MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122486540 · doi:10.5539/jas.v4n4p233

Socioeconomic Analysis of Rice Farmers and Effects of Group Formation on Rice Production in Ekiti and Ogun States of South-West Nigeria

2012· article· en· W2122486540 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
C. A. Afolami, Abiodun Elijah Obayelu, Mure Agbonlahor, O. A. Lawal-Adebowale

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCooperative Studies and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgricultural scienceHectareRice farmingMultistage samplingAgricultureDescriptive statisticsProduction (economics)Promotion (chess)BusinessOgun stateGross marginSocioeconomicsGeographyMathematicsEconomicsStatisticsBiologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study was conducted to determine the impact of farmers’ membership of cooperative societies on rice production. Against the backdrop that the promotion of membership of cooperative society among farmers would give them better access to agricultural inputs and consequently improve their income. Multistage sampling technique was employed to select a total of 310 rice farmers. Data collected were analyzed using descriptive statistics, budgetary technique and inferential statistics. The results revealed the mean age of the rice farmers as 48 years. Majority (92%) of the farmers produced upland rice, with a single harvest per year using mainly owned resources. Family labour was the most important source of farm labour in rice cultivation and about 60% of the members of the farm families participated in the family rice farm. The results further showed that 38.9% of rice farmers had primary education, 27.4% had secondary education, while 25.1% had no education. A total of 71% of the rice farmers were members of rice farmers’ cooperative societies, while 29% were not. The average farm size cultivated was 1.72ha and 1.64ha for cooperative and non-cooperative members respectively. The result also showed that there is no significant difference in the gross margin per hectare realized by farmers that were cooperative members (N90, 222) and the non cooperative members (N92, 986). The input-use structure showed that cooperative members were more intensive users of purchased inputs like fertilizer and pesticides valued at N124,555 per ha (about 41% of variable cost) compared to the non cooperative members valued at N57,647 per ha (about 22% of the variable cost). Almost all the groups were established to serve as receptacles for subsidized agricultural services and inputs rather than real producer organizations that seek to attract commercial providers of services and ensure efficient marketing of their farm outputs. Further revelation from the study is the fact that membership of cooperative society was found to be influenced by household size, access to extension services, number of rice farms owned, access of rice farmers to herbicide and quantity of rice output. The non-significant difference in the gross margin of cooperative and non-cooperative members despite the greater intensity of use of purchased inputs (fertilizer and pesticide) by cooperative members suggests the need for monitoring of rice farmers who are cooperators in order to ensure that the substantial inputs are rightly channeled.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations26
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicCooperative Studies and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207