereira MA, Kartashov AI, Ebbeling CB, Van Horn L, Slattery ML, Jacobs DR Jr, Ludwig DS. Fast-food habits, weight gain, and insulin resistance (the CARDIA study): 15-year prospective analysis. Lancet. 2005;365:36–42.

NHS Digital. Health Survey for England, 2019: data tables. 2020. https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/health-survey-for-england/2019/health-survey-for-england-2019-data-tables . Accessed 07 Jan 2022.

World Health Organization: Regional Office for Europe. Slide to order: a food systems approach to meals delivery apps: WHO European Office for the prevention and control of noncommunicable diseases. 2021. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/350121 . Accessed 08 Mar 2022.

World Health Organization. WHO European Regional Obesity Report. 2022. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/353747/9789289057738-eng.pdf . Accessed 28 May 2022.

Caspi CE, Sorensen G, Subramanian SV, Kawachi I. The local food environment and diet: a systematic review. Health Place. 2012;18:1172–87.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Keeble M, Adams J, Bishop TRP, Burgoine T. Socioeconomic inequalities in food outlet access through an online food delivery service in England: a cross-sectional descriptive analysis. Appl Geogr. 2021;133:102498.

Keeble M, Adams J, Vanderlee L, Hammond D, Burgoine T. Associations between online food outlet access and online food delivery service use amongst adults in the UK: a cross-sectional analysis of linked data. BMC Public Health. 2021;21:1968.

Stephens J, Miller H, Militello L. Food delivery apps and the negative health impacts for Americans. Front Nutr. 2020;7:1–2.

Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19:349–57.

Milne J, Oberle K. Enhancing rigor in qualitative description: a case study. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2005;32:413–20.

Bradshaw C, Atkinson S, Doody O. Employing a qualitative description approach in health care research. Global Qual Nurs Res. 2017;4:1–8.

Keeble M, Adams J, Sacks G, Vanderlee L, White CM, Hammond D, Burgoine T. Use of online food delivery services to order food prepared away-from-home and associated sociodemographic characteristics: a cross-sectional, multi-country analysis. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17:5190.

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Dana LM, Hart E, McAleese A, Bastable A, Pettigrew S. Factors associated with ordering food via online meal ordering services. Public Health Nutr. 2021;24:5704–9.

O’Connor A, Jackson L, Goldsmith L, Skirton H. Can I get a retweet please? Health research recruitment and the twittersphere. J Adv Nurs. 2014;70:599–609.

Hokke S, Hackworth NJ, Bennetts SK, Nicholson JM, Keyzer P, Lucke J, Zion L, Crawford SB. Ethical considerations in using social media to engage research participants: perspectives of Australian researchers and ethics committee members. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2020;15:12-27. https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264619854629 .

Gelinas L, Pierce R, Winkler S, Cohen IG, Lynch HF, Bierer BE. Using social media as a research recruitment tool: ethical issues and recommendations. Am J Bioeth. 2017;17:3–14.

Office for National Statistics. 2011 Census: Key statistics for England and Wales: March 2011. 2011. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/2011censuskeystatisticsforenglandandwales/2012-12-11#qualifications . Accessed 20 Jan 2021.

Okumus B. A qualitative investigation of Millennials’ healthy eating behavior, food choices, and restaurant selection. Food Cult Soc. 2021;24:509–24.

Braun V, Clarke V. To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a useful concept for thematic analysis and sample-size rationales. Qual Res Sport Exerc Health. 2019;13:1–16.

Saunders B, Sim J, Kingstone T, Baker S, Waterfield J, Bartlam B, Burroughs H, Jinks C. Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Qual Quant. 2018;52:1893–907.

Keeble M, Burgoine T, White M, Summerbell C, Cummins S, Adams J. Planning and public health professionals’ experiences of using the planning system to regulate hot food takeaway outlets in England: a qualitative study. Health Place. 2021;67:102305.

Lachat C, Nago E, Verstraeten R, Roberfroid D, Van Camp J, Kolsteren P. Eating out of home and its association with dietary intake: a systematic review of the evidence. Obes Rev. 2012;13:329–46.

Article   PubMed   CAS   Google Scholar  

Janssen HG, Davies IG, Richardson LD, Stevenson L. Determinants of takeaway and fast food consumption: a narrative review. Nutr Res Rev. 2018;31:16–34.

Braun V, Clarke V. Can I use TA? Should I use TA? Should I not use TA? Comparing reflexive thematic analysis and other pattern-based qualitative analytic approaches. Couns Psychother Res. 2020;21:1–11.

Braun V, Clarke V. Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qual Res Sport Exerc Health. 2019;11:589–97.

Willis DG, Sullivan-Bolyai S, Knafl K, Cohen MZ. Distinguishing features and similarities between descriptive phenomenological and qualitative description research. West J Nurs Res. 2016;38:1185–204.

Barbour RS. Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog? BMJ. 2001;322:1115–7.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   CAS   Google Scholar  

Grunseit AC, Cook AS, Conti J, Gwizd M, Allman-Farinelli M. “Doing a good thing for myself”: a qualitative study of young adults’ strategies for reducing takeaway food consumption. BMC Public Health. 2019;19:525–37.

Neve KL, Isaacs A. How does the food environment influence people engaged in weight management? A systematic review and thematic synthesis of the qualitative literature. Obes Rev. 2021;23:1–14.

Sobal J, Bisogni CA. Constructing food choice decisions. Ann Behav Med. 2009;38:s37–46.

Devine CM. A life course perspective: understanding food choices in time, social location, and history. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2005;37:121–8.

Verain MCD, van den Puttelaar J, Zandstra EH, Lion R, de Vogel-van den Bosch J, Hoonhout HCM, Onwezen MC. Variability of food choice motives: two Dutch studies showing variation across meal moment, location and social context. Food Qual Prefer. 2021;98:1–12.

McPhail D, Chapman GE, Beagan BL. “Too much of that stuff can’t be good”: Canadian teens, morality, and fast food consumption. Soc Sci Med. 2011;73:301–7.

Riesenberg D, Backholer K, Zorbas C, Sacks G, Paix A, Marshall J, Blake MR, Bennett R, Peeters A, Cameron AJ. Price promotions by food category and product healthiness in an Australian Supermarket Chain, 2017–2018. Am J Public Health. 2019;109:1434–9.

Hawkes C. Sales promotions and food consumption. Nutr Rev. 2009;67:333–42.

Widener MJ, Ren L, Astbury CC, Smith LG, Penney TL. An exploration of how meal preparation activities relate to self-rated time pressure, stress, and health in Canada: a time use approach. SSM Popul Health. 2021;15:100818.

Partridge SR, Gibson AA, Roy R, Malloy JA, Raeside R, Jia SS, Singleton AC, Mandoh M, Todd AR, Wang T, Halim NK, Hyun K, Redfern J. Junk food on demand: a cross-sectional analysis of the nutritional quality of popular online food delivery outlets in Australia and New Zealand. Nutrients. 2020;12:3107.

Wyse R, Jackson JK, Delaney T, Grady A, Stacey F, Wolfenden L, Barnes C, McLaughlin M, Yoong SL. The effectiveness of interventions delivered using digital food environments to encourage healthy food choices: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nutrients. 2021;13:2255.

Keeble M, Burgoine T, White M, Summerbell C, Cummins S, Adams J. How does local government use the planning system to regulate hot food takeaway outlets? A census of current practice in England using document review. Health Place. 2019;57:171–8.

Brar K, Minaker LM. Geographic reach and nutritional quality of foods available from mobile online food delivery service applications: novel opportunities for retail food environment surveillance. BMC Public Health. 2021;21:458.

Maguire ER, Burgoine T, Penney TL, Forouhi NG, Monsivais P. Does exposure to the food environment differ by socioeconomic position? Comparing area-based and person-centred metrics in the Fenland Study, UK. Int J Health Geogr. 2017;16:1–14.

Hillier-Brown F, Lloyd S, Muhammad L, Summerbell C, Goffe L, Hildred N, Adams J. Feasibility and acceptability of a Takeaway Masterclass aimed at encouraging healthier cooking practices and menu options in takeaway food outlets. Public Health Nutr. 2019;22:2268–78.

Hillier-Brown FC, Summerbell CD, Moore HJ, Wrieden WL, Adams J, Abraham C, Adamson A, Araújo-Soares V, White M, Lake AA. A description of interventions promoting healthier ready-to-eat meals (to eat in, to take away, or to be delivered) sold by specific food outlets in England: a systematic mapping and evidence synthesis. BMC Public Health. 2017;17:93–110.

Bagwell S. Healthier catering initiatives in London, UK: an effective tool for encouraging healthier consumption behaviour? Crit Public Health. 2014;24:35–46.

Goffe L, Chivukula SS, Bowyer A, Bowen S, Toombs AL, Gray CM. Appetite for disruption: designing human-centred augmentations to an online food ordering platform. 34th British HCI Conference 34. 2021. p. 155–67.

Chief Scientist Office N. A multi-armed randomised controlled trial comparing the efficacy of four behavioural interventions promoting lower calorie options in a simulated online food delivery platform through product positioning. 2022. https://osf.io/bxjpt .

UK Government. Restricting promotions of products high in fat, sugar and salt by location and by price: government response to public consultation. 2020. https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/restricting-promotions-of-food-and-drink-that-is-high-in-fat-sugar-and-salt/outcome/restricting-promotions-of-products-high-in-fat-sugar-and-salt-by-location-and-by-price-government-response-to-public-consultation#references . Accessed 04 Mar 2022.

Bennett R, Zorbas C, Huse O, Peeters A, Cameron AJ, Sacks G, Backholer K. Prevalence of healthy and unhealthy food and beverage price promotions and their potential influence on shopper purchasing behaviour: a systematic review of the literature. Obes Rev. 2020;21:e12948.

Nowell LS, Norris JM, White DE, Moules NJ. Thematic analysis: striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. Int J Qual Methods. 2017;16:1609406917733847.

Krefting L. Rigor in qualitative research: the assessment of trustworthiness. Am J Occup Ther. 1991;45:214–22.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable

Matthew Keeble was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) School for Public Health Research (SPHR) [grant number PD_SPH_2015]. This work was supported by the Medical Research Council [grant number MC_UU_00006/7]. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of any of the above named funders. The funders had no role in the design of the study, or collection, analysis and interpretation of the data, or in writing the manuscript. For the purpose of open access. the author has applied a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Box 285 Institute of Metabolic Science, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK

Matthew Keeble, Jean Adams & Thomas Burgoine

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Matthew Keeble: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Jean Adams: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. Thomas Burgoine: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. The author(s) read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew Keeble .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Verbal informed consent was obtained from all respondents prior to data collection.

Data for this study were collected through telephone interviews and not in person, therefore, we opted for verbal informed consent, rather than written informed consent.

The University of Cambridge School of the Humanities and Social Sciences Research Ethics Committee provided ethical approval for this research, including the verbal consent process (Reference: 19/220). All research methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations laid out by The University of Cambridge.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1:.

Box A1. Names of Subreddits used during participant recruitment. Box A2. Final telephone interview topic guide.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Keeble, M., Adams, J. & Burgoine, T. Investigating experiences of frequent online food delivery service use: a qualitative study in UK adults. BMC Public Health 22 , 1365 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13721-9

Download citation

Received : 11 April 2022

Accepted : 27 June 2022

Published : 16 July 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13721-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Meal delivery
• Online food delivery services
• Qualitative methods
• Thematic analysis

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Modelling the significance of food delivery service quality on customer satisfaction and reuse intention

Roles Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft

Affiliation UKM—Graduate School of Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Selangor, Darul Ehsan, Malaysia

Affiliation Global Entrepreneurship Research and Innovation Centre, Universiti Malaysia Kelantan, Pengkalan Chepa, Kelantan, Malaysia

Roles Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – original draft

Roles Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – review & editing

Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected] , [email protected]

• Mengling Wu, 
• Jingzu Gao, 
• Naeem Hayat, 
• Siyu Long, 
• Qing Yang, 
• Abdullah Al Mamun

• Published: February 15, 2024
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293914
• Reader Comments

The millions-worth revenue derived from large-scale food delivery characterises the service as a relatively established phenomenon with potential growth. The current cross-sectional research examined online food delivery service quality on consumer satisfaction and reuse intention. Service quality was divided into seven categories (i.e., reliability, assurance, security, maintaining food quality, system operation, traceability, and perceived service value). Perceived service value offer the unique understanding of the online food delivery consumer satisfaction. Empirical data were elicited from 1352 valid respondents and subsequently assessed through the partial least square structural equation modelling. Findings revealed that reliability, assurance, maintaining food quality, system operation, traceability, and perceived service value could elevate customer satisfaction and optimize the intention to reuse food delivery services. Specific measures to improve service quality, including staff training, improved after-sales service, and system optimisation, were proposed to increase users’ satisfaction and intention to reuse optimally.

