Improving the safety and quality of cotton production in Pakistan
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Since 2014, CABI has been working in partnership with the Better Cotton Initiative (BCI) in two districts of Sindh Province of Pakistan to train cotton farmers and farm workers in improved cultivation and harvesting practices.The aim is not only to improve cotton quality but also to promote practices that are safer in terms of both workers' health and environmental protection.Since the programme started, CABI has trained 11,360 farmers, 22,252 male farm workers and 16,000 female farm workers.In 2017 CABI commissioned a study to evaluate the effectiveness of this capacity building programme.It explored changes in behaviour and the financial, social and environmental benefits of the improved practices, as well as changes in awareness, opinions and attitudes resulting from the training.The study found that as a result of the training, cotton production practices including improved safety had improved.However the direct financial impact of improving cotton quality was disappointing.Although some ginners now pay a 1% premium for cotton produced according to BCI standards, this does not translate into higher pay for the farm workers.The main benefits for workers relate rather to improved health through safer practices, particularly reduced and safer pesticide use, which as well as improved quality of life translates into financial benefits through reduced healthcare costs and the ability to pick more cotton per day. Key highlights• As a result of the training, farmers are much more likely to use registered and properly labelled pesticides, to reduce the frequency of pesticide application, and to adopt a range of safety measure for themselves and their workers.However workers have to pay for safety equipment such as gloves and masks.• Women workers perceive that their own and their families' health has improved as a result of safer pesticide use, and that this enables them to pick larger volumes of cotton and so increase their income. Decent workDecent workplace conditions are a fundamental workers' right.The study explored farmers' awareness and understanding about decent work and wages in terms of five indicators: appropriate timing, good wages, no bullying, proper breaks, and toilet facilities.It found that the vast majority (85-100%) of BCI trained farmers are aware of each of these, compared to only 26-36% of untrained farmers.Furthermore, all BCI trained farmers believed that men and women should be treated equally and should get equal wages.Similarly, BCI-trained male workers were more aware of decent work issues, and of wage and gender equality, than untrained workers.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».