Traceability issues of honey from the consumers’ perspective in Romania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Romanian honey market is facing a problem related to traceability, especially when honey is produced in more than one country and its origin is indicated as a blend of EC and non-EC honeys. The increase of honey adulteration has consequences on both consumers and honey producers with considerable negative effects. The aim of the study was to identify the factors that influence honey purchasing behaviour and to evaluate consumers’ awareness related to honey adulteration in Romania among selected age segments. An online survey was conducted between 2020-2021 on a sample of 1,233 respondents. The questionnaire covered aspects related to purchasing behaviour and honey adulteration, complemented with socio-demographic questions. The data were evaluated using descriptive, non-parametric and multivariate statistics. The results showed that the most important factors considered during the purchasing process by Romanian honey consumers were health factor and country of origin followed by producer reputation and ecological aspect, while the least important were discounts, promotion and brand reputation. The older respondents are more aware of honey adulteration and know better that crystallisation is an indicator of quality. This study provides important information for policymakers and the whole beekeeping chain in Romania. Education in terms of honey authenticity and traceability will help consumers to choose local honey of high quality and to avoid adulterated products. This consumption and purchasing behaviour will discourage producers from honey counterfeiting.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".