MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303457487 · doi:10.1016/j.erss.2022.102829

Injustices in rural electrification: Exploring equity concerns in privately owned minigrids in Tanzania

2022· article· en· W4303457487 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hannah Mottram

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Research & Social Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnergy and Environment Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of AlbertaUniversity of SheffieldEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilGlobal Challenges Research FundUniversity of Dar es Salaam
KeywordsRural electrificationTanzaniaElectricityBusinessElectrificationEquity (law)Economic growthRural areaEconomicsSocioeconomicsPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Access to electricity is vital for many basic needs, but it is often unaffordable. Since 2008, there has been an increase in private companies providing electricity access in rural areas through solar minigrids in Tanzania. This paper focuses on the different tariffs used in projects in Tanzania and how they distribute costs. Data were collected over eight months of fieldwork in 2019/2020 from six rural communities through interviews, focus groups, surveys, and directly from minigrid companies. I have found that by private companies treating electricity as an economic good communities experience energy injustices. Under many tariffs poorer households pay more per unit than those with higher incomes. Poorer households are less likely to be able to connect and under some tariffs self-disconnect from their electricity service. Barriers such as lack of participation in project development, high tariffs, and high connection fees limit the benefits of rural electrification.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.639
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.230 · 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.

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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy Research & Social ScienceSame topicEnergy and Environment ImpactsFrench-language works237,207