The role of halal requirements, health-environmental factors, and domestic interest in food miles of apple fruit

1 Introduction

Sustain Alliance introduced the food miles (FMs) or the length of food trips in their first report in 1994 in the UK that was republished in 2011 [1]. Proponents of FM reduction argue that reducing FMs contributes to a better life regarding the origin and destination of transported foods [1,2]. The recent studies of FMs highlight the importance of FM reduction. Because of the importance, some scholars are eager to compare local and imported foods. In Germany, it is found that locally grown apples have fewer primary energy requirements than apples imported from New Zealand [3]. In South Korea, consumers prefer domestic commodities to imported commodities when FM labels are provided [4]. A study on willingness to pay for short- and long-transported foods found that short-travelled foods are the most preferable [5]. Another study on consumer preference for two environmental labels (a label showing information on CO₂ emission and a label showing information on the distance of travelled foods) found that consumers pay a higher price for products with CO₂ labels than those with FM labels [6]. A product label showing FM information has better effects on consumer welfare than a product label showing CO₂ emission [7].

A choice between longer food miles (LFM) and shorter food miles (SFM) is associated with the ability of a region to provide necessary foods for local people. A study found that the ability of local people to consume local foods varies; some regions can supply the foods for local people while others are unable [8]. The ability to provide sufficient food to local people is limited by distance and geographical coverage. Less than 28% of the global population can meet their demand for food within a radius of 100 km only [9]. It means that over 80% of the global population relies on food from long distances or importation. Thus, a debate on LFM and SFM is also related to the discourse of self-sufficiency (fulfilment of local demand with local foods) and food security (fulfilment of local demand with foods coming from anywhere, regardless of their country of origin) [10]. Food self-sufficiency was promoted by African countries in the Lagos Plan of Action in 1980 as their national development strategy to feed their citizens, even if the strategies were not seriously put into practice [10].

Because the previous studies on the consumer preference for FMs covered countries other than Indonesia, the study of FMs in the Indonesian context is promising. In this study, the apple fruit selected for studying consumer perception of FMs in Indonesia is for four reasons. First, apples are one of the world’s primarily grown fruits, contributing to food loss, waste (FLW), and emission along the supply chain [11,12,13]. Second, studies on the FMs of apples still need to be completed. For example, the previous study on the FMs of apple could have been more in-depth [14]. The study on the consumers’ willingness to pay for wine and apple fruit found a low demand for distantly transported commodities [5]. Third, Indonesia relies on imported apples [15]. Thus, studying the halal issue and FMs in Indonesia is crucial because the country is a Muslim majority and one of the largest halal food markets [16,17]. That is why Indonesia’s context differs from that of Muslim minority countries as a major locus of previous studies on FMs [2,3,4,5].

Fourth, apples are perishable and should be treated with chemical substances for preservation [18,19,20] along with long-distance transport and storage, so the halal status of the substances cannot be discovered. Using a non-halal chemical substance to treat the apples [18,19,20] is not allowed in Muslim society because it does not fulfil the halal requirements such as the wholesome/purity and safety principle (tayyib) [21,22]. The previous study on food safety and the halal–tayyib issue reveals that some halal agricultural commodities (e.g. chicken, fish and meat, fruits and vegetables, flavour, water, caviar, and cheese) are unable to be certified for halal because of non-wholesome (non-tayyib) and unsafe process [21]. In this perspective, the distance of the supply chain and the length of storage time of fruit certainly play a crucial role in maintaining the halal and tayyib condition of apples because the halal status of food can change from halal to non-halal along the end-to-end supply chain [23,24].

Based on the facts and argument above, this study aims to uncover the indirect and direct factors affecting the preference for FMs in the case of apple fruit. The preference for SFM is represented by the preference to purchase domestic food. The consumer preferences for foods from different sources determine the mileage of food travel to Indonesia’s consumption points.

Following the introductory importance of FMs of apple fruit, the article is structured: Section 2 discusses the literature review, Section 3 discusses materials and methods, Section 4 gives the results, Section 5 is a discussion, Section 6 discusses theoretical contribution, and Section 7 is the conclusion.

