Factors Affecting Households Vulnerability to Climate Change in Swaziland: A Case of Mpolonjeni Area Development Programme (ADP)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated household vulnerability to climate change and the factors affecting vulnerability of the households at Mpolonjeni Area Development Programme in Swaziland. Primary data were collected through personal interviews from 323 randomly sampled households. The household vulnerability index was used to establish household vulnerability and the multinomial logistic regression model was used to identify the factors affecting household vulnerability. The results show that 39.6% of the households were lowly vulnerable, 58.2% were moderately vulnerable and 2.2% were highly vulnerable. Parameter estimates of the multinomial regression model show that the number of sick members, number of employed members, number of dependants, household size and the livestock index influence households to move from low vulnerability to moderate vulnerability or high vulnerability. Households are vulnerable to external shocks thus appropriate policy interventions should be put in place. A health policy would help reduce vulnerability of households and a rural development policy would create employment opportunities leading to improved livelihoods.
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) | 0.000 | 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".