Use of a warrantage system to face rural poverty and hunger in the semi-arid area of Burkina Faso
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is widely believed that limited access of small scale farmers to agricultural credit is one of the key causes of rural poverty and a major constraint to adoption of innovations in Sub-Saharan Africa. Since the early 1960s, many strategies to access agricultural credits have been implemented with success. This study assessed the effects of warrantage, a community-based micro credit system, on poor small resource farmers’ income and livelihoods of the semi-arid area of Burkina Faso. Two broad socio economic surveys were conducted among 1040 farmers and 440 household heads. Data were collected from 58 inventory credit warehouses and 36 input shops established in the study areas. The results showed that the warrantage system is dominated by women farmers (who produce 60% of the stored harvests) and appears as the main source of agricultural credit. The profit (up to 140%) provided allows farmers to purchase external inputs such as inorganic fertilizers. This resulted in higher crop productivity and a substantial increase of farmers’ income which in turn improve farmers’ livelihood. Key words: Inventory credit system, mineral fertilizer, staple crop production, small farmers.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".