Citation: Wu M, Gao J, Hayat N, Long S, Yang Q, Al Mamun A (2024) Modelling the significance of food delivery service quality on customer satisfaction and reuse intention. PLoS ONE 19(2): e0293914. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293914

Editor: Thang Quyet Nguyen, HUTECH University, VIET NAM

Received: December 19, 2022; Accepted: October 23, 2023; Published: February 15, 2024

Copyright: © 2024 Wu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

The drastic shift in individuals’ food, clothing, housing and transportation habits has proved advantageous given the rapid growth of the Internet and technologies involving big data, such as online food delivery services [ 1 ]. Such extensive data-driven services cater to local lifestyles based on consumers’ needs to establish online and offline consumption scenarios, achieve a closed loop of online transactions, and fulfil offline transactions through instant delivery [ 2 ]. In this vein, customers are offered a one-stop service from demand initiation to goods acceptance. A substantial number of restaurants are currently providing food delivery services through brand-developed programmes or digital food ordering platforms (Meituan and Foodpanda) with the development of e-commerce [ 3 ]. The global online food delivery market, which was worth US$82 billion in 2018, has increased by up to 140% following the advent of COVID-19 and the subsequent imposition of multiple anti-epidemic policies and travel restrictions [ 4 ].

Online food delivery (OFD) utilises the Internet and digital information platforms as mediums to connect consumers with offline catering enterprises. The integration of this user demand-oriented service with takeout resource integration provides consumers with much food-ordering information and convenient food delivery services [ 5 ]. In expanding this novel business model, catering enterprises could offer customers unique sales and marketing channels through online ordering and digital food delivery services [ 6 ]. The emergence of online food delivery platforms that enable food orders beyond time and space inevitably transforms conventional dining. It renders convenient for consumers to fulfil their basic needs amidst hectic schedules [ 7 ]. The number of online food delivery users in China reached 521 million in December 2022 (an increase of 102 million from December 2020), accounting for 48.8% of all internet users [ 8 ]. Overall, the continued expansion of online food delivery market size, dynamic and competitive landscapes, and technological innovation application enhancements in delivery catalysed online takeaway platform development. However, it requires more understanding towards formation of online food delivery consumer satisfaction with the factors of online food delivery services that may leads to reuse of the online food delivery services.

The service quality impact on the competitiveness of the online food delivery sector proves significant as this industry primarily offers consumers meal delivery services [ 4 ]. Online food delivery service quality has gained prominence following the multitude of digital food delivery platforms to choose from and rapid industrial growth [ 7 ]. Hence, the relatively disregarded service quality in the past is an essential factor impacting customer satisfaction (SAT) and intention to reuse (ITR) OFD apps (also referred to as applications) [ 9 ]. The key determinants of online food delivery service quality should be considered to elevate customer SAT while establishing a competitive organisational edge to achieve a win-win situation for both users and companies.

Past research emphasised the factors influencing customers’ SAT and repeated use of takeaway platforms [ 10 – 12 ]. Online service providers must provide a seamless delivery of all phases, from searching and order placement to payment and delivery, given the complexities underpinning digital food delivery with multiple steps of contact [ 5 ]. Cheng et al.’s [ 4 ] review of past service quality scales categorised takeaway service quality into six dimensions, including reliability (REL), maintaining food quality (MFQ), assurance (ASE), security (SCT), system operation (SOP) and traceability (TRY); the scale failed to assess service quality from the perspective of customers’ perceived value. The perceived value (PSV) level would directly impact customers’ (service recipients) SAT towards service quality. Despite much research on the PSV-SAT link, PSV has been relatively disregarded in service quality-oriented works [ 6 ]. As such, this study utilised PSV as one of the dimensions to measure takeaway service quality, which further examined the customer service quality implications on their SAT and ITR in the takeaway industry. The extent to which (i) REL, ASE, SCT, MFQ, SOP, TRY, and PSV affected customer SAT in using takeaway platforms and whether (ii) such SAT affected consumers’ ITR were also investigated in this study, and the mediational effect of SAT between the seven dimensions of service quality and consumer ITR. The current work, which focused on a nation with well-established digital and takeout industries, i.e., China, assessed this user group for insights into the critical determinants of consumers’ ITR of takeout sites.

Literature review

Theoretical foundation.

Parasuraman et al.’s [ 13 ] SERVQUAL model, which divides service quality into five dimensions (REL, ASE, tangibility, empathy, and responsiveness), is one of the most extensively employed product or service quality assessment methods. SERVQUAL indicates more optimal service performance than customer expectations regarding the gap between clients’ service-oriented anticipations and impressions [ 13 ]. The five service quality dimensions are defined as follows: (i) REL denotes performance consistency and dependability; (ii) ASE represents employees’ expertise, courtesy and their ability to establish client trust and confidence; (iii) tangibility constitutes service providers’ physical facilities, equipment, and appearance; (iv) empathy characterises the personalised customer attention and care; (v) responsiveness implies service providers’ eagerness or preparedness to perform prompt service delivery. Parallel to past works, the SERVQUAL model is associated with or influenced customer SAT in multiple sectors [ 2 , 14 ]. In this vein, service quality plays a crucial role in the organisational competition, given the drastic rise of digital delivery platforms. The online food delivery industry attributes entail system operation, company delivery and the delivery service provided by the delivery man [ 1 ]. Consumers’ PSV should also be regarded as a relevant service quality factor and core component of service generation [ 6 ]. By integrating the SERVQUAL model with the online food delivery industry attributes, this research proposed seven dimensions: REL, ASE, SCT, MFQ, SOP, TRY, and PSV to assess service quality and examine its effect on customer SAT.

Hypotheses development

Reliability and satisfaction..

As the consistency of the final service performance and service provider commitment [ 13 ], REL in the online food delivery context denotes the deliveryman’s efficient completion of the pre-determined delivery service, such as ensuring that the goods are in good condition, the bill is accurate, and the service attitude is positive [ 15 ]. A deliveryman’s service quality, which links the delivery platform and the customer, is a crucial element that directly impacts users’ perceived quality. It is deemed convenient for delivery service platforms to communicate with consumers, earn their client’s trust, and elevate users’ SAT when the deliveryman offers high-quality and professional customer service. Likewise, Cheng et al. [ 4 ] ascertained REL as a key determinant of food delivery service quality. Past literature also demonstrated that customers who perceive higher REL with food delivery providers tend to experience high SAT levels and make repeat purchases [ 15 , 16 ]. In this regard, the following hypothesis was developed:

• H 1 : The REL positively influences customer SAT .

Assurance and satisfaction.

ASE implies customers’ confidence in utilising online platforms owing to its reputation, the items or services on sale, and clear and genuine information [ 17 ]. As the embodiment of product and service values in e-commerce and technology domains, ASE [ 18 ], in the context of online food delivery platforms, denote the degree to which a food delivery platform earns customer trust in service delivery. When a user orders from online food delivery applications, guarantees of accuracy, delivery time, and reasonable delivery fee potentially impact users’ trust in the food delivery platform and perceived ASE [ 9 ]. Generally, prompt food delivery and reasonable delivery costs serve to enhance customers’ ASE. This study proposed the following hypothesis based on Kian et al.’s [ 15 ] identification of a positive ASE-SAT relationship:

• H 2 : The ASE positively influences customer SAT .

Security and satisfaction.

The SCT denotes consumers’ sense of feeling when shopping online and cognizance that their personal information is safe from third parties [ 19 ]. Customers’ concerns about personal data leakage when using electronic platforms, specifically regarding financial issues, is one of the primary reasons deterring them from using electronic platforms amidst rapid, significant data developments [ 20 ]. Regarding business-to-customer connections, consumers highly prioritise online purchase SCT in accepting transaction-related risks [ 21 ]. To ensure privacy, individuals must frequently fill in accurate and effective delivery addresses, personal contact information, and payment information when using food delivery platforms. Data leakage could instigate loss of customer property or even personal safety. Empirically, users’ tendency to use e-service systems or applications was positively influenced by perceived security [ 20 ]. The following hypothesis was developed following Kian et al.’s [ 15 ] assertion of SCT as the key determinant of customer SAT:

• H 3 : The SCT positively influences customer SAT .

Maintaining food quality and satisfaction.

The food delivery platform’s ability to guarantee high-quality food that is unaffected by the delivery service process, such as transportation, implies MFQ [ 16 ]. Given its inevitability in the food delivery process, it is crucial to determine strategies to maintain and ensure high food quality during delivery. Prolonged delivery time and damaged packaging potentially impact the food taste. Notably, the waiting time and trial-and-error costs for online food delivery are longer and higher than for dine-in services. Consumers who complain about food delivery issues would experience low SAT levels. Following Kian et al. [ 15 ], MFQ is crucial to customers’ SAT with online food delivery services. Likewise, Al Amin et al.’s [ 22 ] study implied that consumers’ concerns about the delivered food quality would impact their product SAT and ITR of the food delivery platform. As users are prone to reuse such digital sites with high trust levels in the food quality during the delivery process, the following hypothesis was developed:

• H 4 : The MFQ positively influences customer SAT .

System operation and satisfaction.

Effective technical application operations or SOP [ 17 ] in the food delivery platform context involves search, reservation, order placement, delivery, and after-sales. Notably, SOP-oriented issues would inevitably increase the process complexities. Seamless system operations enable customers to efficiently and quickly identify desired meals and place orders, elevating customer SAT. Strzelecki and Rizun [ 19 ] indicated that seamless and convenient application systems could provide users with a better experience, such as rapid screening, product and service comparison, and suitable product or service selection to increase loyalty and trust towards the application and propensity to reuse the platform. This study proposed the following hypothesis as visual and system design and information quality significantly affect consumers’ attitudes towards online food delivery services [ 23 , 24 ] following relevant research:

• H 5 : The SOP positively influences customer SAT .

Traceability and satisfaction.

Essentially, TRY denotes the technological capacity to track and enquire about delivery progress for online food delivery [ 11 ]. TRY allows users to monitor the order delivery status in real-time, ensure smooth food delivery, protect user interests, maintain a good customer experience, and elevate their SAT [ 25 ]. For example, the TRY system enables consumers to receive information from the deliveryman through a communication platform to mitigate their anxiousness and waiting time. In this regard, TRY is one of the most pivotal factors influencing customers’ SAT with online delivery platforms [ 4 , 15 ]. Cheng et al. [ 4 ] revealed TRY as one of the indicators for users to evaluate online delivery service quality. The study also demonstrated a significant and positive influence on customer SAT. In line with Choi [ 11 ], TRY’s online food delivery system potentially enhances users’ shopping experience by rendering it more productive, enjoyable, and satisfying. Thus, the following hypothesis was developed:

• H 6 : The TRY positively influences customer SAT .

Perceived service value and satisfaction.

A customer’s overall estimation of service utility based on perceptions of what is received and supplied denotes PSV [ 26 ]. Specifically, PSV in the online food delivery context implies users’ expected benefits from the platform services. As cost and value establish customers’ perception of service value, a high PSV could encourage positive consumer attitudes and high SAT levels. Bonsón Ponte et al. [ 27 ] opined that a positive online service experience could create value for users and improve customers’ SAT. This study proposed the following hypothesis in line with Aslam et al. [ 6 ], who proved that high PSV rendered it easier for online food delivery applications to impact customers’ SAT and ITR positively:

• H 7 : The PSV positively influences customer SAT .

Satisfaction and intention to reuse.

User SAT defines consumers’ emotional state following an overall (i) product or service assessment or (ii) a cognitive assessment of perceived quality and emotional attributes induced by their consumption experiences [ 28 ]. Users would be pleased with their experience if the actual outcomes of employing food delivery service mirror or surpass their expectations. Consumers who enjoy their food delivery service experience are inclined to continue using such apps. Oliver [ 29 ] highlighted customer SAT as a primary ITR predictor. Meanwhile, Alalwan’s [ 10 ] research involving the e-SAT impacts on continued ITR in mobile food ordering apps disclosed that improved customers’ SAT promotes their ITR of food delivery services. In this vein, this study proposed the following hypothesis:

• H 8 : Customer SAT positively influences the ITR of online food delivery services .

Mediational effect of satisfaction.

Effect and consistent delivery of the services and product promote the perception of reliability for the product or services [ 1 ]. The perception of reliability among customers can harness customer satisfaction that leads to repeat purchases [ 4 ]. Assurance comes when the customer feels confident using the product and services in the e-commerce platform. Annaraud and Berezina [ 9 ] postulated that the assurance of delivery services builds the e-services users’ satisfaction. The positive assurance leads to satisfaction that can promote the reuse intention. E-services are commonly associated with customer security concerns, as customer financial and personal information data may come at risk [ 20 ]. However, the appropriate level of security measures can lead to the positive emotion of customer satisfaction. The perceived security also can enhance the reuse intention through the satisfaction achieved by the security measurements. Maintenance of food quality becomes a salient feature of food delivery services that promotes customer satisfaction [ 22 ]. However, estimating the mediating effect of satisfaction between maintaining food quality and the reuse intention for food delivery services is necessary.

