This study investigates the integration of blockchain technology into the food supply chain within the restaurant industry. It focuses on how blockchain can be applied to enhance transparency and trust in tracking food sources, ultimately impacting customer satisfactionThis research contributes novel insights to the field of technology innovation in the hospitality industry. It extends the understanding of signaling theory by exploring how blockchain technology can serve as a tool for signal transmission in restaurant food supply chains.Hao, Fei & Guo, Yueming & Zhang, Chen & Chon, Kaye. (2024). BLOCKCHAIN=BETTER FOOD? The Adoption of Blockchain Technology in the Food Supply Chain. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. ahead-of-print. ahead-of. 10.1108/IJCHM-06-2023-0752.
75, 0.50, and 0.25, respectively. Our results indicate that the R2 of PFS (0.688), PFQ (0.723), and PFN (0.664) are moderate.
id: ceb209cb3075e0d7a7cb47b1742231ae - page: 14
We evaluated the hypotheses in the structural model based on path coefficients, t-values, and p-values. The hypotheses were tested for main effects using the bootstrapping 5000 procedure in Smart PLS 4 (Nisar et al., 2021). As shown in Table 1, all hypotheses (H1-H6) were supported by the critical ratio evaluation (t > 1.645; P < 0.05). Our results show that the adoption of blockchain significantly increases traceability (H1, =0.536, t=4.756, p=0.000) and trust (H2, =0.602, t=5.773, p=0.000) compared to not adopting it. Both food traceability and trust have a significantly positive relationship with perceived food safety (H3a, =0.347, t=2.964, p=0.003; and H3b, =0.527, t=5.090, p=0.000), quality (H4a, =0.341, t=3.664, p=0.000; and H4b, =0.554, t=6.572, p=0.000), and naturalness (H5a, =0.496, t=5.819, p=0.000; and H5b, =0.363, t=4.054, p=0.000). Additionally, perceived food safety (H6a, =0.320, t=2.303, p=0.021), quality (H6b, =0.398, t=3.617, p=0.000), and naturalness (H6c, =0.215, t=2
id: b873c3ed428bfc2b74f6b48fa561b366 - page: 14
.336, p=0.020) have a significantly positive effect on customer satisfaction.
id: 1f490fd51114513bfa420e6c81d9f725 - page: 14
13 Table 1. Hypotheses tests Hypotheses SD T P Results S2 S3 S4 S2 S3 S4 S2 S3 S4 S2 S3 S4 S2 S3 S4 H1. BN - > TRA 0.536** * 0.948** * 0.363** * 0.113 0.115 0.083 4.756 8.254 4.359 0.000 0.000 0.000 H2. BN - > TRST 0.602** * 0.888** * 0.398** * 0.104 0.117 0.082 5.773 7.594 4.834 0.000 0.000 0.000 H3a. TRA - > PFS 0.347* * 0.503** * 0.444** * 0.117 0.081 0.068 2.964 6.222 6.536 0.003 0.000 0.000 H3b. TRST - > PFS 0.527** * 0.340** * 0.474** * 0.104 0.090 0.070 5.090 3.768 6.796 0.000 0.000 0.000 H4a. TRA - > PFQ 0.341** * 0.500** * 0.335** * 0.093 0.083 0.083 3.664 6.007 4.030 0.000 0.000 0.000 H4b. TRST - > PFQ 0.554** * 0.315** * 0.571** * 0.084 0.089 0.076 6.572 3.524 7.518 0.000 0.000 0.000 H5a. TRA - > PFN 0.496** * 0.486** * 0.477** * 0.085 0.080 0.077 5.819 6.091 6.226 0.000 0.000 0.000
id: c6726df12b1442aa3afb15289c89223a - page: 14