MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3148841360 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.160108

Sustainable Agriculture, Food Production and Poverty Lessening in Nigeria

2021· article· en· W3148841360 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cordelia Onyinyechi Omodero

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural risk and resilience
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPovertyAgricultureFood securityGovernment (linguistics)BusinessAgricultural productivityPsychological interventionAgricultural economicsProduction (economics)Economic growthEconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The challenge of persistent poverty and food insecurity in Nigeria has been an issue of concern. The government’s effort to alleviate poverty in Nigeria through agriculture appears ineffective because most poor people are rural dwellers and are coincidentally the farmers. They seem not to be benefiting from the government interventions to support farming due to corruption and other unquantifiable factors. This study investigates the impact of agricultural output and food production on poverty decrease in Nigeria. The data used in this study span from 2009 to 2019. Relevant diagnostic tests and regression analysis are performed to obtain the empirical evidence highlighted in this paper. Thus, the findings reveal that the Food Production Index significantly and positively impacts poverty reduction, while Agricultural Output has an immaterial negative effect on poverty decrease. The study concludes that poverty alleviation in Nigeria and food security will depend on government’s full involvement in agriculture and improvement on its agricultural budget. Accordingly, the provision of necessary facilities to boost agriculture have been recommended. The facilities include modern farming equipment, sufficient power supply, credit facility, storage facility, and large markets.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.227
Threshold uncertainty score0.169

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations28
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicAgricultural risk and resilienceFrench-language works237,207