MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801251270 · doi:10.5539/sar.v7n3p9

The Importance of Prison Farms: Evidence from Malawi’s Prisons

2018· article· en· W2801251270 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hastings B. Moloko, Davis H. Ng’ong’ola, Henry Kamkwamba

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainable Agriculture Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPoverty, Education, and Child Welfare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrisonPer capitaFood securityFood insecurityConsumption (sociology)Food processingProbitGeographyProbit modelSocioeconomicsAgricultureEnvironmental healthPolitical scienceEconomicsSociologyPopulationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While Malawi’s per capita cereal production may be higher than her per capita cereal consumption, Malawi is a net cereal importer and thus food insecure. The food situation is much worse in Malawi’s prisons because inmates generally eat one meal per day.The general objective of this study was to determine the importance of farms in Malawi’s prisons by comparing food insecurity in prisons with farms to that in prisons without farms. Using structured questionnaires in face to face interviews, the study collected data from 1000 prisoners and 30 officers-in-charge from all prisons in the country. The data was analysed using Stata 12 and employed the probit and the Foster-Greer-Thorbecke (FGT) models as an analytical tools.Results from the analysis showed that practically all prisoners in Malawi’s prisons were food insecure. There was a higher perception of food insecurity in prisons without farms than there was in prisons with farms. Conditions of severe food insecurity were experienced more in non-farmed prisons than in farmed prisons, and more prisoners in non-farmed prisons depended on food brought to them from their homes. Food insecurity was more prevalent in prisons without farms than in prisons with farms.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.338 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainable Agriculture ResearchSame topicPoverty, Education, and Child WelfareFrench-language works237,207