Using Africa’s past to promote change toward safer alternatives for food packaging in <i>Accra</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed at promoting attitude change among street vendors and their customers by exposing them to a communication intervention. The respondents were exposed to digitized images of ancient pottery and materials used to meet daily needs of food storage in Africa’s past, followed by a narration of how these materials were used in the past that could be used in the present day to package food. Respondents reflected on their experiences in the communication intervention and were engaged in a focus group discussion and in-depth interviews to tap their perceptions and intentions about safer alternative practices of food storage in the present times. To discourage the use of harmful food packaging products, respondents called for attitudinal changes among all actors and suggested that government interventions, prudent economic practices, and education about food packing practices should lead to the adoption of cultural packaging practices that are safe and enhances food quality, taste, and its palatability. Respondents further indicated that, innovative strategies aimed at transforming traditional packaging practices will add the modern touch and make traditional and cultural food packaging safer and acceptable. Thus, the use of earthenware, calabash, leaves, and pottery should be innovatively designed to be more portable and convenient for packaging food. Modern food packaging businesses should therefore explore the combination of knowledge and ideas from the past and the present to make food packaging safe and more environmentally friendly.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".