MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Climate smart agricultural practices and gender differentiated nutrition outcome: An empirical evidence from Ethiopia

2019· article· en· W2946958312 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hailemariam Teklewold, Tagel Gebrehiwot, Mintewab Bezabih

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Development · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCenter for Substance Abuse PreventionConsortium pour la recherche économique en AfriqueInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsFood securityAgricultureClimate changeLivestockBusinessGreenhouse gasNatural resource economicsAgricultural productivitySustainable developmentEconomicsAgricultural economicsGeographyPolitical scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the beginning of the decade, climate resilient green economy strategies have been proposed in many African countries. One of the pillars of the strategies is the adoption and diffusion of various climate smart agricultural practices for improving crop and livestock production and farmer income while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The effects of these innovations on household nutritional security, including gender-differentiated nutritional status, have hardly been analyzed. We examine the determinants of adoption of combinations of multiple climate smart agricultural innovations and their impact on different nutrition outcomes. We find that adoption of climate smart innovations increases dietary diversity and improves calorie and protein availability. These benefits increase with adoption of combinations of innovations, relative to adopting an innovation in isolation. Gender-disaggregation results suggest nutritional outcome differentials between male and female headed households due to both differences in household characteristics, including household resources, and differences in returns to resources. The study provides insight into the interaction between climate change adaptation and nutrition security among male and female headed households, with implication for the Sustainable Development Goals of ending hunger, achieving gender equality, and taking action on climate change.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 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

Citations147
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld DevelopmentSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207