Analysis and Critical Review of Rural Development Efforts in Nigeria, 1960-2010
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The work took a hard and critical look on the past and present efforts of the Nigerian Governments on rural industrialization and development as a panacea to rural poverty in the country. Both empirical and theoretical examination and analyses of the chequered efforts of the previous and present administrations of the Federal Government of Nigeria indicates that Bad Governance and inconsistency had remained the bane of all attempts at rural industrialization and development in the country, thereby exacerbating the poverty level of the rural dwellers. Consequently, the work concludes by noting that rural development in Nigeria since 1960- 2010 had remained a paradox, because the more efforts the government claims to make on rural development the worse the level of poverty in the rural areas turns out to be. It is advisable to point out that from the findings of the study, the best solution to tackling Nigeria's rural poverty and development is for the present government in the country to ensure good governance and policy consistency which will tackle corruption at its roots in the rural communities in particular and the society in general.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it