MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3136804501 · doi:10.31273/lgd.2019.2502

Embracing the Data Revolution for Development

2021· article· en· W3136804501 on OpenAlexafffund
Tesh W. Dagne

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Law Social Justice and Global Development · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Innovations and Practices
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Cape TownAmerican University in CairoInternational Development Research CentreUniversity of JohannesburgUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsContext (archaeology)IndigenousCorporate governanceData governanceAgricultureEconomic JusticeBusinessPolitical scienceGeographyMarketingData qualityService (business)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the challenges that the digitalisation of agriculture in Africa brings with respect to ownership and control of data from the perspective of African indigenous farmers as data originators. It discusses the phenomena of the data revolution and digital agriculture in Africa, mapping out the ecosystem of digital agriculture by identifying general trends, key players, types and features of digitalisation driven by the capabilities of mobile and network infrastructure as well as by higher-level digitisation supported by data infrastructures capability. By situating farm data as a constitutive element of traditional knowledge of agricultural production that is subjected to ‘datafication’, the article outlines the challenges of access to data and of unequal utilisation of data as having an impact on development imperatives that necessitate better control of data flows. It proposes data justice as aconceptual framework for an Africa-wide governance of farm data in which the challenges on access to data and unfairness in its utilisation are addressed in a manner consistent with the continent’s aspirations for intra-regional relations.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.172

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0080.047
Scholarly communication0.0180.026
Open science0.0020.023
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Law Social Justice and Global DevelopmentSame topicAgricultural Innovations and PracticesFrench-language works237,207