MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405539409 · doi:10.55482/jcim.2024.34371

Using Multicriteria Decision Analysis to Assess Stakeholders Motivation toward Sustainable Packaging in the Fruit and Vegetable Value Chains of Rural Uganda

2024· article· en· W4405539409 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Sountongnoma Martial Anicet Kiemde, Bernard F. Lamond, Julien Lépine

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative International Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Socioeconomic Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersRoyal Society
KeywordsValue (mathematics)BusinessEnvironmental economicsOperations managementAgricultural economicsEconomicsMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of better protective packaging is often viewed as a low-cost alternative for short-run reduction of post-harvest losses in the fruit and vegetable supply chains of sub-Saharan Africa. We present the exploratory results of mapping the fruit and vegetable value chain actors in rural Uganda and analyzing their influence on the adoption of packaging. We propose a decision-aiding model based on multicriteria analysis to obtain a motivation score for assessing the degree of interest of the value chain actors toward packaging. Because it combines quantitative and qualitative information, our approach constitutes a valuable tool in the context of planning for an appropriate implementation of an appropriate packaging technology. The results suggest that distributors are the most favorable for adoption of packaging, followed by collectors, farmers, and customers, in that order. By demonstrating the use of a multicriteria decision approach for identifying the actors most likely to adopt packaging, this work suggests that the proposed approach could be used by potential regulators and manufacturers to focus their efforts on developing a well-targeted packaging deployment strategy.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.823
Threshold uncertainty score0.479

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative International ManagementSame topicInnovation and Socioeconomic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207