MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292316413 · doi:10.3390/su141610196

Impact of Farmers’ Climate Risk Perception and Socio-Economic Attributes on Their Choice of ICT-Based Agricultural Information Services: Empirical Evidence from Pakistan

2022· article· en· W4292316413 on OpenAlexaff
Nasir Abbas Khan, Ashfaq Ahmad Shah, Muhammad Atiq Ur Rehman Tariq, Ataharul Chowdhury, Uttam Khanal

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Innovations and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation and Communications TechnologyMultivariate probit modelBusinessAgricultural extensionCroppingAgricultureMultistage samplingMarketingPopulationRisk perceptionSocioeconomicsPerceptionGeographyEconomicsPolitical sciencePsychologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Pakistan, research on information and communication technologies-based agricultural information services (ICTbAIS) have gained significant attention owing to the overwhelming population of smallholder farmers (whose information needs are unable to be met by the conventional extension services) and the increasing incidence of climatic risk. This study is, therefore, conducted in the Punjab province of Pakistan (mixed cropping region) to explore farmers’ use of ICTbAIS and understand the relationship between farmers’ socio-economic attributes, risk perception, and choices of ICTbAIS. A sample of 480 farmers was drawn using a multistage sampling approach, and farmers were interviewed face-to-face. To analyze the dataset, a multivariate Probit (MVP) model was employed. The results show that Television (TV) and mobile-based advisory and mobile-based consultations appeared to be the most used ICTbAIS, followed by radio and internet-based advisory. The estimates of the MVP model showed that farmers’ age, education, farmland, tenancy status, off-farm income, and climate risk perception are significant determinants of their choices of ICTbAIS. Based on our results, we suggest policymakers and extension agencies to improve the content of ICTbAIS and make efforts for the awareness and training of farmers regarding the use of contemporary ICTs.

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)0.005
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicAgricultural Innovations and PracticesFrench-language works237,207