Understanding the aspirations of ultra-poor women in Bangladesh can enhance wellbeing and target development efforts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Much development research is focused on deprivations as well as contextual factors that limit individuals' freedoms and choices to lead the lives they value; however, less attention is paid to the ends or the good life and how these can inform development efforts. This paper examines the aspirations of 43 ultra-poor female heads of household living in urban and rural Bangladesh within the context of wellbeing, i.e., the lives they value, in order to better understand how they could be assisted through development efforts. All women in our study articulated conceptions of personal wellbeing that were linked to their children and with the aim of conducting themselves as good mothers and honourable women. Physical and emotional hardship and the sacrifice of personal aspirations, happiness, nutrition, and health were required to establish children, who might in turn care for them in their old age; still, achieving these modest goals was difficult and resulted in constant worry or tension. Given the life these women value, social programs and policies that aim to support ultra-poor women who have children must consider how they can provide assistance that will benefit women directly without asking them to withhold assistance from their children.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".