Moreover, the food delivery systems require an online delivery application that empowers the users to search, place orders and receive food delivery at specified locations [ 24 ]. System operations are a necessary part of food delivery services. The operation of the food delivery system facilitates customer satisfaction, which can promote the reuse intention among food delivery users. Another significant aspect of food delivery services is the traceability of the delivery man. The food delivery customer rated the traceability of the food delivery highly and considered a food delivery services dimension that elevates customer satisfaction. However, estimating the mediating effect of customer satisfaction in the relationship between traceability and reuse intention for food delivery services is interesting. Lastly, the perception of service value positively influences customer satisfaction. A positive service experience can nurture elevated customer satisfaction that can promote the reuse intention of the food delivery services.

Therefore, the following mediational hypotheses are proposed.

H M1-7 : The relationship between the REL, ASE, SCT, MFQ, SOP, TRY and REL with ITR mediated by SAT.

All associations hypothesised above are presented in Fig 1 below:

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293914.g001

Research methodology

This quantitative cross-sectional study employed the questionnaire survey method, which was disseminated to individuals with experience using food delivery applications in China (target group). The study data were gathered from March to June 2022 using an online questionnaire collection platform (Questionnaire Star). A non-probability judgment sampling technique was chosen for scholars to select suitable respondents better. The respondent needs to answer the qualifying question that they use the food delivery application. Respondents were also required to accept the consent form to take a voluntary part in the current study. Additionally, Smart PLS modelling was incorporated for variable correlation analysis. Empirically, the sample size should not be under 200 when utilising PLS-SEM for data assessment to ensure optimal model development [ 30 ]. A total of 1325 valid questionnaires were eventually chosen for relevant data analysis upon screening the digitally-derived outcomes.

Survey instrument

The current study tool is divided into two sections: (i) demographic details (gender, age, education level, marital status, location, occupation, monthly income level, and sample screening questions) and (ii) variable measurement with a seven-point Likert scale ranging between ‘strongly disagree’ to ‘strongly agree’. All the research variables are presented as follows: REL, ASE, SCT, MFQ, SOP, TRY, PSV, SAT, and ITR. Notably, the original version of the study questionnaire, translated from English to Chinese by a professional translation agency, was subjected to a pre-test. The study items were adapted based on current research questions. Specifically, the items involved in REL, ASE, MFQ, SOP, and TRY were adapted from Cheng et al. [ 4 ], those of SCT from Cheng et al. [ 4 ] and Kumar et al. [ 31 ], PSV from Kim et al. [ 32 ], SAT from Cappelli et al., [ 33 ] and Choi [ 11 ], and ITR from Kim et al. [ 32 ] and Kang and Namkung [ 34 ]. S1 Table . Survey Instrument presents all the current study items.

Common Method Bias (CMB)

The test outcomes between structures may be biased owing to CMB when using questionnaires for data collection. Harman’s single factor is a post-hoc approach that identifies possible CMB issues [ 35 ]. The outcome derived from Harman’s single factor (45.001%) proved lower than the proposed threshold of 50%. Kock’s [ 36 ] full collinearity assessment approach was also performed in this work. Following Table 1 , the variance inflation factor (VIF) value of under 3.3 in this study implied no CMB.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293914.t001

Multivariate normality

Multivariate normality issue was assessed in this study pre-statistical analysis in line with Hair et al. [ 30 ]. The p -value of Mardia’s multivariate skewness kurtosis, below 0.05, denoted data non-normality and complemented the utilisation of SmartPLS for data evaluation.

Data analysis method

This study evaluated data using multivariate analysis, specifically structural equation modelling (SEM), a variance-based partial least squares SEM (PLS-SEM) with maximum likelihood estimation. As a means of examining the links between abstract notions that function with intricate constructions and higher degrees of abstraction, PLS-SEM generates higher construct reliability and validity that complement composite-based models, the model reliabilities were estimated with the Cronbach Alpha, composite realibility and DG rho, convergent validity was estimated average value extracted (AVE), discriminant validty postulated with the Fornell-Larcker criterion, Hetro-trait Mono-trait ratio and cross-loading [ 30 ]. The model performance criteria utilized in the study were R 2 , Q 2 and the effect size ( f 2 ), and the path analysis was estimated with the path value, t score and significance level [ 30 ].

This study utilized the transmittal strategy to estimate the mediational relationships [ 37 ]. Hair et al. [ 38 ], guidelines was employed to evaluate the mediation analysis, where the bootstrapping was performed and the confidence level for the path must be assessed. If zero doesnot come between the lower and higher values of confidence level. It suggest the presence of mediation effect of a mediator between the input and comome variable [ 37 ].

Demographic characteristics

The demographic attributes of all 1352 respondents are presented in Table 2 . Gender-wise, 705 respondents (53, 2%) are male, while the remaining 620 (46.8%) are female. In terms of age group, 367 (27.7%) respondents were under 20 years old, 484 (36.5%) were from 20 to 30 years old, 234 (17.7%) were between 31 and 40 years old, 160 (12.1%) were from 41 to 50 years old, and 80 (6%) were 51 years old and above. Regarding marital status, slightly over half of the respondents were married (51.3%), 584 (41.4%) were single, and the remaining few were either divorced (6.0%) or widowed (1.3%).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293914.t002

With regards to occupation, 33 (2.5%) of the individuals were unemployed, 173 were self-employed (13.1%), 633 were students (47.8%), 46 were housewives (3.5%), 349 were privately employed (26.3%), and 91 were government staff (6.9%). Concerning education level, a significant number of respondents held a Bachelor’s degree (45.7%), 374 (28.2%) were college graduates and below, 288 (21.7%) held a Master’s degree, and 58 (4.4%) were PhD holders or held other qualifications. Based on average monthly income, 277 (20.9) of the respondents earned under RMB1500, 464 (35%) earned from RMB 1500 to RMB 3000, 193 (14.6%) earned from RMB 3001 to RMB 4500, 167 (12.6%) earned from RMB 4501 to RMB 6000, 96 (7.2%) earned from RMB 6001 to 7500, and 128 (9.7%) earned over RMB 7500. Region-wise, most respondents hailed from East China (283, 21.4%), while other counterparts originated from different regions in China. Regarding monthly usage, 109 (8.2%) of the individuals rarely or have never used food applications before, a substantial number used them between 1 to 5 times, 373 (28.2%) between 6 to 10 times, 180 (13.6%) between 11 to 15 times, and 73 (5.5%) over 15 times.

Validity and reliability

This research validated the internal and external consistency of study constructs through Cronbach’s alpha, Dijkstra-Hensele’s rho_A , and composite reliability with a threshold value 0.7. Following Table 3 , each construct measurement in this study exceeded 0.7 and proved internally consistent. Meanwhile, the average variance extracted (AVE), which exceeded 0.5, implied convergent validity. The HTMT in this study varied between 0.360 and 0.566 (see Table 4 ), which was below the threshold value of 0.85. All the square roots of AVEs were greater than the correlation coefficients among the constructs, thus implying discriminant validity [ 39 ]. S2 Table Loading and Cross Loadings and Fig 2 present all the loading values, which exceeded 0.7 and surpassed the cross-loading values. Resultantly, the discriminant validity of all the study items was confirmed [ 30 ].

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293914.g002

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293914.t003

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293914.t004

Hypothesis testing

After obtaining the effective reliabilities and validity results for the model, the measurement estimation performed. The adjusted R 2 for the outcome variable SAT with the seven input variables (REL, ASE, SCT, MFQ, SOP, TRY and PSV) explained 30.3% of variation in SAT. The predictive relevance (Q 2 ) for this part of model was 0.269 predicting a medium predictive relevance [ 40 ]. The adjusted R 2 for the for the SAT on the ITR can described the 27.4% of variance in ITR. The predictive relevance of the part of model was 0.243, depicting a medium predictive relevance [ 40 ].

The proposed study hypotheses were tested with a bootstrapping procedure using a sample size 5000 [ 30 ]. Multicollinearity did not significantly distort PLS estimation as the VIF varied between 1.509 and 2.229, which was below the threshold value of 5 following Hair et al. [ 30 ]. Based on Table 5 , REL demonstrated a positive and statistically significant impact on customer SAT (β = 0.098, p < 0.05. Likewise, ASE (β = 0.081, p < 0.05), MFQ (β = 0.097, p < 0.05), SOP (β = 0.183, p < 0.05), TRY (β = 0.117, p < 0.05), and PSV (β = 0.142, p < 0.05) reflected a positive and statistically significant effect on SAT. Furthermore, the confidence intervals of H 1 , H 2 , H 4 , H 5 , H 6 , and H 7 did not include the value 0 between the 5% and 95% confidence intervals, supporting these hypotheses. Although perceived SCT was positively associated with SAT, the correlation was not statistically significant (β = 0.183, p < 0.05) and did not support H 3 . Lastly, customer SAT positively affected SAT (β = 0.523, p < 0.05) and supported H 8 with confidence intervals that did not contain 0.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293914.t005

Mediation analysis

The relationship between the REL and ITR was mediated by the SAT tested in the H M1 . The results (as presented in Table 6 ) revealed that satisfaction significantly mediated the relationship between reliability and intention to reuse food delivery services. It offers the support to accept the H M1 . Next, H M2 was postulated to estimate the mediating effect of SAT between the ASE and ITR. The finding suggests that the relationship between the assurance and intention to reuse is significantly mediated by satisfaction; hence, this study accept the H M2 . Subsequent, the mediation of SAT between the association of SCT and ITR was tested in H M3 . The results indicated an insignificant mediating effect in the relationship of security and the intention to reuse the food delivery services by satisfaction. Therefore, this study reject H M3 . H M4 evaluates the association between the MFQ and ITR mediated by the SAT. The analysis depicts a significant mediational effect of SAT between the association of MFQ and ITR. Hence offer support to admit the H M4 .

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293914.t006

Following, the mediation of SAT between the relationship of SOP and ITR was tested in H M5 . The results specified that a significant mediating effect of satisfaction exists between the relationship of system operation and the intention to reuse the food delivery services. Consequently, this study accept the H M5 . H M6 appraises the association between the TRY and ITR mediated by the SAT. The analysis describes the significant mediational effect of SAT on the association of TRY and ITR. Hence offer support to admit the H M6 . Lastly, H M7 investigates the mediational effect of SAT on the relationship between PSV and ITR. The findings reveal that a significant mediational effect of SAT exists between the perceived service value and intention to reuse food delivery services.

Discussions

This study aimed to determine which food delivery services reflected high customer SAT and ITR. Notably, the conceptual research model was validated by scientifically evaluating the data gathered in China. The first study outcome denoted a strong and positive REL-SAT relationship (β = 0.098, p < 0.05). In ensuring service quality, REL in the online food delivery sector enables customers to select a dependable delivery platform to place orders, food delivered in good condition, and the professionalism of the delivery staff. A customer who receives a well-packaged item from a courteous and professional deliveryman would be more inclined to experience higher service approbation and SAT levels. This finding corresponded to multiple studies, where highly dependable services tend to elevate customers’ SAT [ 4 , 15 , 16 ] and ITR of food delivery applications.

Regarding the extent to which the protection of service rights by companies and deliverymen could improve users’ SAT with the current food delivery service, the second research outcome revealed a significant and positive ASE-SAT link (β = 0.081, p < 0.05). Consumers are willing to make additional payments for food delivery services if they believe the desired food items would reach them at a reasonable price and delivery service. As a measure of whether the delivery process is up to standard, a high level of ASE significantly minimises the probability of customer complaints and improves their SAT following past literature [ 4 , 15 ]. The SCT-SAT path depicts an insignificant relationship highlighting that the online food delivery consumer still doubts the food delivery with the security concerns. The charging of higher prices and mis-use of user data remains the top concern about the online food delivery customers [ 20 ].

The fourth research outcome denoted a significant MFQ-SAT association. Essentially, MFQ significantly and positively impacted users’ SAT. Food colour and taste change with prolonged exposure post-preparation, specifically for products with high temperature and storage requirements, which inevitably affect users’ experience and SAT levels. Parallel to past works, low food quality during the delivery process would impact consumers’ PSV and induce their dissatisfaction with the food delivery service [ 4 , 41 ].

The study finding affirmed the positive and significant SOP-SAT correlation in alignment with past works [ 42 , 43 ]. An optimal SOP, the ability to select and purchase items and delivery options (time, location, and pick-up), prove critical in the online service platform. Notably, a seamless and digitalised SOP enables customers to promptly identify appropriate products and place orders in food delivery applications. Customer SAT and appeal could be maximised with such a feature, encouraging them to reuse the platform.

The next research outcome revealed that TRY’s food delivery service positively affected users’ SAT (β = 0.117, p < 0.05). Such TRY facilitates merchants, users, and platforms to share information and provide customers with optimal, reliable, and accurate information. Relevant food information could be tracked in real-time and offered to the user post-order placement for high food delivery safety, reasonable mealtime arrangements, and low customer anxiety while waiting for their food items towards improved SAT. The study findings corresponded to those of Alalwan [ 10 ] and Cheng et al. [ 4 ] in denoting the essentiality of TRY for high customer SAT.

