Les fruits tiennent-il les promesses des fleurs ? Une analyse des pratiques de microcrédit de l’UM-Pamecas au Sénégal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article s’intéresse aux impacts économiques et sociaux des microcrédits sur l’autonomisation des femmes de l’Union des mutuelles-Partenariat pour la mobilisation de l’épargne et le crédit au Sénégal (UM-Pamecas). En effet, les femmes des pays d’Afrique subsaharienne ont tenté de répondre aux conséquences des programmes d’ajustement structurel (PAS) en investissant en nombre le secteur informel. C’est dans ce contexte qu’il faut comprendre l’introduction de la microfinance dans les dispositifs de financement de l’entrepreneuriat féminin. L’analyse du mode de fonctionnement de l’UM-Pamecas montre que cette institution a délimité un champ mettant en présence des représentations, des pratiques, des stratégies et des acteurs susceptibles de l’éloigner des objectifs proclamés de la microfinance (lutte contre la pauvreté, promotion de l’égalité entre les hommes et les femmes).
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".