2 Literature review

FMs refer to the distance (in miles) that the foods travel from the point of origin (production) to the point of consumption, bearing some health, environmental, and economic burden [1]. All proponents of FMs agree that SFM is better for health, environment, society, and economy [1,6,7,8,25,26,27,28,29,30]. Thus, the concept of the FMs is different from supply chain segmentation, that is, the first mile, middle mile, and last mile [31].

Preferences for SFM are related to short food supply chains (SFSC) and local food preferences (LFPs). Many scholars have performed their studies on local food consumption, preferences, purchasing intention, and willingness to pay for local foods [32,33,34,35,36,37,38]. Other scholars prefer using the term SFSC, summarising that an SFSC means geographic and social proximity between producers and consumers [39].

Food localisation positively and negatively impacts a certain region. Some scholars identified a hundred positive and negative impacts of local dairy farming on the producing territories [40], and the impacts can be valid for local food growing in general and for apple farming in particular, as presented in Table 1.

Given the different terms various scholars proposed, using local or domestic foods is preferable. The local or domestic term refers to “distance (in kilometres or miles),” “political boundaries,” or “emotional dimensions such as personal relationship with or within a region” [33]. Local or domestic foods are grown within political boundaries where consumers live [37]. Because the foods are produced in regions with the geographic proximity of consumers and producers, the food travel’s mileage falls. Preference to purchase domestic or local foods implies a preference for SFM. In the latter sections, this study exchangeably uses the terms preference for SFM and preference for purchasing domestic foods.

Whatever the terminology is used, people’s reliance on SFM depends on the ability of a region to supply food for the local community (the extent of self-sufficiency in a region) and LFP. Proponents of food self-sufficiency argue that domestic production is the only food source for domestic people and must be available nationally [10]. However, some countries have poor self-sufficiency ratios and highly rely on imports [9,41]. Under the failure of the self-sufficiency paradigm, food security becomes the relevant solution that stability of supply and better access to food to the national population are priorities that must be fulfilled by international market and aid [10,42], implying LFM. Under the food security paradigm, local demand can be fulfilled with foreign supply through international trade with the support of better logistics and supply chain management and better macroeconomic factors (e.g. exchange rate, energy price, financial market, and other macroeconomic factors) [42].

In addition, this study assumes that the choice of preference for LFM or SFM is determined by the consumers’ attitude regarding some factors, as presented in some of the following sub-sections.

2.3 A benefit to the health and environment

FMs impact the health and environment. As described below, SFM can reduce the environmental problem through emission reduction, reduce FLW, and promote healthy foods. The first benefit is emission reduction. Most scholars concerning FMs discussed the environmental impact of LFM contributed by transport and cooling use [3,25,57,58]. A study compared CO₂ emission from transport and cooling for domestically grown apples in Belgium and imported apples from Spain and New Zealand, finding that the imported apples produce more CO₂ emission [58]. LCF has a higher share of producers’ carbon footprint than SCF, while SCF has a higher share of consumers’ footprint than LCF [26]. Local foods are environmentally sustainable because they require less packaging and transport, resulting in less greenhouse gas emission; however, expansion of farming for local consumption has negative impacts, such as high pesticide and fertiliser use and loss of biodiversity [8].

The second benefit is the reduction of FLW. Food loss refers to “the decrease in mass (dry matter quantity) or nutritional value (quality) of food that was originally intended for human consumption because of inefficient food supply chain, lack of technologies, the insufficient skill-knowledge-management capacity of supply chain actors, lack of market access, and natural disaster” [59]. Food waste refers to “food appropriate for human consumption being discarded because it is expired, left to spoil, or oversupply due to market, individual consumer, shopping/eating habits” [59]. The drivers of FLW in the food system are: the first is the agricultural production subsystems; the second is the food storage, transport, and trade subsystem; the third is the food retail and provision subsystem; the fourth is transformation and packaging process; and the fifth is consumer habit or handling by consumers [60].

