Microcredit-nutrition education link: A case study analysis of Ghanaian women's experiences in income generation and family care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Enhancing Child Nutrition through Animal Source Food Management (ENAM) project, part of the Global Livestock Collaborative Research Support Program (GLCRSP), integrated a microcredit and savings program with entrepreneurial and nutrition education to strengthen women’s income-generation activities with the intent of increasing women’s (caregivers)abilities to purchase more Animal Source Foods (ASF) for family meals. The model stressed the integration of research, community development and capacity strengthening and the full participation of partners. The aim of this qualitative study was to provide an understanding of how the microcredit, entrepreneurship and nutrition education program impacted the daily lives of the women who participated in the interventions. Three questions were addressed: What factors lead to success in a microcredit and nutrition education program? What are the obstacles to women’s successful participation and what strategies are employed to overcome these obstacles? What are the lessons learned for future programs? The qualitative analysis was based on case studies of 12 women considered by their peers to be ‘successful’ ENAM participants, and six case studies of women considered to be ‘less successful’ ENAM participants. The qualitative methodology complimented knowledge gained through quantitative investigations as reported by other authors in this supplement. Data were collected through focus group discussions, in-depth interviews and observations. The findings suggested that the greatest benefit to participants from the ENAM experience was its translation into opportunities for obtaining microcredit, which in turn, helped increase women’s business success. Women who were doing well in business before the ENAM interventions did even better as a result of their participation in the ENAM project. Successful women employed multiple strategies to overcome business challenges. Anecdotal evidence suggested that the microcredit-education link in this particular situation did positively impact women’s lives with respect to their small businesses, their personal development, and the health of their families.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".