MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2263612854 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v9n1p177

The Menace of Poverty and the Challenges of Public Policy Making in Nigeria

2016· article· en· W2263612854 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tunde A. Abioro, Hammed Adetola Adefeso

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Education, and Development Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPovertyGovernment (linguistics)HarmPoliticsEnforcementPublic policyDevelopment economicsEconomic growthEconomicsBusinessPolitical sciencePublic administrationLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study contends that poverty is a global phenomenon and no nation is immune to the scourge it is capable of causing especially when determined and clear policy measures are not put in place to check the menace. The objectives that interrogates the nerves of this discourse is to assess the rate of poverty in Nigeria as well as examine the role of government in poverty eradication. Also, to identify the various initiatives that governments in Nigeria have put in place since the pre; through and the post Structural Adjustment Programme era of the nation. Findings from the study reveals that attitudinal response and approach of both the government and the governed is appalling. Also, there exist a sharp disconnect between the government and the governed which has resulted into policy formulations that fail to meet the yearning, demand and desire of the people. Meanwhile, it was established that political and policy instability, poor targeting mechanism and inadequate coordination among the existing three tiers of government have done harm to programme implementation. The paper makes contribution by providing information and it adopt secondary source of data gathering. It concludes by recommending strengthened relationship/ communication between the governments and the governed to ensure proper and adequate policies that will meet their targets are made as well as enforcement of initiatives of governments directed at reducing poverty.

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)0.009
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.011
Scholarly communication0.0110.005
Open science0.0000.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicGender, Education, and Development IssuesFrench-language works237,207