Households’ Willingness-to-Pay for Fish Product Attributes and Implications for Market Feasibility of Wastewater-Based Aquaculture Businesses in Hanoi, Vietnam
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A choice experiment was used to assess households’ willingness-to-pay (WTP) for informational attributes (sources of water used to rear fish, and certification) of fish products in Hanoi, Vietnam. The study showed that households’ purchasing decisions are influenced by their access to information of food product attributes and ascribe an economic value to it. The results indicated that households are willing to pay 51% (USD 1.11 per kg) above the prevailing market price of fish for information to know if wastewater is used to rear the fish they consume. Similarly, they are willing to pay 20% above the prevailing market price of fish (USD 0.43 per kg) to know if freshwater is used as a rearing medium. It is important to note that the increased marginal WTP is for information on whether the fish they consume is raised in wastewater over freshwater. This supports the notion of households’ concern over the safety of consuming wastewater-raised fish. Households are also willing to pay 65% (USD 1.42 per kg) above the prevailing market price for certified fish. Based on the cost of fish certification and WTP estimates, we found a total economic benefit of USD 172 million for the implementation of a wastewater-raised fish business model in Hanoi. The demand for wastewater-raised fish is likely to be affected by households’ perception of certification by a trusted government agency, source of water used to raise the fish, age, income and household size.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it