Master of Science / School of Family Studies and Human Services / Farrell J. Webb / The Food Sufficiency Status Model is a conceptual model that was devised to help explain why some individuals are at an increased risk of becoming food insufficient. This model proposes that there are four factors that can influence an individual’s food status they are—demographics, family status/household size, food risk factors, and depression. This study uses data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES, 2007-2008)—Flexible Consumer Behavior Survey Module (n = 3,413), collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The overall results generally supported the Food Sufficiency model and explained 22% (R[superscript]2adj = 0.215) of the variance in food sufficiency in the study’s population.

The majority of building code development and implementation practices are normally connected with the progress of construction community changing awareness, needs and perspectives, advanced technology in construction and new level of knowledge. Unproven practices and the technology of building code development and implementation in case of insufficient and outdated codes, the use of unproven advanced codes of other countries, or the infringement of the existing codes, in most cases, could lead to a large number of shortcomings of minimum requirements of public health, safety and general welfare, and poor quality of buildings. Every aspect of a building code development and implementation practice could be influenced by insufficiencies and infringements in building codes/regulations that could cause buildings failures. Generally, the success of a building code development and implementation practice is directly connected with the involved insufficiencies and infringements in the framework of building code (legal, Administrative, technical, & social), i.e. faults of building code development and implementation should be successfully resolved in order to come to an end of a building project assuring code's objectives (public health, safety and general welfare). One of the early research problems of building code development and implementation practice was conducted by Productivity Commission (2004) where the research organized and categorized the causes of shortcomings of BC according to four main functions of building code, including legal, administrative, technical, and social functions. Productivity Commission Research had been the starting point of research problems of building codes in Kuwait. For the past 20 years, many researchers have high numbers of categories, components and rankings to explain different types of insufficiencies and infringements in building codes/regulations. However, these categories and rankings produce inconsistent and overlapping cause and impact factors. In addition, researchers and practitioners at this point tend to focus on the technical and administrative sides related to the issues of building codes development and implementation, and neglecting the importance of legal and social sides. Legal issues like finding a law to prepare and enforce building codes, cover of insurance companies, building materials testing system, weak regulations related issues, building specifications, and clarity of regulation texts; as well as social issues like community awareness, issuing and enforcing legal court rules, deterrent punishments for violators, violations or cheatings in related issues, all of these were deemed not that critical by most reviewers. The research is specifically concerned with the insufficiencies and infringements in building codes/regulations which cause shortcomings of minimum requirements of public health, safety and general welfare, and how related cause and impact factors are selected and organized. Existing research highlights the need for further researches of how to relate between research and building regulations that are at present. There is evidence that construction industries around the world have little experience in this area (CIB TG37, 2001). The proposal within this research is to address this aspect of the debate by seeking to clarify the role of the four functions of building code; legal, administrative, technical, and social function as a frame of reference that stakeholder parties (building officials, design and construction professionals) might agree with and which should act as the basis for the selection and formation of occurrences of cause factors, and their iv impact on public health, safety and general welfare. The focus on the four functions of building code as a fault (cause) frame of reference potentially leads to a common, practical view of the (multi) dimensionality setting of fault (cause) within which cause factors may be identified and which, we believe, could be grounded across a wide range of practices specifically in this research of building code development and implementation. The research surveyed and examined the opinions of building officials, design and construction professionals. We assess which fault (cause) factors are most likely to occur in building and construction projects; evaluate fault (cause) impact by assessing which fault (cause) factors that building officials, design and construction professionals specifically think are likely to arise in the possibility of shortcomings of minimum requirements of public health, safety and general welfare. The data obtained were processed, analyzed and ranked. By using the EXCEL and SPSS for factor analysis, all the fault (cause) factors were reduced and groups into clusters and components for further correlation analysis. The analysis was able to prove an opinion on fault (cause) likelihood, the impact of the fault (cause) on the objectives of building code. The analysis indicates that it is possible to identify grouping of insufficiencies and infringements in building codes/regulations that is correspondent to the different parts of the framework of building code (legal, Administrative, technical, & social) these suggest three identified groups when viewing cause from the likelihood occurrence and four identified groups and their impact for each building code objective. The evidence related to the impact of building code objectives, view of cause, and provides a stronger view of which components of cause were important compared with cause likelihood. The research accounts for the difference by suggesting that a more selection and formation of cause and impact, offered by viewing cause within the context of a framework of building code, and viewing impact within the context of building code objectives (public health, safety and general welfare) allows those involved in building code development and implementation to have an understandable view of the relationships within cause factors, and between cause and impact factors. It also allows the various cause components and the associated emergent clusters to be more readily identified. The contribution of the research relates to the assessment of cause within a construction that is defined in the context of a fairly broad accepted view of the framework of building code (legal, Administrative, technical, & social). The fault (cause) likelihood construction is based on the building code framework proposed in this research and could facilitates a focus on roles and responsibilities, and allows the coordination and integration of activities for regular development and implementation with the building code goals. This contribution would better enable building officials and code writers to identify and manage faults (causes) as they emerge with BC aspects/parts and more closely reflect building and construction activities and processes and facilitate the fault (cause) administration exercise.

No description available.