Baseline Farmer Survey of Smallholder Cocoa Farming Systems in Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of the prevalent low-input systems of production, over-aged farms, and unstable climate are worsened by weaknesses inherent in the formal system of production and distribution of recommended cocoa varieties. Generally, the purpose of the baseline survey was to obtain perception of the farmers in the target communities on the possibility of re-introduction of cocoa in denuded and marginal areas which were previously cropped to cocoa, but now food crops; determine farmers’ interest in planting new cocoa varieties; and determine farmer behavior in the use of technologies of cocoa farm establishment and maintenance. The survey was conducted in the period starting from 10th December, 2013 to 5th July, 2014 at Asesewa (Konkoney) in the Eastern Region, Akomadan and Afrancho in the Ashanti Region, as well as Kenyasi (Atwidie), Bechem (Breme) and Acherensua (Kokontreso) in Brong-Ahafo Region. The project sites and 192 respondents were purposively sampled. A standard questionnaire was employed to interview the respondents. Data analysis indicated that 40.0% of the respondents would want their farms to be rehabilitated whereas 60.0% indicated they would not. Also, 98.4% of them reported a higher possibility of re-introduction of cocoa in the denuded and marginal areas whilst 1.6% indicated that it was impossible. Additionally, 79.6% of the respondents expressed interest in testing any new cocoa varieties on their farms as part of the project while 20.4% were disinterested. In conclusion, the survey has indicated that re-introduction of cocoa in marginal and denuded area is highly probable.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".