The research outcome implied a strong and positive PSV-SAT correlation (β = 0.142, p < 0.05): the most significant latent of all the model constructs. Consumers are sensitised to emotion-related service components rather than just their rational counterparts. Hence, the users’ PSV of food delivery platforms significantly influences their SAT. In other words, high PSV induces high SAT. The PSV in earlier works, an essential indicator of customer SAT [ 6 ], paralleled the current research outcomes.

Based on the seventh study outcome, consumers’ SAT with online food delivery is a crucial factor impacting their ITR. This situation is evident in past studies involving multiple sectors [ 28 , 44 ]. Generally, highly satisfied people with the outcomes of their previous behaviours and experiences are more likely to continue doing so. This finding paralleled Alalwan’s [ 10 ] study outcome involving the positive impact of customer SAT on their ITR mobile food ordering applications.

The empirical outcomes derived from this study could not affirm the role of SCT in predicting users’ SAT. Essentially, the SCT of Chinese network platforms has rapidly developed in recent years with the steady growth of information security technology and close supervision of government departments. Additionally, the overall system of current food delivery platforms further optimised SCT. Following past literature, SCT is no longer the critical factor impacting customer SAT when the SCT level is higher, or users perceive lower SCT risks [ 45 ]. Concurrently, SCT does not appear to be a motivational factor that improves SAT but a hygiene element that guarantees it for network applications based on the two-factor theory [ 46 ].

Implications

Theoretical implications.

The current literature review highlighted limited research on food delivery service quality with complex procedures [ 10 ] (Chan & Gao, 2021). As a nation with the largest population and the world’s largest food delivery platform transaction volume, the Chinese perspective of food delivery service requires a holistic understanding. This study expanded the current body of knowledge with insights into the key determinants of optimal food delivery service implementation on local and global scales. For example, the integration of Parasuraman et al.’s [ 13 ] SERVQUAL model with the novel attributes of the food delivery industry in this study led to the incorporation of key online delivery service quality measures. These determinants are extending the SERVQUAL model (i.e., SCT, MFQ, SOP, TRY), and incorporating the PSV as additional factor that can guage the customer satisfaction in online food delivery. The model application and assessment in online food delivery platforms within a contemporary scenario are uncommon in the service business.

Additionally, the current work estimates the mediational effect of SAT among the seven factors of food delivery service quality and the intention to reuse the food delivery services. Online food delivery service realiability, assurance, maintainance of food quality, system operation, traceability and service value signifincatly mediated by the consumer satisfaction on the reuse intention of the online food delivery services. However, it is important to note that the relationship between security and reuse intention insignificantly mediated by the satisfaction. It highlights the issues of security about the food delivery as well as about the mis-handling of users data by the food delivery services. Effort must be made to effectibvely use the user data and safeguard the user identiy in all possible manner.

Practical implications

On practical and empirical grounds, the current work provided a holistic understanding of the key determinants to be considered in developing and promoting the food delivery sector. As the most influential factor in predicting SAT, the role of PSV should be duly regarded and examined to internalise customers’ overall emotional assessments of food delivery services. Marketers should allow users to feel the hospitality of food delivery services through detailed services, such as discounts or free orders for users from different age groups on special days and a sense of empathy. Such provisions could increase users’ sense of belonging to the platform. REL should be equally emphasised regarding food quality during the delivery process, from order placement to food delivery. The deliveryman’s professionalism in offering service would affect consumers’ perception of REL involving food delivery service quality. Thus, such individuals should be provided with relevant pre-job training to communicate with users from different backgrounds and regularly inspect delivery vehicles, deliverymen, and delivery boxes to ensure food hygiene during delivery.

The ASE factor should also be seriously regarded. For example, digital food delivery platforms could establish specific insurance mechanisms, which could be customised for users from different education levels, thus inducing higher ASE. Consumers who encounter (i) order timeout and product loss post-order placement and (ii) food quality issues can apply for compensation on the platform. Preferential and convenient services could also be offered to such users. These platforms should also gather feedback from these customers for high consumer SAT. In ensuring the integrity of the final delivery and food appearance to improve user SAT, MFQ is another factor that concerns users. A delivery process that results in spilling, dripping, squeezing, cooling and other mishaps could leave a bad first impression on the service recipients and induce low SAT and ITR in addition to the implications of the food taste caused by prolonged delivery time. Firstly, the distribution box’s capacity, vibration resistance, and insulation should be improved to avoid compromising the food integrity owing to adverse factors in the distribution process. Second, the platform could collaborate with merchants to provide various packaging boxes for different meal and beverage types and fulfil the multiple food package requirements. Therefore, consumers can try to maintain the same taste when they enjoy takeout as they do in a restaurant.

A seamless SOP enables customers to complete orders and successfully elevate their ITR through efficiency. Thus, food delivery platforms should simplify ordering, increase the matching degree between pictures and dish names, provide consumers with the most appealing visual experience, and optimise platform ordering systems to cater to users from different education levels. Meanwhile, TRY requires customers to track the entire order status and real-time delivery using relevant platforms. Although a significant number of existing platforms support food delivery status tracking, the food preparation process and time duration consumed by the merchants are not digitally available. The amount of meal preparation time consumed by merchants is also one of the reasons underpinning delayed food delivery despite accurate estimates and monitoring. Hence, marketers should incorporate the meal preparation time and process into the scope of online food delivery TRY and update merchants’ meal delivery progress in real-time. The ordered food items should also be visually displayed and uploaded to the system post-order completion to prevent mismatches between the order and the actual food delivered.

Conclusions

While prior research has primarily concentrated on assessing customer satisfaction with food delivery platforms and exploring the impact of certain platform-related factors on reuse behavior, this study takes a comprehensive approach by examining the various factors that influence customers’ satisfaction and intention to reuse food delivery services, specifically focusing on the quality of the service. Additionally, this study also investigates the mediating role of SAT in the relationship between these factors and ITR. The findings indicate a significant relationship between the majority of factors related to the quality of delivery service and the levels of consumer satisfaction and intention to repurchase. The comprehensive examination of REL, ASE, MFQ, SOP, TRY, and PSV has demonstrated that these factors play a crucial role in enhancing user satisfaction with food delivery services. Except for the association between SCT and ITR, SAT serves as a positive mediator for the impact of other factors on ITR. Theoretically, consider that individual perception factors play an important role in how consumers make decisions, this study introduces PSV as an extension factor of the SERVQUAL model based on the characteristics of the food delivery industry and proves that it has a positive effect on SAT and ITR. This finding offers a novel avenue of inquiry for future researchers to investigate the psychological factors related to the utilization of food delivery services. Practically, as a pioneer in the global food delivery industry, China acts as a benchmark for market growth to a certain extent. A better understanding of the factors influencing consumer behavior in the Chinese food delivery industry can not only contribute to the improvement of the overall service level of the industry but also serve as a guide for the strategic market decisions of enterprises in other countries.

Despite providing pivotal insights to understand the factors impacting Chinese consumers’ SAT and ITR involving online food delivery services, this study encountered several limitations. First, the current work was performed cross-sectionally, with primary data gathered within a specified timeframe, thus making it impossible to depict users’ attitudes and perspectives, which may change over time. Future scholars could perform longitudinal and qualitative research to explore how consumers’ SAT and ITR gradually shift. Although a sizable number of factors have been incorporated into this research, further research may consider other factors involving product diversity, personalisation and culture that may influence the satisfaction and reuse intention. The consumer level factors of economic, social psychological also helps in the formation of satisfaction and reuse intention that are necessary to study in future study. The current study findings, which only involved one country (China) in preventing potential cross-cultural bias, could be empirically compared against nations with similar characteristics for outcome optimisation and a broad spectrum of practice decisions.

Supporting information

S1 table. survey instrument..

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293914.s001

S2 Table. Loading and cross loadings.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293914.s002

S3 Table. Dataset.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293914.s003

• View Article
• Google Scholar
• 8. China Internet Network Information Center. (2023). The 51st Statistical Report on China’s Internet Development . China Internet Network Information Center(CNNIC). Retrieved June 9, 2023, from https://www.cnnic.net.cn/n4/2023/0303/c88-10757.html .
• 12. Febrianti R. A. M., Khan A. R., Alde R., Novanka R., Therawan A., & Firmanto A. (2021). Understanding Intention to Use Online Delivery Food in Go Food Application. In Review of International Geographical Education Online (Vol. 11, Issue 6, pp. 791–798). Eskisehir Osmangazi University. https://doi.org/10.48047/rigeo.11.06.97
• PubMed/NCBI
• 30. Hair J.F, Sarstedt M., Ringle C., M. & Gudergan S., P. (2017). Advanced Issues in Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling . SAGE Publications, Inc.

Online Food Ordering and Delivery Applications: An Empirical Study of the Factors Affecting Intention to Reuse

• Conference paper
• First Online: 28 April 2022
• Cite this conference paper

• Evangelia Ganou 3 ,
• George Karavasilis 3 ,
• Vasiliki Vrana 3 &
• Evangelos Kehris 3  

Part of the book series: Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics ((SPBE))

1133 Accesses

3 Citations

Food ordering and delivery platforms/applications is an emerging technology, widely adopted by customers, especially under COVID-19 pandemic conditions. The study aims at investigating the factors that influence users’ intention to reuse platforms/applications. For the purpose of the study, a multiple linear regression model was developed and tested. Data was collected through an online survey and analyzed using SPSS 26. The model for first time integrates variables that access both quality of platform/application and quality of services. The quality of platform/application is the most significant success factor. It seems that consumers have already been convinced about the benefits of using these platforms/applications and the quality of platform/application is their main concern. Platform and application designers should emphasize and enhance the quality of the platform/application in order to gain competitive advantage.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Alaimo, L. S., Fiore, M., & Galati, A. (2020). How the covid-19 pandemic is changing online food shopping human behaviour in Italy. Sustainability., 12 (22), 9594. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229594

Article   Google Scholar  

Amin, A. M., Arefin, M. S., Alam, Z. M., Ahammad, T., & Hoque, M. R. (2021). Using mobile food delivery applications during covid-19 pandemic: An extended model of planned behavior. Journal of Food Products Marketing, 27 (2), 105–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/10454446.2021.1906817

Alalwan, A. A. (2020). Mobile food ordering apps: An empirical study of the factors affecting customer e-satisfaction and continued intention to reuse. International Journal of Information Management, 50 , 28–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.04.008

Babi, M., & Zhao, W. (2015). Increasing the trustworthiness of collaborative applications. Encyclopedia of information science and technology (3rd ed.). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-5888-2.ch424

Bao, Z., & Zhu, Y. (2021). Why customers have the intention to reuse food delivery apps: Evidence from China. British Food Journal, Ahead-of-Print, . https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-03-2021-0205

Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1 (3), 185–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/135910457000100301

Cheung, C. M. K., & Lee, M. K. O. (2006). Understanding consumer trust in internet shopping: A multidisciplinary approach. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57 , 479–492. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20312

Cho, M., Bonn, M. A., & Li, J. (2019). Differences in perceptions about food delivery apps between single-person and multi-person households. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 77 , 108–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.06.019

Choi, J. -C. (2020). User familiarity and satisfaction with food delivery mobile apps. SAGE Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020970563

Costa, A. I. A., Schoolmeester, D., Dekker, M., & Jongen, W. M. (2007). To cook or not to cook: A means-end study of motives for choice of meal solutions. Food Quality and Preference, 18 (1), 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2005.08.003

Dazmin, D., & Ho, M. Y. (2019). The relationship between consumers’ price-saving orientation and time-saving orientation towards food delivery intermediaries (FDI) services: An exploratory study. Global Scientific Journals, 7 (2), 175–190.

Google Scholar  

Davis, F. (1980). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13 , 318–341.

Davis, F., Bagozzi, R., & Warshaw, P. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35 , 82–1003.

Del Chiappa, G. (2011). Trustworthiness of Travel 2.0 applications and their influence on tourist behaviour: an empirical investigation in Italy. In R. Law, M. Fuchs & F. Ricci (Eds.), Information and communication technologies in tourism 2011 . Vienna: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-0503-0_27

Devaraj, S., Fan, M., & Kohli, R. (2002). Antecedents of B2C channel satisfaction and preference: Validating e-commerce metrics. Information Systems Research, 13 (3), 316–333.

Dimitriadis, S., Vrana, V., Dimitriou, S., Kalaitzis, V., & Drogalas, G. (2013). Investigating customer satisfaction and service quality in academic libraries: The case of Technological Educational Institute of Central Macedonia. International Journal of Decision Sciences, Risk and Management, 5 , 48–66. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJDSRM.2013.058900

ELTRUN. (2019). Annual E-commerce survey 2018–2019. https://eltrun.org/ . Accessed 18 June 2020.

