Assessment of Beef Quality Determinants in the Retailing Premises

This study explains how infrastructure and beef processing practices in beef retailing premises (BRPs) are useful for beef purchasing decision. In this respect, features and beef retailing practices were assessed against the questionability of beef that is retailed in least developing countries (LDCs). This assessment was carried out by testing the null hypothesis that hypothesizes that BRPs in Dar es Salaam and Mbeya cities do not comply with the FAO technical requirements. The retailed beef in many BRPs is compromised with the status of the infrastructural development, the situation that may result in the questionability of the consumed beef. The Likert based information regarding 22 beef quality impacting factors (BQIF) from BRPs in Dar es Salaam and Mbeya, respectively, was analyzed with respect to the gaps identified and beef retailing conceptual model. This study is important as it provides general picture in connection to the status of the assessed BQIF in BRPs for the cities in the least developing countries (LDCs). In this regard, the study has shown that the compliance of BRPs in the LDCs’ cities is too weak to meet the infrastructural technical requirements due to existence of more stringent provisions in the developed specifications. The study finally identified the local infrastructural beef quality determinants in LDCs’ BRPs as the gap to be bridged by other studies.


Introduction
Meat retailing is one of the largest fractions of the agricultural market that significantly differs from other food business in terms of technical requirements in rent technology depends on the mass inspection based on grading systems, such as Meat Standards Australia (MSA) of processed beef for ensuring its acceptability [2]. Although this system resulted in general categorization based on quality and tenderness differences, the value of the produced beef is compromised due to imprecision of the sorting methodology [2] [3]. Condition of the storage in beef trading is challenged by cold chain management during beef processing, transportation and retailing, situations that resulted in questionability of produced beef [4] [5] [6]. Elasticity of demand for beef is complex, multifaceted and evolving following the formation of new and important quality cues over time which is connected to attributes such as suitability, consistency in quality, convenience in preparation, price and price of beef relative to price of its substitutes [7]. Therefore, the noted challenges that are quantified by industrialized and developing world's viewpoints have raised the questionability of beef in retailing shops. The former scenario is explained based on the concerns and consequential costs raised in the developed world's community as a result of food safety incidents that caused public attention on the causes, effects and preventions of food hazards [8]. The latter scenario involved infrastructural beef retailing as one of the main beef quality management challenges in post-slaughter animal handling [4] [5] [9] [10].
Various studies have been conducted in the assessment of beef quality determinants in the BRPs. These studies were detailed on the means infrastructure, sanitation and meat handling practices have contributed to the beef purchasing decision [5] [10]. In this respect, it was shown that infrastructural development in LDCs is too weak to question the beef retailed in the cities of these countries [4] [5] [11] [12]. This questionability is described based on possibilities of contamination and bacteriological infection in beef due to non-appropriately handling during beef retailing [9]. It was further documented that, beef undergoes various poorly managed handling processes which have adverse effect on meat quality during retailing [4] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17].
Different from other studies, this study focuses on the infrastructural assessment of unbranded beef retailing with respect to 22 BQIF in Dar es Salaam and Mbeya cities. In connection to this, factors in connection to: infrastructural fixed construction materials, hygienic practices, cold chain management and adherences to the maintenance conditions were comprehensively analyzed [4] [5] [15] [16]. The study is aimed on providing knowledge and skills to the key players involved in food safety specifically on quality aspect of retailed beef in various BRPs. It is specifically presented infrastructural factors that influence the appropriate choice for unbranded beef in the BRPs. Engineering kets, hypermarkets and traditional groceries where beef is processed and sold [18] [19] [20] [21]. In these areas food safety issues, risk management options and hygienic practices need to be considered for protection of health of public consumers in connection to beef supply [6] [20] [22]. In this regards, twenty two (22) BQIF from five (5) basic beef processing managerial features in retail beef shops as identified in other studies [18] [19] [20] [22]- [29], as key study parameters as shown in Table 1, should be addressed.
Entrance to BRPs should be fixed with both pest proof and cleanable self-locking doors that may be designed to open by pushing from all sides to avoid contaminating meat seller's handles [17] [18] [20] [28] [29] They also needed to be fitted with smooth, impervious and easy to clean construction materials on counters, ceilings, floors and walls [17] [28] [29] [30] [31]. The mentioned construction materials should properly be grouted, sealed and internally jointed in the named features of beef retail shops. These features have to be both appropriately  [29]. This area, which should be also appropriately ventilated, is needed to be constructed with non-dark and cleanable materials like plastics, concretes, wood and any other food grade materials [29]. Beef in the storage fa-

