MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606135886 · doi:10.1186/s40066-017-0116-6

Impacts of natural disasters on smallholder farmers: gaps and recommendations

2017· article· en· W2606135886 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAgriculture & Food Security · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersGlobal Affairs CanadaInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsLivelihoodBusinessAgricultureNatural disasterEconomic shortageIndigenousEnvironmental planningNatural resourceAgricultural economicsGeographyGovernment (linguistics)Political scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Here, we review the impacts of recent natural disasters in developing countries on rural agriculture and livelihoods with the objective of understanding gaps and providing recommendations. Lessons from these disasters demonstrate that national governments, aid agencies, and international/non-governmental organizations (I/NGOs) are effective primarily at distributing short-term products (e.g. food packages and tarpaulin) to cities. Such products are inexpensive, simple to procure, and easily quantifiable for donors. Unfortunately, the literature suggests that many national governments and foreign NGOs are ineffective at assisting rural farmers in the short and long term. Given that the global community is somewhat effective at distributing short-term products, we suggest that a similar strategy should be developed for rural areas, but focusing on products that can assist farm households. There appears to be a gap in knowledge of effective products that can target such households after a disaster. We propose an emergency sustainable agriculture kit (eSAK) framework for disaster relief in rural areas that involves a comprehensive list of products that can be combined into packages to address the needs of shelter, hunger, first aid, seeds, preservation of indigenous crop varieties, and post-disaster labour shortages. We also propose ideas on how to re-purpose relief products provided to urban areas to assist with farm needs. Products highlighted are rolls of agricultural-grade plastics, low-oxygen grain storage bags, waterproof gardening gloves, multi-use shovels, seeds of early maturing crops, fertilizers, inexpensive farming tools, temporary food support, and first-aid kits. These products are needed, inexpensive, labour efficient, compact, lightweight, available/procurable on a large scale, simple, and re- usable. Furthermore, correct use and re-purposing of the products can be explained using accompanying graphical illustrations, which is critical for rural illiterate households. As distribution to rural areas is a challenge, especially after a disaster, we propose the use of pre-existing alcohol/cigarette/snackfood distribution networks as a novel strategy for rural disaster relief. These efforts must be in partnership with local officials and grassroots organizations, with dedicated funding from governments and international aid agencies. It is hoped that global stakeholders will benefit from these recommendations to assist affected farmers after a crisis.

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.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.618

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.277 · 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