The FLW occurs mainly in developed countries along the supply chain (e.g. production process, handling and storage, processing, distribution and market, and consumption) [61]. In Turkey, the fruit and vegetable sector is in the first place of FLW in the growing stage, the postharvest handling and storage stage, and the distribution stage [62]. In addition, fruit contributes to the largest share of food waste in the food service sector [62]. In the US, the FLW from vegetables is higher than from fruits and grains due to socio-economic improvement; thus, the strategies to reduce FLW are developed by adopting FM reduction and local food sourcing [63].

The third benefit is the promotion of healthy foods. The foods’ quality improves because SFM can minimise the FLW [59,60,64]. Food quality refers to foods meeting “all negative attributes (e.g. spoilage, contamination with filth, discolouration, and off-odours) and positive attributes (e.g. pure and origin, colour, flavour, texture, and processing method) that affect values of the products to the consumers” [49]. Some studies confirmed the importance of food quality. The nutritional content variable significantly affects the intention to purchase organic foods [65]. “Environmental consciousness” and “food quality” affect the purchasing intention of organic foods [66]. The perceived food quality is associated with the willingness to purchase domestic oysters in the Netherlands [67]. Thus, this study proposes the following hypothesis:

H₃: Health-environmental benefits (HEnv) have a direct effect on the preference for SFM.

The previous studies on halal foods [21,48,50,56], local food and FMs [39,66], organic food [65], and FLW [49,64] have the concept in common. It is related to halal food safety (tayyib/wholesome) and healthy food. It is found that there is an implicit association among local food perception, SFMs, and characteristics of halal foods (e.g. wholesome, clean, no pesticides, organic and natural, quality and taste, fresh, transport distance quality of life, animal welfare, environmental concern, and health concern) [35]. Thus, this study proposes the following hypothesis:

H₄: Halal requirements (Halal) have a direct effect on health-environmental benefits (HEnv).

H₅: Halal requirements (Halal) have an indirect effect on the preference for SFMs through health-environmental benefits (HEnv).

Figure 1

Conceptual framework.

Based on the hypotheses, this study proposes the following research question: What factors affect consumer preferences for FMs of apple fruit (preference to purchase domestic apples) in Indonesia? The variables affecting the preference are presented in Figure 1 and Table 2.

Table 2

Hypothetical factors that affect preference for SFM

Construct	Variable	References
Domestic economy interest (Econ)	Local farmer empowerment (Econ_1)	[8,26,43,44]
	National economy improvement (Econ_2)	[26,34,36,39]
Halal requirements (Halal)	Possibility of non-halal chemical treatment of apples (Halal_1)	[19,21,46]
	Mandatory Halal Certification (Halal_2)	[21,22,23,53]
Health and environmental benefit (HEnv)	FLW Reduction (HEnv_1)	[59,61,63,64]
	Reduction of fuel consumption, pollution, and emission (HEnv_2)	[8,26,58]
	Healthy Food (HEnv_3)	[35,49,65,67]

3 Materials and methods

In the previous sections, research aims, hypotheses, and research questions were discussed. In this section, the research methods and data analysis to answer the hypotheses and research questions in the previous section are described. The relationship among research aims, hypotheses, research question, research methods, and data analysis is presented in Figure 2. In addition, the result, discussion, and conclusion are covered in the later sections.

Figure 2

Methodological procedure.

4 Results

This section covers the output of PLS-SEM. Table 6 presents some outputs of reflective measurement comprising reflective indicator loadings, internal consistency, reliability (i.e. Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability), and convergent validity. The indicator loadings of all variables are acceptable (>0.708). Thus, the variables are reliable. The AVE values are satisfied for all constructs above 0.50 regarding convergent validity. Therefore, all constructs are valid under a convergent validity perspective.