Infrastructural Challenges in Beef Selling Premises
Beef retail shops in many countries are challenged with a failure to comply with food safety requirements due of various reasons like lacking of legal framework, insufficient knowledge in good hygienic practices in meat handling and eco-  [37]. A study on the microbial quality of raw meat sold in some parts of Ibadan Metropolis, Nigeria, has shown similar noncompliance with respect to absence of ceilings in butcher shops [37]. The studies have shown that walls in butchers of Alexandria were contaminated, a situation which indicated that the wall construction materials were not appropriate for beef retailing premises [37]. Similarly, other studies, indicated non-compliance to wall requirements for beef retailing premises in the surveyed butchers in Kampala, Uganda, following non-adherence to the hygienic and maintenance requirements [24]. In connection to this, nearly a half of butcher shops in Gon-  [32]. In connection to this, it was reported that the Tanzanian high quality processed beef was accounted for 5% of the traded beef within the country [19] [20]. It was further reported that 34% of this premium beef is imported from other countries, the situation that elaborates the gap that has to be bridged in meat sector [20]. Other study has shown that beef was retailed in the premises that are lacking basic hygiene requirements in Al-Mafraq governorate, Jordan [25].
Prevalence of Salmonella and Shigella in meat processing facilities indicated a non-conformance to the meat retailing in the surveyed butchers in Gondar town, Ethiopia, and Al-Mafraq, Jordan and Nepal [25] [26] [31]. On the other hand, other studies have shown that beef processing accessories in the surveyed butchers in Nairobi and Isiolo counties were not adequately cleaned, the factor that influences microbial contamination [5]. Similarly, the assessment of beef microbial contamination at abattoir and meat retailing in Morogoro municipality, Tanzania, indicated non-compliance to the meat processing as bony meat was observed to be cut with hand axe on a piece of wood locally known as "kigogo" [10].
Beef storage in dirty and non-maintained storage facilities is common in many developing countries as it was shown in the surveyed butchers in Gondar town, Ethiopia, and Butwal Municipality in Nepal [25] [31]. In this respect, beef was none-hygienically stored with meat from other species, fish, evisceration products and other meat retailing leftover [25]. Most of butchers in these cities had wood cutting surfaces in which residues of meat are stuck, the situation that compromises with effective cleaning.
Adherence to the good hygienic practices during beef retailing was not the case in many states, the case that resulted into a broad range of adverse health effects including increasing the risk of susceptibility to food borne disease [25] [31] [32]. In Gondar town, Ethiopia and Kampala, Uganda, most of staff sur- Uganda mentioned that they were medically examined, none of them mentioned or showed the medical examination certificate [32]. Similarly, the study on the sanitation and hygiene meat handling in Nairobi and Isiolo counties in Kenya indicated that 94% and 88%, respectively, did not have medical certificates [5].
Implementation of the international recognized certification, often through the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) is recommended for smoothly trading of beef and beef products [24] [25]. However, studies have shown the means in which states, especially the developing ones were failed to implement the quality assurance certification schemes in beef trading especially in the developing states [6] [24] [27]. For example, it was reported that lacking of collective actions between producers and retailers as well as dispersity of the producers were noted as the main limiting factors for establishment of the origin-based certification system [24].

Beef Retailing Conceptual Model
Factors influencing the quality of beef in the selling premises were established from the actual observation and literature review technical requirements based on the conceptualized beef retailing model shown in Figure 1. This model was designed based on information on beef quality technical requirements and the gap observed in actual situation. The conceptual model expresses the beef retailing specifically on the impact of both infrastructural features and the respective processes to the beef quality. This model was developed from a total of twenty two (22) main components, starting from the time beef enters a retail shop to the moment beef is taken by consumers. The conceptual framework was constructed using three main blocks, that is, the building and its design features, butchers internal feature, and health and sanitation practices.

