Policy or Markets? An Analysis of Price Incentives and Disincentives for Rice and Cotton in Selected African Countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
African governments have intervened extensively in markets through regulations and other price, trade, or marketing policies to provide price incentives to farmers. Using data from the Monitoring and Analyzing Food and Agricultural Policies program, this paper reports nominal rates of protection (NRPs) for rice and cotton at wholesale and farm level in selected African countries between 2005 and 2010. Rice is an import that has received high levels of border protection by the governments concerned while cotton is a key export crop which has been the focus of direct and indirect public intervention. For both commodities, we provide evidence for both market and nonmarket failures. In the case of rice, these prevent border protection from reaching farmers while raising consumer prices. Cotton ginning and marketing is concentrated in a small number of private sector companies in most countries studied. The farm level NRPs provide evidence of market failure in these countries that may be mitigated by policies that set indicative prices and encourage competition. The NRPs indicate nonmarket failure in the two countries that maintain parastatal monopsonies for cotton.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".