Regarding internal consistency reliability, the results are mixed. The first is the values of Cronbach’s alpha that some constructs (i.e., interest in the domestic economy and health-environmental benefits) are satisfied (above 0.7). The value of Cronbach’s alpha for the halal construct is not satisfied because it falls below the minimum value (0.7). The second is rhoA as the measurement of composite reliability that only some constructs (i.e., interest in the domestic economy and health-environmental benefits) are acceptable, with a value between 0.70 and 0.95. The rhoA value for the halal construct is not satisfied because it falls below the minimum value of 0.70. The third is rhoC, as the measurement of composite reliability that all constructs are acceptable and that the values fall between 0.70 and 0.95. In this case, all the constructs were considered, even if halal constructs should be given serious attention. A clear portrayal of internal consistency reliability is presented in Table 6.

The HTMT ratio was used for discriminant validity, as presented in Table 7. The original estimation shows all constructs are acceptable because the HTMT ratio is under 0.85. The original ratio is consistent with the bootstrapped ratio of HTMT. The bootstrapped mean of the HTMT ratio is also under 0.85. Thus, the constructs are valid under the perspective of discriminant validity.

Besides evaluating reflective measurement, the structural model (comprising estimated coefficients of paths, multicollinearity test, and coefficient of determination) was evaluated. The first is estimated coefficients that all paths are significant under a 95% confidence level except for the path from halal to preference construct (Table 8). Thus, this study accepts hypothesis 1 (domestic-economy interest directly affects the preference for SFMs), hypothesis 3 (health-environmental benefits directly affect the preference for SFMs), and hypothesis 4 (halal requirements directly affect health-environmental benefits). However, this study rejects hypothesis 2 (halal requirements directly affect the preference for SFMs). The portrayal of the estimated coefficients of paths is presented in Figure 3.

Figure 3

Estimated model of path. ***significant under α = 0.01, **significant under α = 0.05, and *significant under α = 0.10.

Regarding the indirect effect of the Halal construct on the SFM construct, the total and indirect effects are presented in Table 9. The total effect of Halal on SFMs (Path 1: Halal → HEnv, Path 2: HEnv → SFMs, and Path 3: Halal → SFMs) is 0.055. The total indirect effect of Halal on SFMs (Path 1 and Path 2) is 0.068 (t-statistics = 3.364; 95% CI (0.03, 0.107), meaning significant (non-zero confidence interval) under a 5% confidence level. Because the total indirect effect of Halal through HEnv on SFMs is significant (Path 1 and Path 2), but the direct effect of Halal on SFMs (Path 3) is not significant (as presented in Table 8), the type of mediation is indirect-only mediation (complete mediation). Thus, hypothesis 5 (halal requirements indirectly affect the preference for SFMs through HEnv benefits) is accepted.

The last one is to examine whether the paths in Figure 3 have the problem of collinearity and explanatory power (i.e. the extent of coefficient determination). Table 10 presents the issues. The first is that VIF values are below 3; thus, it can be concluded that the collinearity issue does not exist. The second is coefficient determination. The R square for the SFM construct is 0.093 (not acceptable), meaning that three constructs (i.e. Halal, Econ, and HEnv construct) explain only 9.3% of the variance of the SFM construct. In addition, the R square for the HEnv construct is 0.134 (acceptable), meaning the Halal construct explains 13.4% of the variance of the SFM construct.

5 Discussion

Finally, as found in this study, the significant and direct causes of preference for SFM of apple fruit (domestic apples) align with previous studies on the preference for domestic apple fruit among Indonesia consumers [80,81,82]. This research confirms the previous studies on the two reasons for the preference for SFM of apple fruit (measured with preference to purchase domestic apple fruit).

The first reason for the choice of SFM is the interest of the domestic economy. Economic interest can be the following regional multiplier effect of SFSC: first, job creation in farming, supply chain, and services, rural territories; second, generating landscape economy with access to nature; third, provision of activities (social, inclusive, labour, intensive industry), life, communication, identity, skills, incomes in remote areas, as argued by the previous study [40]. It means that Indonesians are concerned about the patriotism of the domestic economy. It also implies that economic patriotism in Indonesia is not only encouraged by the government through protectionism policies [83] but also by citizens through the consumption of domestically produced products/commodities [44]. The belief of interest in the domestic economy among Indonesians will benefit the economy in the future because economic patriotism in Indonesia is a widespread and increasing phenomenon [84,85]. The previous study of apple preference in Indonesia found that consumers prefer domestic apples because they support domestic apple farmers [82]. That is consistent with the findings from the present study.