Beef Retailing Assessment Checklist
The beef retailing assessment checklist was designed based on the described conceptual model. The model includes features that are further detailed to beef Engineering quality impacting factors in a pre-description mode within the selling premises.
This resulted into a checklist with a total of twenty four (24) of which twenty two (22) are positively and negatively worded items, i.e., Likert items. Engineering

Data Collection and Sample Size
The study on compliance of butchers or selling points based on design features was conducted using a sample size of 95 and 29 butchers in Dar es Salaam and Mbeya cities, respectively. Since the butchers in two cities are located in different wards, the number of butchers surveyed per ward is summarized in Figure 2, which shows butchers, wards and district covered during this study. The large number of butchers in Kinondoni district can be attributed to the fact that the timing of data collection went in parallel with regulatory activities by Tanzania Food and Drugs Authority (TFDA), hence leading to more butchers being included in the survey.

Determination of Total and Overall Scores
Based on this information, together with the specifications, the BQIF from the identified Likert items were analyzed. The total compliance indices were constructed by comparing the infrastructural requirements for beef quality management against data gathered along the beef retailing. Each of the listed requirements was given a unique number, R i (i = 1, 2, ..., 22) indicating requirement number one, two, and so on as shown in Table 1. As in the past studies, on compliance to the requirement [38], this study adopts an ascending scoring system at 0, 0.25, 0.50, and 1 compliance levels. The parameters that should be addressed on handling of beef quality management along the chain were assessed against 22 requirements developed based on the criteria. The criterion set used, provides the decision rule to which the computed compliance index leads to acceptance or rejection of the hypotheses developed in this study. All the entities with compliance indices less than 20% were excluded from the population sampled.

Overall Analysis for Beef Retailing Premises
The gathered information was analyzed and interpreted by using spread sheet of Microsoft Excel 2010 based on two main hypotheses, namely: the beef retailing total score of each of the assessed feature across all BRPs before being presented in graphics, tables and flow charts. In this respect, the overall score (OS) for each butcher with respect to the assessed BQIF, was determined from the total number of the assessed BQIF, N df , (where, N df = 22) and the given count of frequency for each beef quality criterion assessed, S c as shown in Equation (1): where N df = 22 in each of the assessed beef retail shop.
In addition to that, total score for each design feature (TS), across all the assessed butchers in the cities was determined from total number of assessed butchers. N b , and the given count of each butcher assessed, S c , as shown in Equa- where N b = 29 for Mbeya and 95 for Dar es Salaam.

Statistical Analysis for All Beef Retailing Premises
Next, the Kruskal-Wallis one way ANOVA by ranks test was conducted to check the possibility of having statistical difference on rating the 22 criteria grouped based on the butchers in the surveyed cities at 0.05% significance level (95% confidence interval) [39]. The final stage of the statistical analysis was the estimation of the density function from the observed data, i.e., number of butchers, N 1 , with their respective beef quality impacting parameters, N 2 . This was conducted by using the ranks in a chi-squared distribution plot designed based on degrees of freedom k − 1, i.e., the number of indicators being compared minus 1 and with x and y-axes labeled as x 2 and Probability Density Function (PDF), respectively. PDF of a continuous random variable, x, with support S, is an integral function f(x), under three main conditions, namely: described as a PDF for continuous random variables x; should be positive everywhere in the support S, that is, f(x) > 0, for all x in S; and the probability of finding random variables somewhere on the real axis must be unity [39].

Conditions of the Doors
Counters and entrances to the butchers in the surveyed cities have been pre-Engineering sented based on the observed doors' availability, construction materials and respective position as to whether in opened or closed status during the day. These features should have pest-proof doors that fitted with self-locking devices [27] [28] [29]. Self-locking devices in the doors are important as they prevent frequently touching of the handles that are invariably cleaned less often [18] [27].
The level of compliance of doors' construction materials, beef hygiene, sellers' impression to consumers and pest control and dust controlling practices were presented in Figure 3.  [29]. Self-locking devices in doors are important as they prevent  BRPs, but the common behavior of providing over-the-counter service while the main door in open position [21]. In addition to that butcheries in Nairobi located along dusty streets or roads, and hanging meat in open space in the butchery exposes the meat to environmental contamination from dust and flies [5].
Another study that indicated non-compliance of butcher shops in developing countries as it indicated flies infestation at 78.1% due to lacking of standard fly screen or mesh at 58.9% of the surveyed butcheries [32].

