Misfit food market grows, but quality perceptions still hold shoppers back, study finds

Gen Xers show least willingness to buy upcycled foods, study finds

A research review published Oct. 13 finds that perceptions of quality — more than discount prices or environmental appeals — explain why American shoppers reject misshapen produce and foods made from rescued ingredients, even as grocery bills keep roughly three-quarters of U.S. consumers anxious and a retail market for rescued food expands.

The paper, by Jintao Zhang, an assistant professor of marketing at Binghamton University, State University of New York, cites a U.S. government estimate that consumers, retailers and producers throw out 30% to 40% of the food supply, ranging from misshapen produce to surplus yogurt to “best before” items pulled from shelves early. The United Nations attributes 8% to 10% of global carbon emissions to food waste.

That gap has fueled a growing rescue market. Hungry Harvest and Misfits Market, two “ugly produce” delivery companies, are rescuing and reselling food to shoppers who want to save and reduce their carbon footprint. Misfits Market alone has rescued more than 265 million pounds (about 120 million kilograms) of food since 2018 and sells it at an average discount of 35%. Too Good To Go, an app that sells surplus-food “surprise bags” at roughly one-third of retail, says it has saved more than 26 million meals, including through partnerships with more than 530 Whole Foods stores. Flashfood lists meat, dairy and produce nearing best-before dates at around half price and connects shoppers — including those on public food assistance — to those deals.

Zhang wrote that his research suggests American shoppers care less about price or environmental impact than about quality. “Even when perfectly good ‘misfit’ produce is deeply discounted, for example, many shoppers assume that the low price reflects poor quality and either walk away or reach for a fruit or vegetable they think looks better,” he wrote.

Adoption of the services is rising. According to figures cited in Zhang’s review, Too Good To Go users in the U.S. saved 8.1 million meals in the first seven months of 2025, a 67% jump from the year before. Misfits Market rescued 27 million pounds (about 12 million kilograms) in 2025, up from 23 million pounds in 2019, its first full year of operation.

Companies have learned to adjust labels accordingly. Zhang’s research found labeling misshapen produce as “ugly” reduces the cosmetic-quality bias, because the word signals that the flaw is superficial. A separate study cited in his review found that in-store messages such as “Different Outside. Same Inside” nudged shoppers to look past appearances — in food and in people.

A parallel market in upcycled foods — products such as flour milled from soybean pulp, snacks made with fruit peel left on and bars from rescued bananas — is also expanding. Companies that want to market these goods can earn third-party certification through Upcycled Certified; more than 600 products from over 100 brands now carry it, and sales of certified products grew 17% from 2024 to 2025, Zhang wrote.

Unlike misshapen produce, upcycled products tend to sell at a premium. Zhang cited a small bag of specialty flour going for $7 as an example. His co-authored research found that consumers decide whether to buy upcycled products based largely on whether they believe the item matches its conventional counterpart in quality.

In two experiments, Zhang and his co-authors tested whether logo design shifted those judgments. Products bearing a circular, green, descriptive logo were rated higher in quality and were more likely to be purchased than products with no logo. A hexagonal, monochrome, bare logo had no measurable effect. “A logo that looks credible, explains itself and signals care can change what shoppers believe,” Zhang wrote. “A forgettable one might as well not be there.”

Generational attitudes are also uneven. Zhang’s co-authored research found Gen Z, millennials and baby boomers more willing to buy upcycled foods if they agreed the quality and environmental appeals justified the choice. Gen Xers — those born between 1965 and 1979 — showed less enthusiasm, citing a perception of lower quality.

That pattern fits what Zhang’s research team has generally observed about Gen X shoppers: they are hard to persuade, cost-conscious, more reliant on their own judgment, and the demographic least likely to eat out or order groceries online, preferring instead to cook and inspect food themselves in stores. “A ‘green’ benefit won’t beat these skeptics,” Zhang wrote. “They need an assurance of quality from brick-and-mortar retailers they trust, rather than from online platforms.”

The takeaway, Zhang wrote, is that closing the perception gap does not require shoppers to care more about environmental effects — it requires them to believe the food is good. “The rescue economy can make that case, but it has to lead with quality and not only with conscience,” he wrote.