MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2240235115

Institutional Change in Value Chains: Evidence from Nepal

2015· article· en· W2240235115 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Mohan

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal trade, sustainability, and social impact
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLivelihoodValue chainContext (archaeology)BusinessValue (mathematics)TypologyDeveloping countryIndustrial organizationSupply chainPublic economicsEconomicsEconomic growthAgricultureMarketingGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Local conditions in developing countries have long played a part in determining whether their small-scale firms can benefit from deepening their participation in global value chains (GVCs). Institutional theory allows us to characterize these local conditions not simply as particularistic oddities but rather as elements of an institutional matrix that affects the livelihoods of chain participants. However, the institutional dimension of GVC analysis has been traditionally neglected in the literature, to the detriment of our understanding of the impacts of upgrading in GVCs. This study aims to remedy this failure by illustrating how institutional context mediates between value chain upgrading and the livelihoods of chain participants. It particular, it seeks to elucidate how value chain upgrading spurs a process of change in the institutions that govern the livelihoods of suppliers in developing countries. This examination sheds light on the more general question of how value chain upgrading sometimes helps, but sometimes hurts, the welfare of chain participants. This theoretical contribution to the value chain literature is based upon an institutional analysis of primary qualitative data from more than 80 small-scale tea farmers in Nepal, some of whom had upgraded from conventional to organically certified production. Our study finds that value chain upgrading launches a process of institutional change that can be summarized in a general typology. The typology highlights how rules, strategies, organizations, and informal norms affect whether a given upgrading intervention yields livelihood benefits in a particular place. Upgrading can yield positive impacts in chain-linked livelihood dimensions, such as price, and yet induce negative changes in other livelihood dimensions, such as risk, and thereby yield overall adverse livelihood implications, in a process we dub immiserizing upgrading. These findings contribute to advancing the conceptual literature on global value chains (GVCs) by suggesting a general typology for cycles of institutional change that influence livelihood outcomes. The typology provides a framework to analyze such processes that is also of use to development practitioners seeking to understand the conditions under which upgrading worsens or improves the welfare of value chain participants. The research findings provide an interesting window into how certification schemes interact with the daily lives of the rural poor.

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)0.013
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicGlobal trade, sustainability, and social impactFrench-language works237,207