Conditions of the Ceilings
Compliance of ceiling of a butcher shop as appropriate premises for beef retailing was assessed based on the means at which pests, dusts and other contaminants are reduced. Ceiling should be designed and constructed in such a way that: the access of dirt, dusts and pests to beef is prevented; unable to absorb grease, meat particles and being easily and effectively cleanable [29]. Ceilings in meat selling premises were described based on the observed infrastructural and hygienic conditions in relation to beef quality during selling. Gypsum, plastered cement and hardboard were identified as materials used to construct ceilings in butcher shops during the assessment. The compliance of the identified materials, on other hand, was presented based on the level of smoothness in connection to their ability in preventing the accumulation dirt and ceiling shedding particles, which ultimately reach the beef.
It was observed further that hardboard and gypsum materials were most fre- The percentage of butchers with respect to the ceiling's smoothness was higher in Dar es Salaam (48%) than Mbeya (13.8%) as shown in Figure 5. In connection to this, the former city has higher percentage of butcher shops with smooth ceiling construction materials, than the latter city. Results show that hardboard ceilings were rougher than gypsum boards, indicating that the latter should be preferably used for the purpose of improved beef quality in the selling points, where the buildings are not storeyed, i.e., without concrete slabs as the top.
Ceilings smoothness were also used as a parameter for assessing the com-   A similar study was conducted in Ethiopia showing that one third of butcher shops were without ceiling, a situation that hinders cleaning [23]. The study on good hygiene practice in Butwal municipality has also shown that BRPs that 97.4% of the meat handlers were completely not care on ceilings and ventilating facilities [26]. Butcher shops in Mbeya, on the other hand, were observed to have high percentage of butchers with the appropriate hardboard for beef retailing activities.

Conditions of the Walls
Presentation of the compliance for the walls in the surveyed BRPs, as appropriate meat selling premises was further categorized based on the type construction materials and hygienic conditions. In this study, gypsum, plastered cement and tiles were the construction materials observed in most of the visited butcher shops.
The compliance of the observed materials, on other hand, was presented based on the level of smoothness in connection to their ability in preventing the accumulated dirt and walls' shedding particles.
About 91.6% of the visited butchers in Dar es Salaam were observed to have tiled walls while the corresponding fraction was 55.2% for Mbeya as shown in    Dar es Salaam and 37.9% in Mbeya) indicates a probability of hosting pests and dust, also a challenge to beef quality. of the assessed meat handlers [26]. The surface of walls should be made using impervious materials with no toxic effect in intended use [31]. This is also sup-    [26]. In connection to this, the study on hygienic practices in retail meat shops in Butwal Municipality, Nepal has shown that 96.8% of the meat handlers were unhealthily handling money while processing meat [26].

Beef Storage Infrastructure in the Beef Retail
In this study, compliance of beef storage was presented based on type, availabili-  With respect to types of storage facilities, butchers with freezers only were the highest at 64.2% and 51.7% for Dar es Salaam and Mbeya, respectively as shown in Figure 10. In addition to this, butchers with refrigerators only and variety storage facilities (refrigerators and freezers) were 8.4% and 16.8%, respectively.
On the other hand, none of the butchers in Mbeya had either refrigerators or variety of storage facilities during the assessment.
Furthermore, 48.3% of butchers in Mbeya were selling beef without refrigeration as compared to 10.5% of butchers in Dar es Salaam. This is interpreted as resulted from the difference in ambient temperature between the cities as shown in other studies during which: the former city has a moderate climate with temperature that is less than 25˚C [40]; and the latter one is hot humid climatic city with the mean annual temperature of 30˚C [41]. Similarly, the hygienic assessment of meat retailing in Butwal, Nepal has shown that 21.1% and 71.6% of the surveyed BRPs were operating without storage facilities and covering the meat with red cloths, respectively [26]. In addition to that the study in Kenya where beef was stored in refrigerators in 39.4% in Isiolo County where ambient temperature is high as compared to Nairobi County that have 11% butcher with storage facilities [5]. It was also indicated that 72.5% of beef retailing shops in Morogoro Municipality were operated without storage facilities during which meat that was left were normally transferred to another shops where storage facilities are available [10] [33].

