MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2530399835 · doi:10.1111/apv.12131

‘The weather is like the game we play’: Coping and adaptation strategies for extreme weather events among ethnic minority groups in upland northern Vietnam

2016· article· en· W2530399835 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Delisle, Sarah Turner

Bibliographic record

VenueAsia Pacific Viewpoint · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVietnamese History and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLivelihoodExtreme weatherSubsistence agricultureEthnic groupVulnerability (computing)GeographyVietnameseFood securityGovernment (linguistics)Political scienceEconomic growthAgricultureClimate changeEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Vietnamese government, along with country‐based non‐government organisations, are well aware of the vulnerability of Vietnam's coastal and low‐lying areas to extreme weather events. Yet scant attention has been paid to extreme weather hazards affecting Vietnam's northern mountainous regions and the livelihoods of ethnic minority farmers residing there. Building on conceptual tools from vulnerability, food security and sustainable livelihoods literatures, we examine the impacts of extreme weather, namely drought and severe cold spells, in Vietnam's northern uplands. We explore the degree to which these events impact the livelihood portfolios and food security of ethnic minority farmers, and examine the coping strategies households initiate, based on their ecological knowledge as well as recent market integration initiatives. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork with ethnic minority Hmong and Yao semi‐subsistence households undertaken yearly from 2012 to 2014, we demonstrate that financial capital – now more central to households' livelihoods than ever before due to state‐sponsored agricultural intensification – is an important means for farmers to cope with extreme weather events. Yet concurrently, longstanding culturally rooted social capital, networks and ties remain critical. Nonetheless, short‐ and long‐term adaptation is not widespread, leading us to investigate possible explanations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations36
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsia Pacific ViewpointSame topicVietnamese History and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207