MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802947902 · doi:10.1111/joac.12268

The political ecology of rice intensification in south India: Putting SRI in its places

2018· article· en· W2802947902 on OpenAlexafffund
Marcus Taylor, Suhas Bhasme

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agrarian Change · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRice Cultivation and Yield Improvement
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLivelihoodScope (computer science)Food securityPolitical ecologyPoliticsSouth asiaSystem of Rice IntensificationPaddy fieldBusinessEcologyEconomic growthPolitical scienceDevelopment economicsAgricultureSociologyEconomicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The system of rice intensification (SRI) has been promoted across Asia as a means to improve rice yields while decreasing water use and external inputs. It is argued to be a generalisable means by which to revalidate smallholder livelihoods and improve food security across the region. Current debates about SRI, however, remain predominantly technical in scope, focusing on field‐level outcomes. To more adequately understand the potential of SRI for smallholder farmers, we argue that it is necessary to situate SRI within a political ecology framework that addresses how the adoption and practice of SRI is shaped by uneven access to key assets including labour, water, and extension networks. Fieldwork conducted in Mahabubnagar district in Telangana, south India—where SRI had been widely disadopted despite the achievement of higher yields—is used to illustrate why agronomic analysis must engage directly with the complex social contexts in which farmers operate.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.012
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations30
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agrarian ChangeSame topicRice Cultivation and Yield ImprovementFrench-language works237,207