Design Features of the Beef Splitting Instruments
Carcasses or beef processing instruments are presented as a compliance assessment parameter based on splitting facilities, cutting boards and or butchering block together with hanging hooks. It includes assessing the means in which retail meat handling areas has potential to contribute to contamination of the beef before and after processing. Motorized saw being an appropriate beef processing Compliance of cutting facilities in meat retailing shop is measured based on the applicability of the appropriate meat cutting material [27] [28]. Similarly, a study in Kenyan cities indicates appropriate and cleaned butchery utensils in only 34% and 60% of the surveyed meat retailing shops in Nairobi and Isiolo counties, respectively [5]. Other studies in this respect, indicates non-compliance based on this assessment criteria following 95% of the workers in the visited meat outlets were chopping bony meat with hand axe [10].
Non-compliance as per beef processing/cutting board during which 44.6% and 75.9% of the butchers in Dar es Salaam and Mbeya, respectively, were using an improved log from a tree trunk, locally known as "kigogo" as shown in Figure  Meat should be processed in non-dark, smooth cutting and cleanable cutting blocks from one among the following materials: plastics, concretes, wood and any other food grade materials [29]. In connection to this, a study in Morogoro Municipality, Tanzania, reveals applicability of non-complied wooden cutting blocks in many retail outlets [10]. It is further indicated that most of the meat Figure 11. Distribution of butchers according to the beef cutting and splitting facilities used (N = Engineering handlers were chopping bony meat on cutting logs which were observed to be in poor hygienic conditions. Compliance measurement as per carcasses/beef hanging hook is presented based on the material of construction as to whether made of rust free material like stainless steel or not [28]. Compliance assessment based on type of butchering blocks and materials of construction for hanging hook in the butchers indicates high level of non-compliance, hence high chance of cross-contamination between beef and meat handlers and also from the environment. Furthermore, the chance for contamination was higher in Mbeya than Dar es Salaam due to the high percent of non-compliance in the former city.

Results for Total and Overall Scores
Total scores computed or selected butcher design characteristics R1 to R22 from 29 and 95 BRPs for Mbeya and Dar es Salaam cities, respectively were presented in Figure 12. It is presented based on two conformance criteria, i.e., at

Statistical Analysis of the Total Scores
The compliance estimates based on data sets of butchers in Dar es Salaam and Mbeya were statistically presented by using PDF plot as shown in Figure 13. The plots were accepted as PDF as they were comply with the three main requirements, i.e., non-decreasing, right continuous and asymptotically bounded in 0, 1 behaviors.
The total scores of each butcher across the maximum 22 points (corresponding to all the evaluated BQIF) were ranged between 5 and 16 points in both Dar es Salaam and Mbeya. Two peaks in connection to this were observed as 25% of the assessed butchers in the former city scored 8.3 and 12.2 total points. Whereas, the two peaks in the latter city were also observed as the approximated 24% and 17% of butchers had 8.9 and 14 total scored points. The troughs with respect to this assessment were observed in Mbeya where 10% and 7% of the assessed butchers scored 9 and 13 total points, respectively. Another trough was also observed in Dar es Salaam where 12% of the assessed butchers scored 11 total points.
Another remarkable feature at this point of study is the maximum and minimum percentage of the assessed butchers in the plot is equal in both cities. Bimodal behavior of plots observed in this study as another interesting feature, was reported as due to the mix-up of data from different populations [13].
Similar to this study, the assessment on sanitation and hygiene meat handling practices in Nairobi and Isiolo counties indicated the same patterns of results on which butchers operators did not adhere to the food quality specification [5].
Likewise, other studies have reported the same pattern on contamination due to insufficient hygienic practices and improper handling of meat in retail shops in different locations [14]. Figure 13. Probability density functions of the total score per butcher or combined data and or each city (N 1 = 29 for Mbeya and 95 for Dar es Salaam). Engineering

Control Chart for Butchers' Total Scores Data
Compliance of butchers in the surveyed cities was presented by using quality control charts as indicated in Figure 14. The figure shows the quality control of a total of 124 combined data obtained from the surveyed cities on the responses (based on the established criteria, i.e., 1 for conformity and 0 for non-conformity) to the pre-listed variables on the compliance assessment of beef retailing shops.
This is a graph of complied individual butchers plotted on a format that includes statistical process limits set at Xbar + 2 with standard deviation (2.36) together with lower control limit (5.51) and upper control limit (14.96) as indicated in Table 2. Figure 14 shows a quality control run chart that was designed to test the null hypothesis that states that all the surveyed butchers in Dar es Salaam and Mbeya

