Single mothers coping with food insecurity in a Nairobi slum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With high urbanisation rates, cities in sub-Saharan Africa are contending with food insecurity. Urban studies scholars have approached the issue mainly from the perspective of food deserts. We adapt Sen’s ‘resource bundles’ and Watts and Bohles’s ‘space of vulnerability’ concepts to examine food insecurity as a function of both tangible and intangible resources. Moreover, we also interrogate the role of kin in strengthening safety nets for the urban poor. Drawing on a data set of 462 single mothers in a slum in Nairobi, Kenya, we find that (1) bundles comes in four types; (2) bundles with high levels of all resources buffer against food insecurity as do (3) bundles weighted with high levels of wealth and social standing; and (4) kin enhance the protective effect of bundles only for two types. These findings should direct urban poverty researchers to consider the compounding effect of resources in the reproduction of poverty and social inequality and encourage policy makers to focus on both vulnerability and resilience in designing interventions to ensure food security.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".