Moreover, this study confirms the findings of previous studies on the promotion of SFM [57,86], even if the effectiveness of the FM program on food self-sufficiency and food security is still under big question [8]. The previous studies implicitly reported patriotism by providing local foods to local people in the UK, Germany, France, Sweden, Norway, and Fiji [34,36,57,86]. The previous study shows that the effective implementation of SFM for typical foods in Germany and France could not only supply foods for domestic people but also export foods to other countries [86] due to an excess of domestic supply. The Fijian case reduced LFM by producing more local foods and reducing dependence on imported foods [57]. The Fijian case shows patriotism among people from developing country to purchase and consume local foods for better local economy and environmental quality [57], which is strongly relevant to the present study.

However, the successful implementation of FMs may be only valid for certain foods, not for many other foods. Some countries will face food insecurity if they persist in promoting SFM for all food categories because they do not have the capabilities to supply all foods domestically. For example, a few global populations (between 11 and 28%) can meet their demand for foods within a radius of 100 km², and a somewhat large proportion of the global population between 24 and 64% can meet their demand for foods within 1,000 km² [9]. Some regions cannot grow typical foods because of geographic characteristics and climatic conditions [87]. The different productivity among regions also determines the ability to supply typical foods within regions. The Europeans exemplify that the failure of local livestock production was caused by the high production cost, leading to the high price of animal products [88].

In addition, losses can be faced by trading partners of the countries promoting SFMs. For example, some African countries (e.g. Malawi, South Africa, and Madagascar) face welfare losses due to FM promotion in the UK, Germany, and France [86]. The decline of imports from countries promoting FMs will cause more FLW in countries of origin, as food waste occurs before distribution [62,63]. It is because the market does not absorb oversupplied foods domestically, and nobody can consume them. As a result, the foods should be disposed of and become waste.

The second reason for the preference for SFM is environmental conservation and a healthy lifestyle. Indonesians are aware of the environmental issues contributed by the long food transport. As found by some scholars [89], CO₂ emission in Indonesia, which is contributed by the energy sector and waste, will increase by 2050. As emphasised by another study, food waste due to LFMs contributes to emissions [90,91]. Preference for SFM among Indonesian consumers means Indonesians take the bottom-up initiative to reduce FLW. The bottom-up approach found in the present study differs from the top-down approach of waste reduction under a circular economy implemented by the Government of Turkey and the UK [62].

The findings in the present study confirm some previous studies about environmental consideration as the cause of preference for either LFM or SFM [8,26,28,40,43,57,58,61,63,64]. SFSC (including apple fruit) is expected to improve the following environmental qualities: first, quality and efficiency of the resource management that is favourable to biodiversity, carbon footprint, landscape, and soil fertility; second, closing the nutrient cycle and producing renewable energy; third, valorisation of non-arable, disadvantaged land; and fourth, fire prevention [40]. The present study’s findings also align with the previous study in Fiji that the action of SFM can reduce greenhouse gasses from transport (e.g. carbon dioxide, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxide, and carbon monoxide) [57]. A study of local food in Indonesia found that LFP is to reduce emissions and raise “environmental awareness and social justice” [92].

The present study’s findings regarding the environmental reason for SFM preference do not align with previous studies, which found that SFM cannot reduce emissions; otherwise, LFM can produce fewer emissions depending on the adopted technologies, type of carried foods, and region [93]. In addition, this study also rejects the previous study, stating that SFM can produce a higher carbon footprint than LFM [26].

