MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2783688124 · doi:10.5539/jas.v10n2p82

Impacts of Agricultural Cooperatives on Farmers’ Revenues in Cambodia: A Case Study of Tram Kak District, Takeo Province

2018· article· en· W2783688124 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sereynithia Hun, Shoichi Ito, Hiroshi Isoda, Yuichiro Amekawa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Innovations and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRevenueAgricultureLivestockBusinessAgricultural economicsAgricultural sciencePropensity score matchingGovernment (linguistics)Agency (philosophy)Production (economics)Household incomeEconomicsGeographyFinanceForestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Agricultural cooperatives in Cambodia have been promoted with the aim of increasing agricultural production and farmers’ revenues. The objectives of this study are to identify factors influencing farmers’ decision on membership in agricultural cooperatives, and to assess the impact of being a member in those cooperatives on farmers’ revenues from paddy, livestock and farm. Cross-sectional data from interviews of 242 households in Tram Kak District, Takeo Province were used. The probit model and propensity score matching were employed to achieve the objectives. The results show that farmers who sold their paddy and had been contacted by extension workers from the government agency and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are more likely to join the cooperatives while male-headed household farmers and farmers who have high off-farm income are less likely to become members of the cooperatives. Moreover, the results of propensity score matching reveal that agricultural cooperatives have no impact on paddy yields and paddy revenue due to the fact that agricultural cooperatives do not provide sufficient training to their members, and members did not actively attend those trainings provided. Also, the cooperatives have failed to provide members better prices for their paddy. There are positive impacts on their livestock and farm revenues through increasing livestock and other crop production when agricultural cooperatives provide livestock and other crop training to their members. However, there is no impact on non-members if they join the cooperatives as they have higher off-farm income, less paddy land size and fewer laborers that are not favorable to taking on other farming activities.

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)0.000
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 score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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