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.
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 processing technology, storage condition and elasticity of demand [
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 [
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 [
Food retailing includes both organized modern retail outlets such as supermarkets, hypermarkets and traditional groceries where beef is processed and sold [
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 [
Basic feature (s) | Variable | Beef quality impacting feature |
---|---|---|
Entrances | R01 | Glassed doors |
R02 | Pest screen in doors | |
R03 | Door in closed position | |
Room structural surfaces | R04 | Appropriate maintained |
R05 | Appropriate construction material | |
R06 | Clean room structural surfaces | |
Beef processing area | R07 | Clean beef processing area |
R08 | Appropriate maintained beef processing area | |
R09 | Appropriate construction materials | |
Beef quality handling | R10 | Storage practices (beef only) |
R11 | Appropriate ventilated beef | |
R12 | Cold storage (freezers & refrigerators) | |
Hygiene condition | R13 | Butchers with uniform |
R14 | Clean uniform | |
R15 | Certified butchers (food safety) | |
R16 | Butchers with exchanging room | |
R17 | Valid medical certificate | |
R18 | Appropriate cutting table | |
R19 | Stainless steel hanging hook | |
R20 | Toilet availability | |
R21 | Butcher with cleaning facilities | |
R22 | Beef displayed at butcher’s side |
maintained and regularly cleaned in order to avoid paint flacking, cracks and damage. Dirty and poorly maintained ceiling, floor and wall in butchers are not considered as first line concerns in food safety as they do not directly contact the meat, instead, they result into aesthetic impact to beef consumers [
Beef processing (cutting and weighing) area in a beef retail shop should be appropriately arranged with a clear separation from a hooked beef in a butcher’s space, storage facilities, customers’ waiting point and hand washing station [
Food safety conditions with respect to hygienic requirements in BRPs should be adhered to. While working in BRPs, staff should wash their hands regularly and maintain high degree of cleanliness by wearing clean uniform and head gear [
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 economic point of view [
Ceiling, floor and walls in these non-complied beef retail shops were also fixed with inappropriate construction materials. This condition resulted into dirty and dusty on these features [
Compliance with the specification for beef processing is poor in many BRPs especially in developing countries where beef is processed without adherence to sanitation and hygienic requirements [
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 [
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 [
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 [
The legal frame-work in many developing countries is too fragmented for their respective BRPs to be appropriately monitored [
Implementation of the international recognized certification, often through the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) is recommended for smoothly trading of beef and beef products [
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
The beef retailing assessment checklist was designed based on the described conceptual model. The model includes features that are further detailed to beef
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.
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
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, Ri (i = 1, 2, ..., 22) indicating requirement number one, two, and so on as shown in
The gathered information was analyzed and interpreted by using spread sheet of Microsoft Excel 2010 based on two main hypotheses, namely: the beef retailing
shops in Tanzanian cities do not comply with food quality technical requirements; and the level of compliance of beef retailing shops with respect retailing infrastructure in different cities is significantly different. The Likert scale data were re-arranged and organized to provide: overall and average scores of all of the assessed features in each of the assessed beef retailing premises (BRPs); and 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, Ndf, (where, Ndf = 22) and the given count of frequency for each beef quality criterion assessed, Sc as shown in Equation (1):
O S ( % ) = [ ∑ i = 1 N d f s c i N d f ] × 100 (1)
where Ndf = 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. Nb, and the given count of each butcher assessed, Sc, as shown in Equation (2):
T S ( % ) = [ ∑ i = 1 N b s c i N b ] × 100 (2)
where Nb = 29 for Mbeya and 95 for Dar es Salaam.
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) [
Counters and entrances to the butchers in the surveyed cities have been presented 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 [
The level of compliance of doors’ construction materials, beef hygiene, sellers’ impression to consumers and pest control and dust controlling practices were presented in
Glassed automatic doors were reported as among the appropriate material for butcher entrance as they reduce dirty trap together with the entry of both pest and dust particles to the displayed meat. Wooden doors on the other hand, are not preferred and if used they have to be coated with non-toxic, easily cleanable materials to prevent accumulation of dirt [
frequently touching of the handles that are invariably cleaned less often [
Similar to this study, other studies, express not only none-glassed doors in BRPs, but the common behavior of providing over-the-counter service while the main door in open position [
Generally, when door design is used as a compliance assessment parameter for butchers, it indicates high level of non-compliance observed in butchers visited during this study. This is explained based on the observed doors in most of the butchers were fixed with inappropriate materials that can neither be cleaned nor sanitized (that is, 30.5% and 37.9% in Dar es Salaam and Mbeya, respectively). Furthermore, the level of non-compliance of doors as appropriate facilities to be fitted in BRPs is both high and variable between different places in the two cities surveyed, but also in different developing countries. Doors in most of the visited butchers do not have self-locking devices and are characterized by rough, dirty absorbing and difficult to clean surfaces. On the other hand, entries to some of the visited butchers were suitably fitted with pests and dusts protecting measures like curtains/wire meshed doors, glassed doors and doors with self-locking devices.
