Farmer perceptions on indigenous pig farming in Kakamega district, western Kenya
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives for this paper were to: study farmer beliefs and perceptions on local pig farming practices; and to explore opportunities for improved located production in selected villages of Western Kenya. The paper seeks to understand why the local pig breed still remains the predominant breed in these areas despite numerous calls to introduce better exotic breeds. Most pigs in Kenya are of exotic breeds, intensively managed on commercial farms. Focus group discussions were used to gather data. Discussions were taped, transcribed and translated from Swahili to English. Farmers use pigs to guard homes at night, pigs also act as a charm to protect families against evil spirits. Women farmers manage the family pigs, men sell the pigs. Farmers identified feeding, marketing, and breeding as the main challenges affecting the sector. The discussions identified a number of opportunities for improved production, and likely strengthened the bond between the farmers, researchers and staff. This created an outlook that can now be used in further public engagement as ongoing research studies on appropriate feed, health and improvement of market access are being analysed.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".