Does Government Intervention Matter? Revisiting Recent Rice Price Increases in Bangladesh
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The specter of food crisis is haunting the world again in 2011. This comes after a short period of decline in food prices since they peaked in the summer of 2008. The addition of seven point five million people during the 2007-08 food crisis with the estimated food insecure population of sixty-five point three million in Bangladesh (FAO/WFP 2008) underlines the magnitude of food insecurity in the country. In this article I trace the volatility in Bangladesh’s rice market since the 2007-8 food crisis in terms of the country’s deregulation of agricultural sector and the gradual elimination of market regulatory mechanisms. I demonstrate that despite Bangladesh’s relatively minor dependence on the international rice market and a steady domestic supply, the lack of strong government regulation and monitoring of the market resulted in irrational rice-price increases. I argue that the alleged connections between the domestic and the international rice markets are largely hypothetical, and therefore the domestic price increases must be analyzed in terms of internal management of the market. The methodology of this article involves critical review of literature and data collected from secondary sources. Referring to Stiglitz I conclude that the Bangladesh rice market is far from developed and thus warrants a strong regulatory regime.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".