Erdem, T., Swait, J., & Louviere, J. (2002). The impact of brand credibility on consumer price sensitivity. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 19 (1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8116(01)00048-9

Goldsmith, R. E., Kim, D., Flynn, L. R., & Kim, W. M. (2005). Price sensitivity and innovativeness for fashion among Korean consumers. The Journal of Social Psychology, 145 (5), 501–508. https://doi.org/10.3200/SOCP.145.5.501-508

Hajli, M. N. (2014). A study of the impact of social media to consumers. International Journal of Marketing Research, 56 , 387–404. https://doi.org/10.2501/IJMR-2014-025

Jensen, J. M. (2012). Shopping orientation and online travel shopping: The role of travel experience. International Journal of Tourism Research, 14 (1), 56–70. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.835

Julious, S. (2005). Sample size of 12 per group rule of thumb for a pilot study. Pharmaceutical Statistics, 4 , 287–291. https://doi.org/10.1002/pst.185

Karavasilis, I., Vrana, V., & Zafiropoulos, K. (2016). An extended model of e-government adoption by civil servants in Greece. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 12 (1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJEGR.2016010101

Kim, S., Lee, K., & Lee, Y. (2018). Selection attributes of home meal replacement by food-related lifestyles of single-person households in South Korea. Food Quality and Preference, 66 , 44–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.01.004

Kim, J., & Yoo, S. (2021). Perceived health problems of young single-person households in housing poverty living in Seoul, South Korea: A qualitative study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18 (3), 1067. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18031067

Kumar, S., & Shah, A. (2021). Revisiting food delivery apps during COVID-19 pandemic? Investigating the role of emotions. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 62 , 102595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102595

Li, C., Mirosa, M., & Bremer, P. (2020). Review of online food delivery platforms and their impacts on sustainability. Sustainability, 12 (14), 5528. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12145528

Medeiros, N., Ivaki, N., Costa, P., & Vieira, M. (2017). Towards an approach for trustworthiness assessment of software as a service. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Edge Computing (EDGE) (p. 220ś223). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEE.EDGE.2017.39

Mohammad, R. M., & AbuMansour, H. Y. (2017). An intelligent model for trustworthiness evaluation in semantic web applications. In 2017 8th International Conference on Information and Communication Systems (ICICS), 2017 (pp. 362–367). https://doi.org/10.1109/IACS.2017.7921999

Muhamad, M. B., Hartono, M. A. B. R., Azizi, M. I. B. F., Jamaludin, N. A. B., & Muslim, N. A. B. M. (2020). A study of consumer’s perception towards online food delivery apps. International Journal of Entrepreneurship, Organization and Business, 2 (1), 1–13.

Lee, S. W., Sung, H. J., & Jeon, H. M. (2019). Determinants of continuous intention on food delivery apps: Extending UTAUT2 with information quality. Sustainability, 11 (11), 3141. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113141

Lockhart, J. W. (2021). Food and beverage industry trends 2021. https://www.shopify.com/enterprise/food-and-beverage-industry-trends . Accessed 29 June 2021.

Natarajan, T., Balasubramanian, S. A., & Kasilingam, D. L. (2017). Understanding the intention to use mobile shopping applications and its influence on price sensitivity. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 37 , 8–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.02.010

Pavlou, P., Liang, H., & Xue, Y. (2007). Understanding and mitigating uncertainty in online exchange relationships: A principal-agent perspective. MIS Quarterly, 31 (1), 105–136. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148783

Pavlou, Y., & Georgiou, N. (2021). How Covid-19 changed food shopping and consumption, creating new delivery models. https://www.capgemini.com/gb-en/2021/02/covid-19-impact-on-online-food-delivery-services/ . Accessed 14 July 2021.

Prabowo, G. T., & Nugroho, A. (2018). Factors that influence the attitude and behavioral intention of indonesian users toward online food delivery service by the go–food application. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Business and Management Research (ICBMR 2018) . https://doi.org/10.2991/icbmr-18.2019.34

Reddy, C. S., & Aradhya, G. B. (2020). Driving forces for the success of food ordering and delivery apps: A descriptive study

Ribeiro, C. J. (2018). Technology at the table: An overview of Food Delivery Apps. Master Thesis. Universidade Catσlica Portuguesa, Portugal.

Roy, R., Rabbanee, F. K., & Sharma, P. (2016). Antecedents, outcomes, and mediating role of internal reference prices in pay-what-you-want (PWYW) pricing. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 34 (1), 117–136. https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-08-2015-0157

Schaefer, M. (2021). Five trends driving the era of food on demand. https://www.researchworld.com/five-trends-driving-the-era-of-food-on-demand/ . Accessed 29 June 2021.

Song, Y. A., Jeon, S. H., & Jeon, M. S. (2017). The effect of mobile food delivery application usage factors on customer satisfaction and intention to reuse. Culinary Science & Hospitality Research., 23 (1), 37–47. https://doi.org/10.20878/cshr.2017.23.1.005

Srajal, J., Stafard, A., & Ajay, P. (2019). A study of food-based mobile applications: With special reference to youngsters of Indore city. Journal of Information and Computational Science, 13 (2), 7–14.

Suhartanto, B., Ali, M. H., Tan, K. H., Sjahroeddin, F., & Kusdibyo, L. (2019). Loyalty toward online food delivery service: The role of e-service quality and food quality. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 22 (1), 81–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/15378020.2018.1546076

Theocharidis, A. I., Argyropoulou, M., Karavasilis, G., Vrana, V., & Kehris, E. (2020). An approach towards investigating factors affecting intention to book a hotel room through social media. Sustainability, 12 (21), 897.

Toma, C. (2010). Perceptions of trustworthiness online: The role of visual and textual information. In CSCW ‘10: Proceedings of the 2010 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 13–22). https://doi.org/10.1145/1718918.1718923

Ul Haq, I., & Awan, T. M. (2020). Impact of e-banking service quality on e-loyalty in pandemic times through interplay of e-satisfaction". Vilakshan - XIMB Journal of Management, 17 (1/2), 39–55. https://doi.org/10.1108/XJM-07-2020-0039

Ursavas, O. M. (2013). Reconsidering the role of attitude in the TAM: An answer to Teo (2009) and Nistor and Heymann (2010), and Lopez-Bonilla and Lopez-Bonilla (2011). BJET, 2013 (4), E22–E25.

Wang, Y. S. (2008). Assessing e-commerce systems success: A respecification and validation of the DeLone and McLean model of IS success. Information Systems Journal, 18 (5), 529–557. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2007.00268.x

Winnie, P.-M.W. (2014). The impact of trustworthiness and customer e-loyalty and e-satisfaction. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences., 4 (3), 390–408. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v4-i3/718

Wu, S. (2003). The relationship between consumer characteristics and attitude toward online shopping. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 21 (1), 37–44. https://doi.org/10.1108/0263450031045813

Yeo, V. C. S., Goh, S. K., & Rezaei, S. (2017). Consumer experiences, attitude and behavioral intention toward online food delivery (OFD) services. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 35 , 150–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.12.013

Zhuang, X., Lin, L., Zhang, R., Li, J., & He, B. (2021). e-service quality perceptions of millennials and non-millennials on O2O delivery applications.  British Food Journal , ahead-of-print https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-01-2021-0049

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the M.B.A. in Hospitality and Tourism, International Hellenic University for financial support.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

International Hellenic University, Serres, Greece

Evangelia Ganou, George Karavasilis, Vasiliki Vrana & Evangelos Kehris

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

University of West Attica, Athens, Greece

Vicky Katsoni

Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania

Andreea Claudia Şerban

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Cite this paper.

Ganou, E., Karavasilis, G., Vrana, V., Kehris, E. (2022). Online Food Ordering and Delivery Applications: An Empirical Study of the Factors Affecting Intention to Reuse. In: Katsoni, V., Şerban, A.C. (eds) Transcending Borders in Tourism Through Innovation and Cultural Heritage. Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92491-1_57

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92491-1_57

Published : 28 April 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-92490-4

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-92491-1

eBook Packages : Business and Management Business and Management (R0)

Share this paper

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Ordering in: The rapid evolution of food delivery

How the world eats is changing dramatically. A little under two decades ago, restaurant-quality meal delivery was still largely limited to foods such as pizza and Chinese. Nowadays, food delivery has become a global market worth more than $150 billion, having more than tripled since 2017. In the United States, the market has more than doubled during the COVID-19 pandemic, following healthy historical growth of 8 percent.

The advent of appealing, user-friendly apps and tech-enabled driver networks, coupled with changing consumer expectations, has unlocked ready-to-eat food delivery as a major category. Lockdowns and physical-distancing requirements early on in the pandemic gave the category an enormous boost, with delivery becoming a lifeline for the hurting restaurant industry. Moving forward, it is poised to remain a permanent fixture in the dining landscape.

Even as the food-delivery ecosystem continues to expand, its economic structure is still evolving. Considerations such as brand, real estate, operating efficiency, breadth of offerings, and changing consumer habits will determine which stakeholders win or lose as the industry develops. Potential regulatory constraints, including possible changes to how drivers are compensated, will figure into the reshuffling. And while the industry has experienced explosive growth during the global pandemic, delivery platforms, with few exceptions, have remained unprofitable. As DoorDash chief operating officer Christopher Payne told the Wall Street Journal recently, “This is a cost-intensive business that is low-margin and scale driven.” 1 Preetika Rana and Heather Haddon, “DoorDash and Uber Eats are hot. They’re still not making money,” Wall Street Journal , May 28, 2021, wsj.com.

Despite such challenges, there are still major investments happening in the space, with recent fundraises, including Wolt (which raised $530 million in January 2021), REEF Technology ($700 million in November 2020), and Rebel Foods ($26.5 million in July 2020), and consolidation, including Uber’s acquisition of Postmates (for $2.65 billion in December 2020) and Just Eat Takeaway’s acquisition of Grubhub (for $7.3 billion in June 2021). Two recent IPOs—DoorDash in December 2020 and Deliveroo in March 2021—demonstrate the excitement and uncertainty still present in the sector. As the landscape shifts further in the wake of the global pandemic, new challenges, opportunities, and decision points are emerging for a complex web of players—including delivery platforms, restaurants, drivers, consumers, and other tech enablers. In parallel, the emergence of rapid delivery/quick-commerce platforms that have themselves raised significant funding, such as Getir ($550 million in June 2021) and JOKR ($170 million in July 2021), adds a new class of competitors to the fight for “share of stomach.”

Sizing the market

The most mature delivery markets worldwide—including Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States—grew twofold (in the United States) to as much as fourfold (in Australia) in 2018 and 2019 (Exhibit 1). This exponential growth continued in 2020 and early 2021 to the point where these markets are now four to seven times larger than they were in 2018. 2 Global food delivery trends 2018 vs. 2021 , Edison Trends, September 2021, trends.edison.tech.

Before the pandemic put thousands of establishments out of business, the US restaurant industry was growing 3 to 4 percent per year. Delivery sales were increasing at roughly twice that pace (7 to 8 percent). While population growth was a factor, the bulk of the increase came at the expense of the grocery sector, with millennials and Gen Zers preferring the convenience of prepared meals.

This trend toward convenience has grown more pronounced during the pandemic. Between March and May 2020, when lockdowns in Europe and the United States were the most severe, the food-delivery market spiked. Significantly, it has maintained that trajectory, continuing to grow throughout 2020 and into 2021.

As we move into the last quarter of 2021, with vaccinations spurring many cities to reopen even as the Delta variant becomes more prevalent, the permanent implications of the 2020 market surge should become clearer. This includes the extent to which eating habits that formed during the start of the pandemic will endure.

Emerging delivery battlegrounds

In the not-so-distant past, restaurants directly handled the limited food delivery that existed. These days, an entire ecosystem of players is involved.

The United States is one of the more complex food-delivery markets, with four active players—DoorDash, Grubhub, Postmates, and Uber Eats—at the top, each commanding certain large urban markets. As of May 2021, DoorDash prevailed in San Jose (with 77 percent of the market), Houston (56 percent), Philadelphia (51 percent), and San Antonio (51 percent). Uber’s 2020 acquisition of Postmates leveled the playing field, but only slightly. Combined, Uber Eats and Postmates led the market in Los Angeles (50 percent) and New York City (41 percent) as of May 2021 (Exhibit 2). These figures change monthly as platforms continue to vie for local markets.

As the food-delivery business continues to expand, a few key factors, from market dynamics to legal and regulatory issues, will help determine the levels of success for the various players.

Adding to this competitive environment, specialized delivery apps focusing on a single customer segment or cuisine type—such as Slice, for pizza, and HungryPanda, for Chinese—have also come to market successfully in recent years.

