Assessing Haitian Consumers' Willingness to Pay a Premium for Aflatoxin‐Compliant Peanut Butter in the Informal Market
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Market‐based solutions are increasingly tested to address aflatoxin issues in peanuts in developing countries. Although previous studies have found that Haitian grocery store shoppers are willing to pay a 21% premium for peanut butter with levels of aflatoxin that meet international standards, no information is available for the much larger informal market. A stated preference survey, using an iterative bidding process, was conducted among 585 informal market consumers of Port‐au‐Prince and Cap‐Haitien, the two largest cities in Haiti. Results show that informal market participants are willing to pay a 12% premium for peanut butter that meets international aflatoxin standards. Based on the result of a previous revealed preference study on Haitian peanut farmers, the observed premium would be largely sufficient to incentivize farmers to adopt aflatoxin mitigation practices, which supports market‐based solutions to improve the safety of a Haitian staple food. Results also indicate that informal market consumers have greater confidence in a certification from an international institution rather than a domestic one.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".