MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2258838787 · doi:10.4102/jamba.v8i2.182

Climate change, household vulnerability and smart agriculture: The case of two South African provinces

2016· review· en· W2258838787 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mkhululi Ncube, Nomonde Madubula, Hlami Ngwenya, Nkulumo Zinyengere, Leocadia Zhou, Joseph Francis, Talentus Mthunzi, Olivier Crespo, Tshilidzi Madzivhandila

Bibliographic record

VenueJàmbá Journal of Disaster Risk Studies · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicClimate change impacts on agriculture
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)Climate changeAgricultureGeographySocioeconomicsProductivityNatural resource economicsBusinessEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The impact of climate-change disasters poses significant challenges for South Africa, especially for vulnerable rural households. In South Africa, the impact of climate change at the local level, especially in rural areas, is not well known. Rural households are generally poor and lack resources to adapt to and mitigate the impact of climate change, but the extent of their vulnerability is largely not understood. This study looked at the micro-level impact of climate change, evaluated household vulnerability and assessed alternative adaptation strategies in rural areas. The results indicate that climate change will hit crop yields hard and that households with less capital are most vulnerable. These households consist of the elderly and households headed by females. Households that receive remittances or extension services or participate in formal savings schemes in villages are less vulnerable. The results suggest that households need to move towards climate-smart agriculture, which combines adaptation, mitigation and productivity growth.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations51
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJàmbá Journal of Disaster Risk StudiesSame topicClimate change impacts on agricultureFrench-language works237,207