This pressure on traditional restaurants could be tightened further by the proliferation of “dark kitchens” (a restaurant that has no front of house for customers) and other delivery-first and delivery-only restaurant models. Since these lower-overhead businesses can afford to pay the platforms’ higher commissions, they are often featured more prominently in the platforms’ apps. They may also be able to lower the service fees placed on customers. Increasingly, a greater share of delivery volume is likely to go their way at the expense of traditional restaurants, some of which may be forced to consider whether they can afford to continue playing in the delivery space at all. At the same time, dark kitchens also present an opportunity for restaurants, which may choose to supplement their on-premises facilities with remote locations devoted exclusively to delivery.

Increasingly, a greater share of delivery volume is likely to go to dark kitchens, while some traditional restaurants may consider not playing in the delivery space at all.

• Driver compensation and benefits constitute another persistent hot-button issue . Delivery platforms rely on the gig economy, with its system of on-demand drivers offering much-needed flexibility. This model, however, is still in flux, amid an ongoing national (and international) debate about whether gig workers, particularly drivers, should be considered employees. Shifts in how independent contractors are paid, as well as what benefits they receive, could significantly shake up the economics for all major stakeholders across the marketplace.

Evolving stakeholder economics

As consumer expectations and regulations evolve over the coming years, and as emerging technologies continue to reshape the industry, the long-term economics will likely look different than they currently do. To better understand how the landscape is poised to shift, it’s helpful to delve into the economic and cultural forces affecting restaurants, food-delivery platforms, drivers, and customers.

Restaurants

Historically, restaurants have measured their profits against three basic costs: food (generally 28 to 32 percent of total costs), labor (another 28 to 32 percent), and occupancy- or real-estate-related costs (22 to 29 percent). Looking at a unit economics view of a restaurant, the business should run between 78 to 93 percent—allowing for a profit margin of between 7 to 22 percent (franchise restaurants pay additional franchise fees to corporate).

Delivery orders used to be viewed as an extra table for the restaurant, serviced by a driver instead of a waiter. Drivers were paid minimum wage by the restaurant and earned tips from customers, typically delivering several orders at a time within a set radius. Overall, delivery was intended to improve a restaurant’s revenue by increasing the utilization of its kitchen at a decent margin.

As the COVID-19 pandemic began to pose an existential threat to restaurants, delivery became a saving grace. Many restaurants that delivered through online platforms were able to grow their delivery revenue throughout 2020. Even so, their overall profits generally declined, occasionally resulting in negative margins (Exhibit 3). This trend may have been accelerated by dining restrictions imposed during the pandemic, but the gap between delivery-fueled revenue spikes and profit declines was already an underlying issue.

Realistically, restaurants’ traditional profit margins of 7 to 22 percent make covering the platforms’ delivery commissions, roughly 15 to 30 percent, unsustainable as delivery orders become a larger part of a restaurant’s business. This is less of a problem when in-house diners, who order high-margin items such as wine and other alcoholic drinks, help cover the costs of occupancy and labor. But the business model is seriously threatened when in-house dining dwindles.

With fewer in-house diners, delivery must cover a greater share of restaurants’ fixed operating costs. If the delivery business grows to such an extent that it requires more physical kitchen space to fulfill, the fixed costs could also increase.

Increasing total sales through delivery may look like a smart way to dilute fixed costs, but restaurants that focus too much on increasing deliveries could cannibalize their in-house dining and compromise the quality of the dining experience, which could eventually reduce the base over which their fixed costs are spread.

At the same time, a booming delivery business could mean that everyone has to work harder—from the cooks to the managers to the maintenance staff. Restaurants will likely need to introduce new processes and systems to accommodate high volumes of delivery orders. Ultimately, restaurants should thoughtfully balance delivery against other parts of the business to ensure that the net impact is positive. As Exhibit 4 illustrates, a typical restaurant would have to increase its total sales significantly to stay at the same profit margin it enjoyed without delivery.

The pizza segment sheds light on how the broader restaurant industry may grapple with the delivery conundrum. Most pizza restaurants have chosen either dine-in or delivery as their primary offering and have anchored their business models around it. It would not be surprising to see restaurants in other segments of the market also deciding to specialize in the experiences they offer, with those built around the dine-in experience potentially choosing not to play in the delivery space, because of their inability to compete on margin. This would leave dark kitchens and other delivery-focused businesses to compete for delivery volume.

Learn more about our tech delivery capabilities at Build by McKinsey

Restaurants that choose to continue serving both dine-in and delivery customers will need to adapt their pricing to cover delivery’s additional costs. Those that favor pricing consistency could raise overall menu prices to cover these costs, with dine-in and pick-up customers effectively subsidizing delivery. Alternatively, restaurants could create separate, higher-priced delivery menus, as some have already done. As Chipotle Mexican Grill’s chief financial officer, Jack Hartung, told Yahoo Finance Live in early February, after a 13 percent rise in delivery-app prices was announced: “It’s no surprise that delivery comes with an added cost. Our belief has been that’s a premium experience from a convenience standpoint. We want to make sure that channel covers the cost.” 4 Brian Sozzi, “Why Chipotle just raised prices,” Yahoo Finance, February 3, 2021, yahoo.com.

Delivery platforms

The pressure is on for the platforms. Despite explosive growth, they are struggling to make a profit. And, as the Wall Street Journal has reported, these companies aren’t expected to become profitable for a number of years. 5 “DoorDash and Uber Eats are hot,” May 2021. Nonetheless, there is opportunity for upside, as platforms tap into new revenue sources and curb certain costs.

Platforms’ current economics are driven largely by fees and commissions paid by restaurants and customers, as well as delivery costs (Exhibit 5). Our analysis shows an average contribution margin of around 3 percent, or roughly $1.20 on the average order.

The cost of delivery is unlikely to decline substantially, as the economics of last-mile delivery remain challenging across sectors, particularly with increasing expectations for speed (typically, 30 minutes or less). However, new technologies (such as autonomous delivery robots), improved routing, and the ability to batch or “stack” multiple orders per delivery should help.

Another important consideration is variable marketing costs, such as advertising. With multiple high-profile players competing in the market, and as restaurants and chain brands are fragmented across platforms, the current cost of attracting customers is becoming unsustainable. As platforms are being combined through acquisition, this cost should decline. Consolidation will also give the platforms an outsize influence over which of the thousands of restaurants are seen by the customer—likely resulting in the further consolidation of volume to leading restaurants, whose brands are well positioned to play in the digital marketplace.

Delivery platforms will likely not see any significant margin growth in the restaurant space, given the economic squeeze that restaurants are already facing, as well as the increasing pressure from platform commissions. But when it comes to consumer demand, delivery platforms are still only scratching the surface. As they continue to tap into this vast pool of potential demand, platforms are poised to grow their overall volume and generate profits at scale—if they can unlock the logistics, operational requirements, and challenges of last-mile delivery.

Delivery platforms are poised to generate profits at scale if they can unlock the logistics, operational requirements, and challenges of last-mile delivery.

Already, many platforms are expanding the use cases for their logistics networks. This activity is likely to increase, with platforms improving their overall economic profiles by delivering other, higher-margin products in new categories such as alcohol, pharmaceuticals, grocery, and more. These new categories attract new customer segments, increase average order value, and allow for the stacking of deliveries to help maximize efficiency of each delivery run.

They also position the platforms to become service providers to businesses beyond restaurants. As the Wall Street Journal notes, DoorDash provides delivery services for companies including Petco, Macy’s, and Walmart. 6 “DoorDash and Uber Eats are hot,” May 2021.

Delivery drivers must complete a certain number of deliveries per hour to make the economics favorable for them. In fact, time is one of the most expensive components of single-point delivery, with the physical handoff to the customer typically taking one to five minutes. As food delivery takes off in less densely populated locations, including suburban and rural areas, the service becomes more costly to both restaurant and driver.

Would you like to learn more about our Technology, Media & Telecommunications Practice ?

As previously discussed, major changes in how independent contractors are compensated would have significant ripple effects throughout the food-delivery ecosystem. Barring such changes, pay per delivery will likely continue to decline in real terms as platforms become more efficient and facilitate more total deliveries per hour. However, with substantial increases in volume, as well as enhancements in platforms’ logistics technology, it is conceivable that overall pay per hour could rise slightly for drivers over time, as they are able to complete more deliveries per hour.

The customers fueling the surge in food delivery are paying a significant premium over the cost of their average order. If a typical meal from a fast casual restaurant is priced on a delivery platform’s menu at around $25, the customer might end up paying a total of roughly $35, excluding tax (Exhibit 6). Customers’ total costs include delivery fees ($2 to $5 per trip), driver tips (usually around 10 to 20 percent), and platform service fees (which are often offset by discounts but generally come out to around $3). Customers do not directly see the service commissions that restaurants pay platforms. Some restaurants raise their delivery-menu prices to cover this cost, while others opt for pricing consistency, spreading the markup among all customers.

Even as customers are paying a 40 percent premium on the cost of their actual meal, it is worth noting that restaurants themselves receive around only 55 percent of the total customer spend.

For much of the ongoing pandemic, many people have had few other restaurant options than to order delivery and have been willing to pay a significant premium for the service. More than a year and a half into the pandemic, a growing number of consumers (particularly those who are vaccinated) are becoming more accustomed to ongoing restrictions and more open to dining out. As dining options begin to increase, customers will likely expect more from food-delivery services, prioritizing the following features:

• speed of delivery, with a goal of under 30 minutes being a differentiator among platforms
• quality of food, with an expectation of restaurant-quality meals even after transit time
• 100 percent order accuracy and completeness, for regular items as well as special requests
• variety in cuisines and meal occasions

High population density and big-ticket orders tend to make food delivery more efficient. As the footprint and economic profile of delivery expands to meet more and varied customers, platforms and restaurants will need to figure out how to serve these different population segments—for example, customers who tend to spend less money on meals, as well as those who live in sparsely populated areas, far apart from one another and from the restaurants serving them (Exhibit 7).

Moving forward, consumers will likely see the cost of their restaurant meals increase (through additional listed fees or menu markups) in order to cover restaurants’ commission costs and driver pay. These fees and markups may eventually decrease as restaurants and delivery platforms become more efficient at scale.

In one example of a market shift that could increase customer retention while also benefiting consumers, many delivery platforms have begun offering monthly subscription services, following similar models such as Amazon Prime. With DoorDash’s DashPass, for example, or Uber Eats’ Eats Pass, customers pay a monthly fee for unlimited free deliveries. These offers reduce the cost burden for customers who order frequently and make the cost of attracting customers more worthwhile for platforms, as customers become more loyal.

New opportunities and untapped revenue pools

As the way people eat continues to evolve, new revenue pools are emerging. Tapping into them will require creativity and a willingness to overhaul operating models built for a different time. The following revenue models are among the most promising:

‘Menu engineering’

Using the data generated through delivery platforms, restaurants can build custom menus for each consumer, increasing opportunistic sales, total order value, and conversion rates. End-to-end customization helps ensure that customer preferences, such as food allergies, are taken into account for every meal and that food recommendations are more accurate.

‘Dark kitchens’

Also called ghost kitchens, dark kitchens market and produce delivery orders but have no physical restaurant or storefront attached. They take delivery out of the “front of house,” allowing restaurants to expand and experiment with minimal investment risks. REEF Technology, with its Neighborhood Kitchens concept, is among the companies offering established and upstart restaurants access to dark kitchens (among other infrastructure and services).

Subscribe to the McKinsey on Start-ups podcast

Virtual brands.

These are incremental offerings targeted at new meal occasions or cuisine types, developed to increase a restaurant’s online presence and capture a different market segment. Virtual brands can help attract new customers, improve labor efficiency, and optimize order stacking for delivery platforms. YouTuber Jimmy Donaldson (known as MrBeast) parlayed his popularity into MrBeast Burger, a virtual brand whose menu items are prepared in existing restaurant kitchens across the United States and in the United Kingdom. Man vs Fries, which started as a Bay Area pop-up, has expanded its virtual brand into several cities, including Atlanta, Miami, and Seattle.

Brand spin-offs

In a digital world, restaurants that enjoy a great deal of brand loyalty in their communities have an even greater opportunity to consolidate their position and grow their business by creating spin-offs targeting new demographics or meal occasions. Au Cheval, for example, the diner-style Chicago restaurant and bar revered for its cheeseburgers, has spawned Small Cheval, which offers a simplified menu. The potential to leverage brand equity in this way is greater with digital ordering and delivery, as consumers turn to valued brands regardless of where they are located.

Consolidation points

One of the largest costs of last-mile delivery stems from poor route optimization when making multipoint pickups and drop-offs. Partnerships with nearby restaurants could help develop a “food hall”-like online market to improve the customer experience and offer more variety. Solutions such as Toronto’s Kitchen Hub Food Hall allow customers to place a single order that includes items from multiple restaurants. Families that can’t agree on what to have for dinner can include a variety of cuisines, such as burgers, sushi, and stir-fry, on the same order.