Analysis of Compliance Index Data for R1 to R22
The observed conditions in beef retailing shops were statistically analyzed based on their respective infrastructural conditions against raised hypotheses in connection to food specifications. The presentation includes analysis of both level of their respective compliance and correlation of beef retailing located in different wards. The approach adopted for data presentation and analysis is in tandem to other studies [38] for assessment of compliance with disclosure requirements of IAS 16. The analyzed results from the survey of beef retailing premises are presented in tables or clustered columns of total observed scores and frequency distribution curves adopted with modification from other literature [30]. In Table   3, the distribution results were also presented based on the statistical comparison parameters. This includes frequency and cumulative frequency statistical parameters that were categorized based on four compliance index levels and named as A, B, C and D.
Results based on these statistical parameters were further elaborated by using frequency distribution and cumulative frequency plots as shown in Figure 15. It was indicated that, the highest frequency was in category B at 40 -49 compliance index level, i.e., the third highest scored categorized group, with eleven (11) wards, followed by group C that ranged at 50% -69%, the second top most categorized level. The third level with three wards was group A, with 20% -39% level, i.e., which is the fourth categorized group. In addition to that, none of the surveyed wards was in group D, i.e., 70 -100 the highest categorized group. Figure 16 compares the compliance index values for different wards in Dar es Salaam were narrowed at the 45% and 55% compliance index range. With regards to the first hypothesis of this study and data analysis by using this model, it was deduced that: this model is semi-strongly applied to butchers in Kijitonyama (58%), Kariakoo (50%), Iyunga (55.7%) and Ilomba (53.4%); weakly applied in eleven butchers; and very weakly applied in Uyole (37.5%), Iyela (35.2%) and Ruanda (28.5%) wards. Therefore, based on these remark, it is deduced that, the listed BRPs in both cities leads to an overall conclusion that the butchers were weakly complied at 42.1% and 47.3% compliance indices levels for Mbeya and Dar es Salaam, respectively. Generally, the compliance based on these values in not satisfactory. This is due to the existence of more stringent provisions in food technical requirements than actual conditions in the field in beef quality management. The implication is that we failed to reject the null hypothesis which hypothesizes that the visited beef retailing points do not comply with the technical requirements. The levels of compliance observed from test of hypotheses were lower than that observed in other researches on compliance in other parts of the developed world. This is in line with other studies in their findings that indicate poor handling during which carcasses, quarters, unwashed offal, and other items placed together on the floor or dirty concrete or wooden tables in retailing shops, increasing the microbial contamination of the meat [9] [10] [17]. This study was also corresponding to the findings that indicated that contamination sources of beef are more likely to be associated with insufficient hygienic practices and improper handling of meat in retail shops [17]

Kruskal-Wallis Based Statistical Interpretation
A Kruskal-Wallis H test was conducted to determine if the compliance of beef retailing shops that categorized based on the surveyed wards was different for twenty two (22) designed features (twenty two groups) as shown in Table 1. Ta

Conclusion and Recommendation
The study concludes that, BRPs in the surveyed cities were characterized by high level of non-compliance of the assessed doors and ceilings. Walls in most of these beef selling premises were not only poorly maintained but inappropriately painted and too dusty to attract beef consumers. It was also shown that, the level of compliance with respect to beef storage and splitting in the surveyed BRPs is higher for Dar es Salaam than Mbeya. All the surveyed cities were completely not appropriate with respect to the assessed meshed doors and staff exchanging room as their compliance index was at the lowest category of compliance index.
The study revealed that the compliance of the BRPs according to their respective wards is not uniform as Kijitonyama, Iyunga, Ilomba and Kariakoo were identified in the semi strongly applied top most achieved level of compliance index in this study as compared to the other wards. Ruanda, on the other hand, was ranked as the lowest conformed ward that fell at very weakly applied compliance index.
It is therefore, deduced that, the surveyed BRPs in both cities weakly complied with FAO technical requirements. This compliance that is interpreted as not satisfactory is caused by existence of more stringent provisions in food technical requirements than actual conditions in the field of beef quality management.
The implication is that we failed to reject the null hypothesis which hypothesizes that the visited beef retailing points do not comply with the technical requirements. The levels of compliance observed from test of hypotheses were lower than that observed in other researches on compliance in other parts of the developed world. This is in line with other studies in their findings that indicate poor handling during which carcasses, quarters, unwashed offal, and other items placed together on the floor or dirty concrete or wooden tables in retailing shops, increasing the microbial contamination of the meat.
The study finally identified the local infrastructural beef quality determinants in LDCs' BRPs as the gap to be bridged by other studies.