MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1666909838 · doi:10.5539/ass.v11n21p183

The Role of Microfinance in Poverty Alleviation: Empirical Evidence from South-West Nigeria

2015· article· en· W1666909838 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Taofeek Aremu Kasali, Siti Aznor Ahmad, Lim Hock Ean

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMicrofinance and Financial Inclusion
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrofinancePovertyLoanGovernment (linguistics)Descriptive statisticsPoverty reductionBinary logit modelEconomic growthBusinessDevelopment economicsLogistic regressionSocioeconomicsEconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microfinance programme has been generally regarded as a development strategy that can enhance the economic performance of the poor. The government of Nigeria has made concerted efforts to alleviate poverty in the country. One of such efforts is Poverty alleviation through Microfinance loan but poverty still remains pervasive and widespread in the country especially in the rural communities. This study examines the role of microfinance vis-à-vis poverty reduction particularly in the South- West Zone of Nigeria. Data were collected through survey questionnaire in the study area. Descriptive Statistics together with Binary Logit Regression Model were employed to analyse the data collected. The result of the analyses revealed that microfinance loan made significant impact on the loan beneficiaries in the study area which lead to poverty reduction. The government is advised to provide more enabling environment to make Microfinance operations more effective in the country particularly in the rural areas. Microfinance Institutions are implored to create more awareness on their operations and make less stringent conditions for the loan accessibility.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicMicrofinance and Financial InclusionFrench-language works237,207