MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2401293832 · doi:10.1177/0020872815603783

Self-help without the self: Critique of non-governmental organizational approaches to rural development in Ghana

2015· article· en· W2401293832 on OpenAlexafffund
Gershon K. Osei

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Social Work · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPoverty, Education, and Child Welfare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersUniversity of Windsor
KeywordsUnderdevelopmentRural developmentEconomic growthWork (physics)Political scienceRural managementRural areaDevelopment economicsEconomicsAgricultureGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For more than four decades, governments of Ghana have worked with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to solve rural problems. However, the extent to which NGOs have been able to improve rural conditions is questionable. Many have suggested that NGOs function more as patriarchs than as partners in their rural development work. This article is a critique of NGO strategies for rural development in Ghana, in which I argue that the longstanding limitations of NGO strategies may have contributed to rural underdevelopment rather than development. I conclude that if NGOs are to contribute meaningfully to rural development in Ghana, they will need to change their strategies.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Social WorkSame topicPoverty, Education, and Child WelfareFrench-language works237,207