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 [
It was observed further that hardboard and gypsum materials were most frequently used in construction of ceilings of the visited butchers in Mbeya and Dar es Salaam compared to other material as shown in
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
Ceilings smoothness were also used as a parameter for assessing the compliance of the visited butcher shops in the cities as appropriate premises for selling beef. Although the compliance of the beef retailing shops as per availability of ceiling is good (97% for Dar es Salaam and 80% for Mbeya), the assessment based on smoothness of the available ceilings is poor with Mbeya being worse with 6.9% hardboards, 6.9% gypsum and 0.0% plastered materials than Dar es Salaam where the observations were 20.0%, 26.3% and 4.2% of respective
construction materials. Moreover, Dar es Salaam was observed to have higher percentage of butcher shops that were not only unsealed, but also without appropriate materials compared to Mbeya.
A similar study was conducted in Ethiopia showing that one third of butcher shops were without ceiling, a situation that hinders cleaning [
Finally, when ceiling conditions are used as a compliance assessment parameter of butchers, it indicates high level of non-compliance observed in butchers visited during this study. This is attributed to poor conditions of the observed roofs in most of the butchers which were fixed with materials that can neither be cleaned nor sanitized. Among the complied meat selling premises, Dar es Salaam had high composition of butchers that have ceilings that are constructed with gypsum materials (which provides smooth and cleanable surface) compared to Mbeya. Butcher shops in Mbeya, on the other hand, were observed to have high percentage of butchers with the appropriate hardboard for beef retailing activities.
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.
The presented compliance was assessed based on [
The level of compliance observed beef processing facilities in the visited cities are presented here based on construction materials and maintenance status of beef processing areas. Construction materials that were observed during this survey are wood, tiles, concrete and aluminum. Results of maintenance as a compliance assessment parameter on the other hand, is presented based on hygienic and appearance of the beef processing area. Assessment results for beef processing facilities on compliance of butchers in Dar es Salaam and Mbeya as appropriate premises for selling beef are presented based on the construction material of their processing blocks, maintenance status and the hygienic status in the respective processing areas. With exception of wood material as processing blocks, the general results indicate that the compliance of butchers in the visited cities are not similar as shown in
Among the surveyed butchers, the complied butchers with respect to tiled beef processing areas in Dar es Salaam and Mbeya were 50.5% and 31.0%, respectively. The smoothness of processing areas made up of concrete material was opposite, being high for Mbeya (27.6%) compared to Dar es Salaam (21.1%). Another variation of the results is observed on the aluminum as a beef processing construction material on which high percentage of the visited butchers in Mbeya were observed to have smooth aluminum material (20.7%) compared to Dar es Salam (13.7%). The study indicated also that less than 10% of the visited butchers have wooden processing materials. Among the butchers with wooden processing materials, Mbeya had relative higher non-complied butchers (6.9%) with rough surfaces than Dar es Salaam that had 1.1%. In general, construction material as a compliance assessing parameter indicates high level of compliance since beef processing areas in 86.1% and 79.3% of the surveyed butchers in Dar es Salaam and Mbeya, respectively, were appropriate constructed.
There is variability in the level of compliance of butchers in the visited cities in terms of hygienic condition and appearance as shown in
Broken beef processing areas should be clean and appropriately maintained immediately for preventing pests and harmful microorganisms harboring. With regards to cleanliness and maintenance status, 58.6% and 65.5% of butchers in Mbeya, respectively, were complied with specifications, indicating a higher compliance than in Dar es Salaam. Dar es Salaam had 52.6% of butchers in Dar es Salaam had worn-out and or cracked beef processing areas compared to 34.5% in Mbeya. This is similar to other studies that have shown that meat processing at retail level is likely to have huge contribution of contamination in the supplied beef [
In this study, compliance of beef storage was presented based on type, availability, hygiene and storage practices of the facilities used for beef storage the retailing shops. While the assessment with respect to types of storage facilities was presented based on the applicability of freezers only, refrigerators only and variety storage facilities (refrigerators and freezers), hygiene was presented based on cleanliness and dirtiness of the observed storage facilities. The butchers’ assessment results on the storage practices was then presented based on whether beef stored separate only or combined with perishable food. Lastly, it was the presentation of the assessed butchers with respect to whether storage facilities were available or not.