On the health side, some Indonesians are concerned about healthy foods and lifestyles. Even if some Indonesians have unhealthy consumption, as reported by UNICEF’s staff [94,95], this study found that LFP is one of Indonesia’s quests for healthy foods and lifestyle. The healthy food and lifestyle found in this study confirm some previous studies on the health reason as the cause of SFM preference [8,61,65,66,67]. SFM can minimise food loss [60,64,96,97] and increase food security [64,98,99,100]. In addition, local farming of foods shapes a sustainable food system. It can enhance access and sustainability of food supply as the pillar of food security to meet safe and nutritious food diet [99] as the prerequisites to prevent malnutrition [98].

The findings from this study argue that a halal diet contributes to a healthy lifestyle. It is true because halal requirements promote food safety [21,22] and less use of food additives minimising the negative effect of the additives [50]. In this situation, halal diets help fulfil healthy diets with safety and quality [21,22,98,99]. Previous studies in Indonesia found that Indonesians prefer buying domestic apples because of their freshness and safety [80,81,82]. It implies that domestic apples coming from SFSC are healthy food.

In addition, the present study found a new construct as the new cause of the SFM preference. This study found that halal requirements can only work indirectly, fully mediated by health-environmental factors. Fulfilment of a healthy diet can be done by consuming halal foods free from unsafe ingredients and additives, as argued by some halal scholars [21,22,101]. It is true because imported foods are possibly treated with a non-halal chemical substance for preservation [18,19,47], and using coatings with unknown halal status is suggested to reduce FLW during long shipment [63]. Using food additives affects the integrity of the halal food supply chain (HFSC) and halal certificate issuance [21,101] because the contaminated foods have negative impacts on human health and food safety [1,21,22,50].

Halal scholars indirectly promote adopting a halal diet as the antecedent of a healthy diet [21,22] and food security scholars [98,99] to achieve the goals of healthy diets. Even if Sun and his/her colleagues promote using coatings to reduce FLW, they also suggest a dietary change for consumers [63]. It means consumers can freely select a healthy diet for better health. In Muslim society, consumers should select a halal diet for better health. Moreover, halal diets indirectly affect the SFM through a healthy diet because domestically produced foods in Muslim countries are mostly assured of their halal status. Muslim majority of Indonesia and the Government of Indonesia require the production and distribution of halal foods within the nation [102].

The findings from the present study also imply that the halal factor determines the purchasing decision of foods transported for long distances among Indonesian consumers. For apple fruit, Indonesian consumers prefer pure apples free from contamination by non-halal chemical substances (non-halal food additives). The purity of the apples is related to the tayyib principle (wholesome) in halal foods certification and halal lifestyle [21]. Thus, using edible waxes for apples does not persuade Indonesian Muslim consumers to purchase foods traveling for long distances. The concern that should be given is to treat apples with edible halal chemical substances for significant gain from the big Muslim market.

6 Theoretical contribution

This research found a theoretical contribution to the literature on green supply chains (i.e. FMs), HFSC, food security, and self-sufficiency. This research suggests halal requirements are the new and indirect factor affecting the preference for SFMs. The construct of halal requirements is an effort to close the research gap from previous studies mentioned in the literature section [26,35,36,39,58,61,63,65]. Thus, the construct of halal requirements can equip other factors affecting SFM. Moreover, a study on FMs in Muslim countries suggests the different contexts of FM studies should be considered not only about the distance but also about the halal and tayyib (wholesome) issue as the concern of Muslim society [21,22,51,54,56].

In addition, this study contributes to the literature development on food security and self-insufficiency with special emphasis on SFSC and HFSC for healthy diet. The present study suggests the notion that successful SFSC can fulfil a healthy diet, including a halal diet, as the outcome of food security [10,21,98,99].

7 Conclusion

This study, focusing on Indonesia, investigates the indirect and direct factors influencing the desire for FMs of apple fruit (expressed by LFP of apples). This study made many vital discoveries: first, the demand for SFM is directly driven by interest in domestic economy and health-environmental benefits, confirmed by the acceptance of H₁ and H₃ results; second, a halal lifestyle is required for a healthy lifestyle, confirmed by the acceptance of H₄; third, the non-significant H₂ results show halal requirements do not directly influence food short-distance preferences; fourth, halal requirements were discovered to indirectly influence SFM preferences via health-environmental benefits (with complete mediation), which was shown by the significance of H₅. Therefore, the new construct of halal requirements mostly prevails in Indonesia and other Muslim countries. From a consumer behaviour perspective, Indonesian consumers prefer pure apples free from contamination by non-halal chemical substances (food safety). Even if treated with edible coatings or waxes, it is important to use halal chemical substances (halal food additives) for health consumers and gain from the big Muslim market.

