Vermicompost as a fertilizer for urban and peri-urban farms: Perceptions of farmers in Accra, Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vermicompost is considered a valuable organic fertilizer in many tropical regions, but has rarely been used in sub-Saharan Africa. A study in Accra, Ghana, assessed urban and peri-urban (UP) farmers’ fertilizer and pesticide use, knowledge of earthworms, fertilizer performance criteria, and attitudes toward vermicompost as a fertilizer. Twenty-six farmers involved in irrigated vegetable farming and three subsistence farmers were interviewed. Farmers were aware that earthworm activity was associated with soil fertility, and some associated insecticide applications to reduced earthworm populations. Farmers used the greenness of leaves, crop emergence, stand and yield as indicators of fertilizer performance. Farmers resisted making statements about vermicompost before testing it, and advised that its fertilizer value be tested during the dry season. Farmers involved in irrigated vegetable farming had insufficient space and time for on-farm vermicomposting, while subsistence farmers lacked a reliable access to water necessary for on-farm vermicomposting; but both types of farmers were interested in adopting vermicompost if it improved crop performance. Such lack of farm resources suggest that a commercial facility would be best suited to produce vermicompost from organic waste, which would then be sold to farmers.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".