MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2926905697

Developing and Testing a Novel Intervention to Reduce Household Food Waste

2018· article· en· W2926905697 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Paul van der Werf

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Waste Reduction and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaBrescia University College
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)BusinessEnvironmental healthMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The amount of food wasted is a topic of societal and academic interest. As academic research in this area is nascent, there are significant knowledge gaps, which this dissertation seeks to narrow, pertaining to: (1) the measurement of food waste; (2) the human behaviors that lead to wasting of food; and (3) the development of efficacious food waste reduction interventions.\nA systematic literature review of 55 food waste estimates showed that on average 114.3 kg/capita/year is wasted from consumption (i.e., household) and 198.9 kg/capita/year across the entire food supply chain. There is considerable uncertainty with this data because of the different food waste measurements methodologies employed.\nHousehold waste composition study data (2012-2015) from 9 Ontario municipalities, that used the same direct measurement methodology and included a single “food waste” category, were aggregated and analyzed to develop estimates of food waste in the garbage stream. This methodology, which showed households disposed 2.40 kg/week of food waste in the garbage, was used as the basis of a bespoke household food waste measurement methodology.\nTo better understand food wasting behavior and facilitate the development of an effective intervention the theory of planned behavior (TPB) was used to inform the development of a survey, which was administered to households in London, Ontario, Canada. Households (n=1,263) threw out avoidable food 4.8 times/week and perceived behavioral control (p\nA “Reduce Food Waste, Save Money” household intervention, which combined elements of behavioral economics (nudging the desire to reduce monetary loss) and the TPB (strengthening perceived behavioral control), was developed, tested and assessed in a randomized control trial. Treatment total household food waste decreased by 31% and this was significantly greater (p=0.02) than for control households. Key determinants of avoidable food waste reduction included personal attitudes, perceived behavioral control, the number of people in a household and the amount of garbage set out.\nThis research can contribute directly to food waste reduction policy in national, provincial, and municipal contexts.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.507

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.210
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.102 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)Same topicFood Waste Reduction and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207