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
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 [
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
facility was observed in 40.9% and 34.5% of the butchers in Dar es Salaam and Mbeya, respectively as shown in
Compliance of cutting facilities in meat retailing shop is measured based on the applicability of the appropriate meat cutting material [
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
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 [
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 [
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
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
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 [
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 [
Compliance of butchers in the surveyed cities was presented by using quality control charts as indicated in
Statistical parameters | Combined | Dar es Salaam | Mbeya | Control limits: ±2 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Number of samples | 124 | 95 | 29 | (Dar es Salaam + Mbeya) | 124 |
Standard deviation | 2.36 | 2.23 | 2.68 | 14.96 | |
Mean | 10.23 | 10.43 | 9.59 | Xbar + 1 | 12.60 |
Minimum | 5 | 5 | 5 | X-bar | 10.23 |
Maximum | 16 | 16 | 15 | Xbar-1 | 7.87 |
Range | 11 | 11 | 10 | Xbar-2 | 5.51 |
comply with the food quality requirements. Butchers with the total of score below x bar and above Xbar-1 were regarded as moderate noncompliance which included a total of 41 BRPs (21 in Dar es Salaam and 20 in Mbeya). The BRPs with a total score between Xbar-1 and Xbar-2 were regarded as falling into a critical non-compliance, which included a total of 52 butchers (27 butchers in Dar es Salaam and 25 in Mbeya). Two butchers B88 and B28 scored below Xbar-2 insisting action by regulatory authorities. About 56 scored above x bar for which 36 and 13 butchers were from Dar es Salaam and Mbeya, respectively. This non-conformance is less than intolerance due to Salmonella in 7%, and 9% of the surveyed butchers in Pakistan and Ethiopia, respectively [
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 [
Results based on these statistical parameters were further elaborated by using frequency distribution and cumulative frequency plots as shown in
Category | Compliance index levels | Frequency (number of wards) | Cumulative frequency | Frequency (wards) % | Cumulative frequency % |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | 20 - 39 | 3 | 3 | 16.7 | 16.7 |
B | 40 - 49 | 11 | 14 | 61.1 | 77.8 |
C | 50 - 69 | 4 | 18 | 22.2 | 100.0 |
D | 70 - 100 | 0 | 100 | 0.0 | 100.0 |
Salaam and Mbeya based on 989 and 278 observations in the beef retailing premises. In this study the top most wards with 50 and higher compliance indices in descending orders were Kijitonyama (58.0%), Iuynga (55.7%), Ilomba (53.4%) and Kariakoo (50.0%). On the other hand, Ruanda in Mbeya was the lowest scored ward at 28.5% compliance index. The total scored level for both cities was 46.1%, the compliance index that deduced from 42.1% and 47.3% compliance indices scored from the surveyed butchers in Mbeya and Dar es Salaam.
The scored levels in Dar es Salaam ranged between 42.4% and 58% with Wazo being the lowest ranked and Kijitonyama the highest scored ward. On the other hand, the range in Mbeya was between 55.7% and 28.5%, in which Iyunga and Ruanda being at the highest and lowest ends, respectively. Results in this study were further presented by using the superimposed plots in which the findings from Mbeya and Dar es Salaam were compared as detailed in the Figure. It was noted that butchers in two wards, one from Mbeya and the other from Dar es Salaam had compliance index of 55% and above. Furthermore, the level of compliance in Mbeya were scattered distributed between 25% and 55% compliance indices. Whereas, the scored levels of most of the surveyed butchers 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 [
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
Statistic parameters | Dar es Salaam | Mbeya |
---|---|---|
Total number of assessed values | 242 | 154 |
Test statistic, H | 121.539 | 74.852 |
Number of samples, k | 22 | 22 |
Degree of freedom, (k − 1) | 21 | 21 |
Critical, H | 32.671 | 32.671 |
Number of observations, n | 11 | 7 |
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.
The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.
Mwashiuya, J.T., Manyele, S.V. and Mwaluko, G. (2019) Assessment of Beef Quality Determinants in the Retailing Premises. Engineering, 11, 675-702. https://doi.org/10.4236/eng.2019.1110044