Conceptual framework develops sustainable restaurant experiences, suggesting positive impacts on ecosystems and communities.
Restaurants face increasing pressure to engage in the green transition while remaining economically viable and socially embedded. This article presents a conceptual framework for regenerative restaurant experiences and concept development by integrating the Five Aspects Meal Model (FAMM) with the place-based HEPEC research tool (History, Ecosystem, Primary Producer, Entrepreneur, Circular Systems). The aim is to demonstrate how contextual, place-based analysis can inform coherent organizational and experiential design in sustainable gastronomy. The study is conceptual and design-oriented. It is illustrated through examples from a university course in which the framework was developed, as well as through a retrospective, interpretive case based on an in-depth interview with a restaurateur who applied the framework in the reorganization of a rural, multifunctional food enterprise. Together, the examples illustrate how the combined use of HEPEC and FAMM can support the development of regenerative restaurants, where sustainability is reflected in situated decisions concerning sourcing strategies, menu composition, hospitality practices, and the coordination of organizational activities. Rather than offering a prescriptive implementation model, the framework provides an analytical and reflective basis for decision-making, supporting alignment between strategic intent and local social, ecological, and economic conditions, and positioning restaurants as agents in regenerative food system development. • We offer a new place-based framework for regenerative restaurant development • Restaurants can work as positive agents in the development of regenerative food system • The key is to link place-based analysis to meal-level design and organizational coordination
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rodell et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: