MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An error corrected almost ideal demand system for major cereals in Kenya

2010· article· en· W2097976094 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan Makau Nzuma, Rakhal Sarker

Bibliographic record

VenueAgricultural Economics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomics of Agriculture and Food Markets
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersConsortium pour la recherche économique en AfriqueInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsAlmost ideal demand systemEconomicsSorghumConsumption (sociology)Agricultural economicsError correction modelEconometricsPrice elasticity of demandMicroeconomicsCointegrationAgronomyBiologyProduction (economics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Despite significant progress in theory and empirical methods, the analysis of food consumption patterns in developing countries, particularly those in Sub‐Saharan Africa (SSA), has received very limited attention. An attempt is made in this article to estimate an Error Corrected Almost Ideal Demand System for four major cereals consumed in Kenya employing annual data from 1963 to 2005. This demand system performs well on both theoretical and empirical grounds. The symmetry and homogeneity conditions are supported by the data and the Le Chatelier principle holds. Empirically, all own‐price elasticities are negative and significant at 5% level and irrespective of the time horizon, maize, wheat, rice, and sorghum may be considered as necessities in Kenya. While the expenditure elasticities of all four cereals are positive, they are inelastic both in the short run and in the long run. Finally, wheat and rice complement maize consumption in Kenya while sorghum acts as a substitute. Since cereal consumers have price and income inelastic responses, a combination of income and price‐oriented policies could improve cereal consumption in Kenya.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations59
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgricultural EconomicsSame topicEconomics of Agriculture and Food MarketsFrench-language works237,207