Virtual concierge

Drivers and consumers alike stand to gain from efficiencies achieved when multiple deliveries are consolidated, or “stacked.” Virtual concierge services make this possible—for example, by having a driver pick up a customer’s dry cleaning or groceries in addition to their restaurant order. These services can also stack orders from different customers who live in the same apartment building or neighborhood. Rappi, based in Bogotá, Colombia, is an example of a multivertical delivery app that combines food delivery with other errands (through services such as RappiFavor or RappiCash), while Uber Eats and DoorDash have started exploring order stacking as part of their food offerings.

Tiny restaurants

Restaurants may want to rethink their design approach in light of the growing delivery market. Burger King, for example, recently unveiled plans for a restaurant that is 60 percent smaller than its traditional outposts, accommodating the influx of to-go orders with features such as “pickup lockers” and dedicated curbside-delivery parking spots.

Innovation in customer attraction

The evolving food-delivery ecosystem requires, and will likely reward, creativity. One potential example: combining dining and television with “taste your favorite cooking shows at home” type of offerings, in which meals are delivered so that viewers can dine at home “alongside” their favorite celebrity chefs. Rachael Ray partnered with REEF and Uber Eats in 2019 to launch her latest cookbook, offering fans in certain cities the opportunity to sample her recipes without so much as turning on their ovens. “It’s me, joining people for dinner,” said Ray. 7 Kate Krader, “With Rachael Ray, Uber Eats starts virtual celebrity restaurants,” Bloomberg, October 10, 2019, Bloomberg.com.

Check, please

Though a great number of restaurants have suffered and even closed during the COVID-19 pandemic, the surge in tech-enabled delivery has been a meaningful silver lining for many. And for homebound customers, the arrival of steaming hot curry or burritos or filet mignon—summoned with a few clicks or swipes—has been revelatory.

Going forward, the food-delivery space is poised for further expansion and evolution as the “next normal” takes shape. Restaurants will need to adapt their strategies, think carefully about how to partner with delivery platforms, and experiment with new ways of doing business. Delivery platforms will need to evolve how they leverage customer data to improve the user experience and find innovative ways to reduce the costs associated with delivery. And as investors pour money into delivery platforms, dark kitchens, new brands, and other infrastructure and services, the companies on the receiving end will face substantial pressure to live up to investors’ expectations.

As these changes in the way the world eats take hold, the implications for new and established businesses, as well as for consumers, will continue to take shape. Unlocking the opportunities inherent in these shifts will require a sophisticated understanding of where the market is heading and the powerful forces shaping its trajectory.

Kabir Ahuja is a partner in McKinsey’s London office, Vishwa Chandra is a partner in the San Francisco office, and Victoria Lord and Curtis Peens are associate partners in the Miami office.

The authors wish to thank Olamide Bada, Rob Bland, Brendan Gaffey, Sajal Kohli, and Vik Krishnan for their contributions to this article.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

The changing market for food delivery

Eating out(side): Restaurant dining in the next normal

Winning formula: How Europe’s top tech start-ups get it right

Get food delivery from the best Santa Clara restaurants

Top cuisines.

Mediterranean

Fresh Fruits

Smoothies and Juices

Asian Fusion

Cheesesteaks

Coffee and Tea

Family Combo

Frozen Yogurt

Gluten-Free

Grocery Items

Indian Chinese

Latin American

Lunch Specials

Middle Eastern

South Indian

Restaurants open now

Jack in the Box

Chick-fil-A

Ikes Love & Sandwiches

Jersey Mike's Subs

Panda Express

Mr. Pickle's Sandwich Shop

Rubio's Coastal Grill

Peanuts Deluxe Cafe

Dave’s Hot Chicken

Starbird Chicken

Taqueria La Espuela

Burger King

La Victoria Taqueria

Kakaroto Japanese Restaurant

Chicken Meets Rice

Bill's Cafe

Opa! (Campbell)

John's of Willow Glen

Habana Cuba Restaurant

bb.q Chicken

Araujo's Mexican Grill

Local Taco Loco

Banh Mi Oven (N Capitol Ave)

Holder's Country Inn/ Cupertino

Holder's Country Inn Los Altos

Taqueria El Grullo

Popular brands.

Restaurants nearby

Cities nearby, browse by category, santa clara delivery faqs, 1) how many restaurants in santa clara deliver on grubhub, 2) what are the most ordered foods in santa clara, 3) does grubhub deliver in santa clara, 4) does grubhub offer $0 delivery in santa clara, no javascript, no proble... well, actually.

Our site is delivered by JavaScript. To continue, please enable JavaScript in your browser's preferences.

Reload the  homepage

Chinese Delivery in Santa Clara

• United States
• Santa Clara
• Chinese Food

Chinese Food Delivery Near Me

Chinese food delivery in santa clara.

Enjoy Chinese Food delivery and takeaway with Uber Eats near you in Santa Clara. Browse Santa Clara restaurants serving Chinese Food nearby, place your order and enjoy! Your order will be delivered in minutes and you can track its ETA while you wait.

Find more restaurants nearby in Santa Clara .

Kettle'e

Inchin's Bamboo Garden (San Jose)

Ding's Kitchen

JX Cuisine 川魯人家

Calcutta Chaat & Chinese

Royal Cuisine

AROMA INDIAN CUISINE (82 E Santa Clara St)

Tarim Garden

Fuji Huoshao & Dumpling 福記火勺 & 水餃

Mahalo Hawaii BBQ

Hi Pot 嗨锅｜麻辣烫｜麻辣香锅

Fu King Chinese Restaurant

Neighborhood Kitchen

杨国福 YGF Malatang Noodles & Pots (Cupertino)

Ox 9 Lanzhou Hand Pulled Noodles - Valley Fair

Indian Sizzler

Panda Express (1320 El Paseo De Saratoga)

Taichi Pot Shabu Shabu (Santa Clara)

Pot & Fried Bistro

Chef Ko Chinese Cuisine

New Jade China

Beijing Restaurant

Chinese & Indian Fusion

Noodle Plus Mongolian BBQ

Lucky Chinese Bistro

Edna Ray Chinese Restaurant

Friendship BBQ-Chinese BBQ

Lee's House Chinese Food To Go

Cooking Cooking

Tasty Restaurant

小刘清粥 Taiwan Porridge - Cupertino

Sun-Ly Chinese Foods

Pearl River Chinese Restaurant - Blossom Hill Road

Chowking (1535 Landess Ave)

Paik's noodle - Santa Clara

OK Noodle - Milpitas

Hunan Mifen Saratoga

Mandarin Gourmet-San Jose

眷湘 Easterly - Santa Clara

Best Taste Restaurant

Wok's On! Express

Kusan Uyghur Cuisine

P.F. Chang's (Sunnyvale)

Asia Village Restaurant

Top Cafe - Milpitas

Ma's Restaurant

HANLIN TEA ROOM cupertino

DARDA SEAFOOD

Yeung Shing Restaurant

Mifen101 - Mountain View

Tasty Pot - Milpitas

Hong Kong Best Dim Sum

Momo King (1342 S Marry Avenue)

Fashion Wok (Sunnyvale)

Asian Street Eatery

Highland Noodles金城兰州拉面

Yum Noodles

Little Hunan Chinese Restaurant 小湖南

Old Street Chengpan Malatang

Soong Soong Chinese Restaurant

四姐 Special Noodle - Fremont

Koong's

Star Udupi Cafe

The Rice House 三禾煲仔饭.

Hunan Mifen Sunnyvale

Chick & Tea (Milpitas)

Bowl 1 Noodle

Noodleosophy – Eat Up Food Court

Noodle Talk 福牛堂私房菜

serious dumpling

Pho Saigon Noodle House

Kim Tar BBQ

Shanghai Family Restaurant

Frequently asked questions

Is chinese food delivery available near me in santa clara.

Chinese Food delivery is available with Uber Eats in Santa Clara. Since your options for Chinese Food delivery may vary depending on your location in Santa Clara, be sure to enter your address to see what’s available near you.

Where can I find the best Chinese Food delivery in Santa Clara?

The 5-star rating system exists to help you find the best of the best in Santa Clara. As you compare your options, look for the Chinese Food delivery spots that have earned a high star rating from users.

Where can I find cheap Chinese Food delivery in Santa Clara?

A single “$” is used to mark the most affordable spots for Chinese Food delivery in Santa Clara.

What’s open now for Chinese Food delivery near me in Santa Clara?

At any given time, we’ll show you on this page the Chinese Food spots that are currently available for delivery. If you’re interested in a particular place, take a look at their designated page to view their hours of operation.

How can I get free Chinese Food delivery in Santa Clara?

Become an Uber One member to enjoy $0 Delivery Fee on Uber Eats, whether you’re ordering Chinese Food or something else.

How much should I tip for Chinese Food delivery?

How much you tip the delivery person for your Chinese Food order is up to you. Keep in mind that tips are always appreciated and that 100% of the tip you leave will go to them.

How do I pay for my Chinese Food delivery order on Uber Eats?

Payment for your Chinese Food order is handled through your Uber Eats account; there’s no exchange of cash required for orders in Santa Clara.

Explore Popular Categories

Javascript disabled

Javascript is needed to run Uber Eats. You can try enabling it or visiting the website with a browser that supports Javascript.

Money blog: Major free childcare change kicks in today as parents of younger children can now apply

From today, eligible parents of children from nine-months-old in England can register for 15 free hours of childcare per week. Read this and the rest of our Weekend Money features, and leave a comment, and we'll be back with rolling personal finance and consumer news on Monday.

Sunday 12 May 2024 11:59, UK

Weekend Money

• Free childcare applications open for new age band
• 'Loud budgeting': The money-saving trend that has nothing to do with giving up your daily coffee
• What is most in-demand period property?
• £12m tea advert, downsizing, £320 tasting menus and job interview mistakes: What readers have said this week
• Where has huge week for UK economy left us?

Best of the week

• How to avoid a holiday data roaming charge (while still using the internet)
• Mortgage rates up again this week - here are the best deals on the market
• My daughter discovered undeclared £600 management fee after buying her flat - can we complain?
• Best of the Money blog - an archive

Ask a question or make a comment

From Sunday, eligible working parents of children from nine-months-old in England will be able to register for access to up to 15 free hours of government-funded childcare per week.

This will then be granted from September. 

Check if you're eligible  here  - or read on for our explainer on free childcare across the UK.

Three and four year olds

In England, all parents of children aged three and four in England can claim 15 hours of free childcare per week, for 1,140 hours (38 weeks) a year, at an approved provider.

This is a universal offer open to all.

It can be extended to 30 hours where both parents (or the sole parent) are in work, earn the weekly minimum equivalent of 16 hours at the national minimum or living wage, and have an income of less than £100,000 per year.

Two year olds

Previously, only parents in receipt of certain benefits were eligible for 15 hours of free childcare.

But, as of last month, this was extended to working parents.

This is not a universal offer, however.

A working parent must earn more than £8,670 but less than £100,000 per year. For couples, the rule applies to both parents.

Nine months old

In September, this same 15-hour offer will be extended to working parents of children aged from nine months. From 12 May, those whose children will be at least nine months old on 31 August can apply to received the 15 hours of care from September.

From September 2025

The final change to the childcare offer in England will be rolled out in September 2025, when eligible working parents of all children under the age of five will be able to claim 30 hours of free childcare a week.

In some areas of Wales, the Flying Start early years programme offers 12.5 hours of free childcare for 39 weeks, for eligible children aged two to three. The scheme is based on your postcode area, though it is currently being expanded.

All three and four-year-olds are entitled to free early education of 10 hours per week in approved settings during term time under the Welsh government's childcare offer.

Some children of this age are entitled to up to 30 hours per week of free early education and childcare over 48 weeks of the year. The hours can be split - but at least 10 need to be used on early education.

To qualify for this, each parent must earn less than £100,000 per year, be employed and earn at least the equivalent of working 16 hours a week at the national minimum wage, or be enrolled on an undergraduate, postgraduate or further education course that is at least 10 weeks in length.

All three and four-year-olds living in Scotland are entitled to at least 1,140 hours per year of free childcare, with no work or earnings requirements for parents. 

This is usually taken as 30 hours per week over term time (38 weeks), though each provider will have their own approach.

Some households can claim free childcare for two-year-olds. To be eligible you have to be claiming certain benefits such as Income Support, Jobseeker's Allowance or Universal Credit, or have a child that is in the care of their local council or living with you under a guardianship order or kinship care order.

Northern Ireland

There is no scheme for free childcare in Northern Ireland. Some other limited support is available.

Working parents can access support from UK-wide schemes such as tax credits, Universal Credit, childcare vouchers and tax-free childcare.

Aside from this, all parents of children aged three or four can apply for at least 12.5 hours a week of funded pre-school education during term time. But over 90% of three-year-olds have a funded pre-school place - and of course this is different to childcare.

What other help could I be eligible for?

Tax-free childcare  - Working parents in the UK can claim up to £500 every three months (up to £2,000 a year) for each of their children to help with childcare costs. 

If the child is disabled, the amount goes up to £1,000 every three months (up to £4,000 a year).

To claim the benefit, parents will need to open a tax-free childcare account online. For every 80p paid into the account, the government will top it up by 20p.

