MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2291995701 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v9n1p296

Approaches to Community Development in Nigeria, Issues and Challenges: A Study of Ebonyi State Community and Social Development Agency (EB-CSDA)

2016· article· en· W2291995701 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Larry E. Udu, Sunday O. Onwe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican Education and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPovertyAgency (philosophy)Community developmentState (computer science)Economic growthPoverty reductionSocioeconomicsPolitical scienceRural developmentGeographySociologySocial scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study examined the activities of the Ebonyi State Community Based Social Development Agency (EB-CSDA), particularly on poverty reduction in the rural communities of Ebonyi State. Survey and content Analytical Approach were adopted. Data were extensively drawn from documentary papers, publications, oral interviews, direct observation and the use of structured questionnaire distributed to 400 sampled respondents from rural communities in the 13 LGAs of the State. Findings reveal that despite efforts of successive governments aimed at reducing poverty, the scourge has remained pervasive. EB-CSDA however, is rated high in the provision of micro-projects to the rural communities but its approach is group- targeted rather than on the individual poor. Consequently, the paper recommends among others that adequate background studies should be undertaken to understand the demographic characteristics of the rural communities to enable development agencies target their efforts on the real poor based on sufficient needs assessments of recipients.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0190.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.158 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations11
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicAfrican Education and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207