The impact of international actors on domestic agricultural policy: a comparison of cocoa and rice in Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The global financial and food crisis of 2007 and 2008 was followed by a surge in foreign interest and investment in African agriculture. Renewed global interest in African agriculture was also accompanied by an increase in international efforts to influence domestic agricultural policies, including in Ghana. In the context of an increasingly globalised food regime and integrated commodity markets, this thesis answers the question: to what extent do international actors impact domestic agricultural policies in Ghana?<br><br>Policy ‘impact’ is understood as the marked influence that international actors have on policy goals and the resources, institutions, and knowledge used for achieving them. This thesis compares case studies of cocoa and rice policy over two different periods in Ghana’s recent history (1983-1995 and 2003-2012) to understand how international actors use their power and resources to impact agricultural policies. The comparison of cocoa and rice policy is used to address two gaps in existing literature by examining how the impact of international actors relates to: 1) the political economy for a specific crop; and 2) the interaction between actors at international, national and local levels. Findings from the comparative analysis are then used to test existing theories for how international actors influence government policy in Africa more generally. In particular, findings provide new insights into how the impact of international actors on African agricultural policies is strongly associated with the effect of policy decisions on the longer-term political economy for a particular crop.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".