MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949561484 · doi:10.1093/jae/ejaa002

Impact of the West African Ebola Epidemic on Agricultural Production and Rural Welfare: Evidence from Liberia

2020· article· en· W2949561484 on OpenAlexaff
Alejandro de la Fuente, Hanan G. Jacoby, Kotchikpa Gabriel Lawin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of African Economies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural risk and resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgricultureContext (archaeology)WelfarePer capitaAgrarian societyAgricultural productivityAgricultural economicsEconomicsSocioeconomicsDevelopment economicsRural areaEconomic growthGeographyPopulationEnvironmental healthPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The 2014-15 Ebola epidemic took a devastating human and economic toll on three West African countries, of which Liberia was perhaps the hardest hit. The pathways through which the crisis affected economic activity in these largely agrarian societies remain poorly understood. To study these mechanisms in the context of rural Liberia, we link a geographically disaggregated indicator of Ebola disease mortality to nationally representative household survey data on agricultural production and consumption. We find that higher Ebola prevalence (as proxied by local mortality) led to greater disruption of group-labor mobilization for planting and harvest, thereby reducing rice area planted as well as rice yields. Household welfare, measured by per capita expenditures spanning two points before and after the crisis, fell by more in Ebola prevalent areas with more intensive rice-farming, precisely those areas more adversely affected by agricultural labor shortages.

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)0.004
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations26
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of African EconomiesSame topicAgricultural risk and resilienceFrench-language works237,207