MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765774025 · doi:10.5539/jas.v9n11p99

Analysis of Factors Influencing Market Participation of Smallholder Bean Farmers in Nyanza District of Southern Province, Rwanda

2017· article· en· W2765774025 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jean Pierre Kamanzi Mbitsemunda, Antoine Karangwa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Innovations and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTobit modelProbitProbit modelOrdered probitMarket accessProductivityBusinessAgricultural economicsEconomicsAgricultural scienceAgricultureGeographyEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rwanda remains trading very low volume of beans inside the country and across borders thereby becoming unable to meet national and international demands. This is exacerbated by low market participation of bean growers. This study assessed factors that influence market participation and extent of participation among bean growers in Nyanza district. Probit model was used to analyze the factors influencing market participation among bean growers while the extent of market participation was analyzed using Tobit model. The probit results indicated that factors that positively and significantly influenced the probability of farmers to participate in output market were bean quantity produced, market experience, and access to credit while factors that negatively and significantly influenced market participation decisions included distance to nearest market, age and access to off-farm activities. Tobit results revealed that factors that were found to have positive statistical significant impact on the extent of market participation were bean quantity produced, marketing experience and selling price. Contrary to earlier expectation, land size was found to have negative significant impact on the quantity of bean marketed. This is possibly an indication that the increased household’s participation in output market is a function of farm productivity too.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.427
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations40
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicAgricultural Innovations and PracticesFrench-language works237,207