An official website of the United States government
The donation of unharvested or unsold crops to rescue organizations has been promoted as a strategy to improve healthy food access for food insecure households while reducing production-level food loss and waste (FLW). In this study, we aimed to assess the motivations, barriers, and facilitators for crop donation as a FLW reduction strategy among Maryland farmers. We interviewed 18 Maryland-based food producers (nine frequent crop donors and nine infrequent, by self-report) in 2016 – 2017, soliciting their perspectives on crop donation motivators, process feasibility, and interventions aimed at increasing crop donation. The interviews were thematically coded. All respondents were aware of crop donation as an option, and most expressed interest in reducing FLW by diverting crop surpluses for human consumption. While financial barriers represented one aspect influencing donation decisions, respondents also cited convenience, process knowledge, and liability as key considerations. In contrast to frequent donors, many of whom considered donation a moral imperative, some infrequent donors questioned the expectation that they would donate crops without compensation. Both frequent and infrequent donors were aware of pro-donation tax incentives, and infrequent donors reported being unlikely to use them. This research demonstrates that crop donation motivations, barriers, and facilitators can be diverse. Given the existence of crop surpluses and their potential benefits as emergency food, our results suggest that multiple interventions and policies may contribute to incentivizing and facilitating crop donation (or enabling the purchase of surplus crops) rather than one-size-fits-all approaches. Our findings also highlight a need to prioritize crop recovery methods that enhance growers’ financial stability.
more »
« less
The Fear of Personal Death and the Willingness to Commit to Organ Donation
In three studies, with samples from different countries (the United States and Israel) and religions (Christians and Jews), we found that individual levels of fear of death significantly predicted lower willingness to register as organ donors (Studies 1 and 2). Moreover, after being asked about their organ donation status (i.e., whether they are registered as donors), fear of death significantly increased among unregistered people. This did not occur among registered people, who had already faced the decision to become donors in the past (Study 2). Finally, providing non-registered (non-religious) people with a defense strategy to manage their fear of death increased their willingness to sign an organ donation commitment, partially by increasing their feelings of hopefulness. The implications of these findings for increasing organ donation registration are discussed.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1559546
- PAR ID:
- 10463475
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Social Psychological and Personality Science
- ISSN:
- 1948-5506
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Hunger and food insecurity are present in each American county. Government and non-government organizations are working to address food insecurity in the United States. Food banks are nonprofit hunger relief organizations that collect food and monetary donations from donors and distribute food to local agencies which serve people in need. Contributions come from retail donors, communities, and food manufacturers. The uncertainty of donation amounts and frequency is a challenge for food banks in the fight against hunger. In this research, we analyze local food bank donation data and propose a predictive model to forecast the contribution of different donors. Our study shows the necessary behavioral attributes to classify donors and the best way to cluster donor data to improve the prediction model. We also compare the accuracy of prediction for different conventional forecasting techniques with the proposed Support Vector Regression (SVR) model.more » « less
-
Kidney exchange, where candidates with organ failure trade incompatible but willing donors, is a life-saving alternative to the deceased donor waitlist, which has inadequate supply to meet demand. While fielded kidney exchanges see huge benefit from altruistic kidney donors (who give an organ without a paired needy candidate), a significantly higher medical risk to the donor deters similar altruism with livers. In this paper, we begin by exploring the idea of large-scale liver exchange, and show on demographically accurate data that vetted kidney exchange algorithms can be adapted to clear such an exchange at the nationwide level. We then propose cross-organ donation where kidneys and livers can be bartered for each other. We show theoretically that this multi-organ exchange provides linearly more transplants than running separate kidney and liver exchanges. This linear gain is a product of altruistic kidney donors creating chains that thread through the liver pool; it exists even when only a small but constant portion of the donors on the kidney side of the pool are willing to donate a liver lobe. We support this result experimentally on demographically accurate multi-organ exchanges. We conclude with thoughts regarding the fielding of a nationwide liver or joint liver-kidney exchange from a legal and computational point of view.more » « less
-
BackgroundLiving kidney donation currently constitutes approximately a quarter of all kidney donations. There exist barriers that preclude prospective donors from donating, such as medical ineligibility and costs associated with donation. A better understanding of perceptions of and barriers to living donation could facilitate the development of effective policies, education opportunities, and outreach strategies and may lead to an increased number of living kidney donations. Prior research focused predominantly on perceptions and barriers among a small subset of individuals who had prior exposure to the donation process. The viewpoints of the general public have rarely been represented in prior research. ObjectiveThe current study designed a web-scraping method and machine learning algorithms for collecting and classifying comments from a variety of online sources. The resultant data set was made available in the public domain to facilitate further investigation of this topic. MethodsWe collected comments using Python-based web-scraping tools from the New York Times, YouTube, Twitter, and Reddit. We developed a set of guidelines for the creation of training data and manual classification of comments as either related to living organ donation or not. We then classified the remaining comments using deep learning. ResultsA total of 203,219 unique comments were collected from the above sources. The deep neural network model had 84% accuracy in testing data. Further validation of predictions found an actual accuracy of 63%. The final database contained 11,027 comments classified as being related to living kidney donation. ConclusionsThe current study lays the groundwork for more comprehensive analyses of perceptions, myths, and feelings about living kidney donation. Web-scraping and machine learning classifiers are effective methods to collect and examine opinions held by the general public on living kidney donation.more » « less
-
Can deliberation increase charitable giving when giving is impulsive (i.e., a one-time small gift in response to an immediate appeal)? We conduct two studies in Israel and Sweden to compare two forms of deliberation, unguided and guided, in their ability to decrease the singularity effect (i.e., giving more to one than many victims), often evident in impulsive giving. Under unguided deliberation, participants were instructed to simply think hard before making a donation decision whereas participants in the guided deliberation condition were asked to think how much different prespecified decision attributes should influence their decision. We find that both types of deliberation reduce the singularity effect, as people no longer value the single victim higher than the group of victims. Importantly, this is driven by donations being decreased under deliberation only to the single victim, but not the group of victims. Thus, deliberation affects donations negatively by overshadowing the affective response, especially in situations in which affect is greatest (i.e., to a single victim). Last, the results show that neither type of deliberation significantly reversed the singularity effect, as people did not help the group significantly more than the single victim. This means that deliberate thinking decreased the overall willingness to help, leading to a lower overall valuation of people in need.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506231198135
