MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083015718 · doi:10.1080/03056240008704458

State‐NGO relations in an era of globalisation: the implications for agricultural development in Africa

2000· article· en· W2083015718 on OpenAlexaff
Korbla P. Puplampu, Wisdom J. Tettey

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of African Political Economy · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgricultureGlobalizationState (computer science)Context (archaeology)PoliticsPolitical scienceInternational relationsInternational developmentAgricultural developmentDevelopment economicsInvestment (military)Economic growthEconomic systemPolitical economyEconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The crisis of the African state has been a dominant feature of the continent's socio‐political and development discourse in the last two decades. In a region where agriculture is the engine of development and the state plays an active role in agriculture, the crisis of the state has created a vacuum in the institutional framework required for agricultural development. Nongovernmental organisations (NGOs), consistent with globalisation, have emerged and filled the vacuum as viable institutions for agricultural development. This study examines State‐NGO relations during globalisation and the implications of that relationship for agricultural development in Africa. Exploring the socio‐political context of such relations, especially the nature of investment in the agricultural sector, the study shows how the uncertain outcomes of State‐NGO relations, exacerbated by global forces, affect the long‐term prospects of agricultural development in Africa.

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)0.003
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations20
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of African Political EconomySame topicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207