The present study contributes to developing the literature on supply chains (covering the green supply chain and HFSC) and the relationship between food security and self-sufficiency. This study gives an emphasis on some pillars of food security (e.g. food safety, sustainability, access, healthy diet, and preference), as studied by FAO [99]. In addition, this study has some scientific values added: first, this study can discover a new construct of halal as the factor affecting SFMs that the construct is never considered by some previous studies on halal and green supply chains; second, this study can associate halal and food security issues; third, this study successfully shows that SFSC will effectively work if it is supported by successful program self-sufficiency or local food development; fourth, this study successfully shows the willingness of bottom level to reduce LFM for better health, environment, and economy. The bottom-up approach is assumed to have more massive mobilisation and action than the top-down approach of the circular economy program, as studied by a previous study [62].

This study has practical implications for the government, food scientists, activists, and environmentalists. They should promote SFM to reap the benefits such as a better domestic economy, healthy lifestyle, and environmental conservation. For Muslim countries, promoting SFM aligns with religious requirements, contributing to a healthy lifestyle and environmental conservation. For food scientists and activists, the promotion of SFSC will benefit local people in terms of a healthy diet that should be accompanied by sufficient supply, better access, and sustainability of supply.

The findings and recommendations from this study apply to numerous countries since this study adds the repository of scientific studies on green HFSC and food security. It can apply to developed and developing countries, as previous studies on FMs were conducted in Western countries [86] and Eastern countries [57]. In addition, the findings from this study can be applied in Muslim majority and minority countries, considering the impact of LFM on FLW, healthy diet (including halal diet for Muslims), and environment. The large FLW production in Turkey (a Muslim country), as found in the previous study [62], can be reduced with the SFM program besides the current action on circular economy. Application of green and HFSC can improve and assure the integrity of halal food along the supply chain, as suggested by a previous study [23].

Even though this study generated many vital results, it has some limitations. First, the variables for the Halal and Econ construct are limited. Second, this study combines the health-environmental causes in one construct, which can be independent of various indicators. Third, this study has few constructs, so it cannot disclose other factors affecting SFM preference. Fourth, food security issues are not considered an independent construct; instead, it is partially and implicitly covered in the construct of health-environment.

Future research can consider the following areas of study. First, the factor of halal requirements and domestic economic interest with many indicators enhances the inadequate parameters of this study. Second, the future tasks are to investigate the direct effect of halal requirements on SFM as the halal requirements latent variable is the newly created construct. Third, future studies can consider the environmental factor construct independent of the health factor. Fourth, a study on the relationship among FMs, food security, and self-sufficiency is necessary because successful SFSC requires sufficient supplies from domestic production for a healthy diet. Fifth, a study on SFs in Indonesia should compare the positives and benefits of food sourcing in a specific region from neighbouring regions and other countries to capture more insight into the distance effect, as conducted in Fiji [57]. Sixth, in the context of Indonesia, some partial and in-depth studies on the positive and negative impacts of local food development on a territory, as suggested by some scholars [40], are necessary so that they can present a comprehensive view of the negative and positive impacts of SFSC in Indonesia.

Nomenclature

AVE

average variance extracted

FLW

food loss and waste

FM(s)

food mile(s)

HFSC

halal food supply chain

HTMT

heterotrait-monotrait

PLS-SEM

partial least square-structural equation model

LFM(s)

long(er) food mile(s)

LFP

local food preference

SFSC

short(er) food supply chain

SFM(s)

short(er) food mile(s)

SCF

short chained foods

VIF

variance inflation factor