The potential and limits of farmers’ groups as catalysts of women leaders
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index revealed weak leadership and influence of women in the community as indicators of women’s political disempowerment. Collective action through farmer groups can be an important strategy for women members to strengthen their political power. The study horns in to analyze the potential group characteristics that can act as catalysts to the number of leadership positions that women occupy. The study uses data from 65 farmers’ groups in central Uganda. Tobit regression model was used to assess the group factors that influence the proportion of positions women held in groups. The study found that groups had an average of 5 leadership positions and women strong leadership skills lie in being treasurers (70%). Number of households represented (10.7%), record keeping (27.9%), proportion of both youth (19.4%), and women (69.7%), number of economic activities (2.9%) were the key factors that influence the proportion of women in group leadership. The findings are useful in guiding development interventions that use group-based approaches in agricultural production and marketing.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it