MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283265881 · doi:10.1002/fes3.405

The future of sustainable food consumption in China

2022· article· en· W4283265881 on OpenAlexaff
May Chu, Sven Anders, Qing Deng, Carolina A. Contador, Francisco Cisternas, Catherine Ann Caine, Zhu Ying, Shuyuan Yang, Bo Hu, Zhiguang Liu, Lap Ah Tse, Hon‐Ming Lam

Bibliographic record

VenueFood and Energy Security · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEnvironmental Sustainability in Business
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersChinese University of Hong Kong
KeywordsSustainable consumptionChinaBusinessConsumption (sociology)Theory of planned behaviorGovernment (linguistics)Sustainable developmentSustainable agricultureConceptual frameworkGreenhouse gasMarketingConstruct (python library)PopulationSustainabilityEnvironmental economicsControl (management)Production (economics)EconomicsPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Food production is one of the main contributors to greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. China, as a rapidly developing economy, contributes to an unsustainable food system as its consumption of animal products and meat has continued to grow in recent decades. Using the extended theory of planned behavior as the conceptual framework, this paper examines factors influencing consumers' intention to purchase sustainable food in China. To this end, a population‐based face‐to‐face survey was conducted with 2422 respondents in five provinces spanning the north and south of China. The results showed that the traditional constructs of behavioral attitude, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and the additional construct of perceived quality are significant in inducing such intentions. This paper suggests that to enhance consumers' willingness to shift to sustainable food consumption, appropriate regulation and monitoring framework is needed to increase consumers' trust toward sustainable food. The government can also cooperate with the media, experts, and social media opinion leaders to ensure that messages on sustainable development are promoted in effective ways.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations28
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood and Energy SecuritySame topicEnvironmental Sustainability in BusinessFrench-language works237,207