MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2732953159 · doi:10.1002/jid.3291

Food Price, Food Security and Dietary Diversity: A Comparative Study of Urban Cameroon and Ghana

2017· article· en· W2732953159 on OpenAlexaff
Krishna Bahadur KC, Alexander Legwegoh, Alex G. Therien, Evan Fraser, Philip Antwi‐Agyei

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of International Development · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicUrban Agriculture and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDietary diversityFood securityDiversity (politics)Proxy (statistics)Food insecurityFood systemsEconomicsAgricultural economicsBusinessGeographyEconomic growthPolitical scienceAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper contributes to the urban food security literature by presenting the results of 600 household surveys conducted in Ghana and Cameroon. In this, we show how dietary diversity, which is a well‐developed proxy for food security, is similar in both countries but varies significantly based on household demographic characteristics. In particular, smaller, better‐off and more educated households were likely to have higher levels of dietary diversity and were less likely to respond to rising food prices by reducing diets or shifting buying patterns. In addition, households that live in ‘primary’ cities that are large and well integrated into global markets also enjoyed higher levels of dietary diversity. This research contributes to debates around whether or not food security is enhanced by being integrated into global markets or whether it is better served through national or regional food systems. The evidence uncovered here suggests that for well‐off households, integration into global markets is probably preferable as such households enjoy more diverse diets. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 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

Citations44
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of International DevelopmentSame topicUrban Agriculture and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207