The scheme is available until the September after the child turns 11.

Universal credit  - Working families on universal credit can claim back up to 85% of their monthly childcare costs, as long as the care is paid for upfront. The most you can claim per month is £951 for one child or £1,630 for two or more children.

Tax credits -  People claiming working tax credit can get up to 70% of what they pay for childcare if their costs are no more than £175 per week for one child or £300 per work for multiple children.

By Jess Sharp , Money team 

Money saving trends are constantly popping up on social media - but one in particular has been gaining huge amounts of attention.

Created accidentally by a comedian, loud budgeting is breaking down the taboo of speaking about money.

The idea is based on being firmer/more vocal about your financial boundaries in social situations and setting out what you are happy to spend your money on, instead of "Keeping up with the Joneses". 

On TikTok alone, videos published under the hashtag #loudbudgeting have garnered more than 30 million views - and that figure is continuing to climb. 

We spoke to Lukas Battle - the 26-year-old who unintentionally created the trend as part of a comedy sketch. 

Based in New York, he came up with the term in a skit about the "quiet luxury" hype, which had spread online in 2023 inspired by shows like Succession. 

The term was used for humble bragging about your wealth with expensive items that were subtle in their design - for example, Gwyneth Paltrow's  £3,900 moss green wool coat from The Row, which she wore during her ski resort trial...

"I was never a big fan of the quiet luxury trend, so I just kind of switched the words and wrote 'loud budgeting is in'. I'm tired of spending money and I don't want to pretend to be rich," Lukas said. 

"That's how it started and then the TikTok comments were just obsessed with that original idea." 

This was the first time he mentioned it...

Lukas explained that it wasn't about "being poor" but about not being afraid of sharing your financial limits and "what's profitable for you personally". 

"It's not 'skip a coffee a day and you'll become a millionaire'."

While talking money has been seen as rude or taboo, he said it's something his generation is more comfortable doing. 

"I've seen more debate around the topic and I think people are really intrigued and attracted by the idea," he said. 

"It's just focusing your spending and time on things you enjoy and cutting out the things you might feel pressured to spend your money on."  

He has incorporated loud budgeting into his own life, telling his friends "it's free to go outside" and opting for cheaper dinner alternatives.

"Having the terminology and knowing it's a trend helps people understand it and there's no awkward conversation around it," he said. 

The trend has been a big hit with so-called American "finfluencers", or "financial influencers", but people in the UK have started practising it as well. 

Mia Westrap has taken up loud budgeting by embarking on a no-buy year and sharing her finances with her 11.3k TikTok followers. 

Earning roughly £2,100 a month, she spends around £1,200 on essentials, like rent, petrol and car insurance, but limits what else she can purchase. 

Clothes, fizzy drinks, beauty treatments, makeup, dinners out and train tickets are just some things on her "red list". 

The 26-year-old PHD student first came across the idea back in 2017, but decided to take up the challenge this year after realising she was living "pay check to pay check". 

She said her "biggest fear" in the beginning was that her friends wouldn't understand what she was doing, but she found loud budgeting helped. 

"I'm still trying my best to just go along with what everyone wants to do but I just won't spend money while we do it and my friends don't mind that, we don't make a big deal out of it," she said. 

So far, she has been able to save £1,700, and she said talking openly about her money has been "really helpful". 

"There's no way I could have got this far if I wasn't baring my soul to the internet about the money I have spent. It has been a really motivating factor."

Financial expert John Webb said loud budgeting has the ability to help many "feel empowered" and create a "more realistic" relationship with money.

"This is helping to normalise having open and honest conversations about finances," the consumer affair manager at Experien said. 

"It can also reduce the anxiety some might have by keeping their financial worries to themselves." 

However, he warned it's important to be cautious and to take the reality of life into consideration. 

"It could cause troubles within friendship groups if they're not on the same page as you or have different financial goals," he said.

"This challenge isn't meant to stop you from having fun, but it is designed to help people become more conscious and intentional when it comes to money, and reduce the stigma around talking about it." 

Rightmove's keyword tool shows Victorian-era houses are the most commonly searched period properties, with people drawn to their ornate designs and features.

Georgian and Edwardian-style are second and third respectively, followed by Tudor properties. Regency ranked in fifth place.

Rightmove property expert Tim Bannister said: "Home hunters continue to be captivated by the character and charm of properties that we see in period dramas.

"Victorian homes remain particularly popular, characterised by their historic charm, solid construction, and spacious interiors. You'll often find Victorian houses in some of the most desirable locations which include convenient access to schools and transport links."

Throughout the week Money blog readers have shared their thoughts on the stories we've been covering, with the most correspondence coming in on...

• A hotly contested debate on the best brand of tea
• Downsizing homes
• The cost of Michelin-starred food

Job interview mistakes

On Wednesday we reported on a new £12m ad from PG Tips in response to it falling behind rivals such as Twinings, Yorkshire Tea and Tetley....

We had lots of comments like this...

How on earth was the PG Tips advert so expensive? I prefer Tetley tea, PG Tips is never strong enough flavour for me. Shellyleppard

The reason for the sales drop with PG Tips could be because they increased the price and reduced the quantity of bags from 240 to 180 - it's obvious. Royston

And then this question which we've tried to answer below...

Why have PG Tips changed from Pyramid shape tea bags, to a square? Sam

Last year PG Tips said it was changing to a square bag that left more room for leaves to infuse, as the bags wouldn't fold over themselves.

We reported on data showing how downsizing could save you money for retirement - more than £400,000, in some regions, by swapping four beds for two.

Some of our readers shared their experiences...

We are downsizing and moving South so it's costing us £100k extra for a smaller place, all money from retirement fund. AlanNorth

Interesting read about downsizing for retirement. We recently did this to have the means to retire early at 52. However, we bought a house in the south of France for the price of a flat in our town in West Sussex. Now living the dream! OliSarah

How much should we pay for food?

Executive chef at London's two-Michelin-starred Ikoyi, Jeremy Chan, raised eyebrows when he suggested to the Money blog that Britons don't pay enough for restaurant food.

Ikoyi, the 35th best restaurant in the world, charges £320 for its tasting menu. 

"I don't think people pay enough money for food, I think we charge too little, [but] we want to always be accessible to as many people as possible, we're always trying our best to do that," he said, in a piece about his restaurant's tie up with Uber Eats... 

We had this in... 

Are they serious? That is two weeks' worth of food shopping for me, if the rich can afford this "tasting menu" then they need to be taxed even more by the government, it's just crazy! Steve T

If the rate of pay is proportionate to the vastly overpriced costs of the double Michelin star menu, I would gladly peel quail eggs for four-hour stints over continuing to be abused as a UK supply teacher. AndrewWard

Does this two-star Michelin star chef live in the real world? Who gives a toss if he stands and peels his quails eggs for four hours, and he can get the best turbot from the fishmonger fresh on a daily basis? It doesn't justify the outrageous price he is charging for his tasting menu. Topaztraveller

Chefs do make me laugh, a steak is just a steak, they don't make the meat! They just cook it like the rest of us, but we eat out because we can't be bothered cooking! StevieGrah

Finally, many of you reacted to this feature on common mistakes in job interviews...

Those 10 biggest mistakes people make in interviews is the dumbest thing I've ever read. They expect all that and they'll be offering a £25k a year job. Why wouldn't I want to know about benefits and basic sick pay? And also a limp handshake? How's that relevant to how you work? Jre90

Others brought their own tips...

Whenever I go for an interview I stick to three points: 1. Be yourself 2. Own the interview 3. Wear the clothes that match the job you are applying Kevin James Blakey

Two big economic moments dominated the news agenda in Money this week - interest rates and GDP.

As expected, the Bank of England held the base rate at 5.25% on Wednesday - but a shift in language was instructive about what may happen next.

Bank governor Andrew Bailey opened the door to a summer cut to 5%, telling reporters that an easing of rates at the next Monetary Policy Committee meeting on 20 June was neither ruled out nor a fait accompli.

More surprisingly, he suggested that rate cuts, when they start, could go deeper "than currently priced into market rates".

He refused to be drawn on what that path might look like - but markets had thought rates could bottom out at 4.5% or 4.75% this year, and potentially 3.5% or 4% next.

"To make sure that inflation stays around the 2% target - that inflation will neither be too high nor too low - it's likely that we will need to cut Bank rate over the coming quarters and make monetary policy somewhat less restrictive over the forecast period," Mr Bailey said.

You can read economics editor Ed Conway's analysis of the Bank's decision here ...

On Friday we discovered the UK is no longer in recession.

Gross domestic product (GDP) grew by 0.6% between January and March, the Office for National Statistics said.

This followed two consecutive quarters of the economy shrinking.

The data was more positive than anticipated.

"Britain is not just out of recession," wrote Conway. "It is out of recession with a bang."

The UK has seen its fastest growth since the tailend of the pandemic - and Conway picked out three other reasons for optimism.

1/ An economic growth rate of 0.6% is near enough to what economists used to call "trend growth". It's the kind of number that signifies the economy growing at more or less "normal" rates.

2/ 0.6% means the UK is, alongside Canada, the fastest-growing economy in the G7 (we've yet to hear from Japan, but economists expect its economy to contract in the first quarter).

3/ Third, it's not just gross domestic product that's up. So too is gross domestic product per head - the number you get when you divide our national income by every person in the country. After seven years without any growth, GDP per head rose by 0.4% in the first quarter.

GDP per head is a more accurate yardstick for the "feelgood factor", said Conway - perhaps meaning people will finally start to feel better off.

For more on where Friday's figures leaves us, listen to an Ian King Business Podcast special...

The Money blog is your place for consumer news, economic analysis and everything you need to know about the cost of living - bookmark news.sky.com/money .

It runs with live updates every weekday - while on Saturdays we scale back and offer you a selection of weekend reads.

Check them out this morning and we'll be back on Monday with rolling news and features.

The Money team is Emily Mee, Bhvishya Patel, Jess Sharp, Katie Williams, Brad Young and Ollie Cooper, with sub-editing by Isobel Souster. The blog is edited by Jimmy Rice.

If you've missed any of the features we've been running in Money this year, or want to check back on something you've previously seen in the blog, this archive of our most popular articles may help...

Loaves of bread have been recalled from shelves in Japan after they were found to contain the remains of a rat.

Production of the bread in Tokyo has been halted after parts of a "small animal" were found by at least two people.

Pasco Shikishima Corp, which produces the bread, said 104,000 packages have been recalled as it apologised and promised compensation.

A company representative told Sky News's US partner network, NBC News, that a "small black rat" was found in the bread. No customers were reported to have fallen ill as a result of ingesting the contaminated bread.

"We deeply apologise for the serious inconvenience and trouble this has caused to our customers, suppliers, and other concerned parties," the spokesman said.

Pasco added in a separate statement that "we will do our utmost to strengthen our quality controls so that this will never happen again. We ask for your understanding and your co-operation."

Japanese media reports said at least two people who bought the bread in the Gunma prefecture, north-west of Tokyo, complained to the company about finding a rodent in the bread.

Record levels of shoplifting appear to be declining as fewer shopkeepers reported thefts last year, new figures show. 

A survey by the Office for National Statistics shows 26% of retailers experienced customer theft in 2023, down from a record high of 28% in 2022.

This comes despite a number of reports suggesting shoplifting is becoming more frequent. 

A  separate ONS finding , which used police crime data, showed reports of shoplifting were at their highest level in 20 years in 2023, with law enforcements logging 430,000 instances of the crime.

Let's get you up to speed on the biggest business news of the past 24 hours. 

A privately owned used-car platform is circling Cazoo Group, its stricken US-listed rival, which is on the brink of administration.

Sky News has learnt that Motors.co.uk is a leading contender to acquire Cazoo's marketplace operation, which would include its brand and intellectual property assets.

The process to auction the used-car platform's constituent parts comes after it spent tens of millions of pounds on sponsorship deals in football, snooker and darts in a rapid attempt to gain market share.

The owner of British Airways has reported a sharp rise in profits amid soaring demand for trips and a fall in the cost of fuel.

International Airlines Group said its operating profit for the first three months of the year was €68m (£58.5m) - above expectations and up from €9m (£7.7m) during the same period in 2023.

The company, which also owns Aer Lingus, Iberia and Vueling, said earnings had soared thanks to strong demand, particularly over the Easter holidays.

The prospect of a strike across Tata Steel's UK operations has gained further traction after a key union secured support for industrial action.

Community, which has more than 3,000 members, said 85% voted in favour of fighting the India-owned company's plans for up to 2,800 job losses, the majority of them at the country's biggest steelworks in Port Talbot, South Wales.

Tata confirmed last month it was to press ahead with the closure of the blast furnaces at the plant, replacing them with electric arc furnaces to reduce emissions and costs.

In doing so, the company rejected an alternative plan put forward by the Community, GMB and Unite unions that, they said, would raise productivity and protect jobs across the supply chain.

Be the first to get Breaking News

Install the Sky News app for free