Space to waste: the influence of income and retail choice on household food consumption and food waste in Indonesia
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
This paper draws on the result of surveys completed by 323 households and a qualitative study of 21 households from upper (n = 7), middle (n = 7) and lower income (n = 7) households in Indonesia. This article employs practice theory to better understand the role of planning and infrastructure in food provisioning and food wasting practices. Results from this study indicate that there is a positive and statistically significant association between the self-reported amount of household food waste and income (X2 = 27.30, p < 0.001). The study also found a statistically significant association between amount of food waste generated and certain types of retail (p < 0.000), with 75.9% of respondents who self-reported that they waste a ‘significant amount’ of food, shopping at supermarkets. In the Indonesian context, it is important to note that the choice or ability to access certain types of retail is income-related. Accordingly, food waste reduction interventions should consider the role of retail and income.
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 | 0.000 | 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