MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4304182999 · doi:10.1177/00219096221131824

“Are We All in This Together?”: The Socioeconomic Impacts and Inequalities of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Ghana’s Informal Economy

2022· article· en· W4304182999 on OpenAlexaff
Ernest Nkansah‐Dwamena, Kesha Fevrier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Asian and African Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformal sectorLivelihoodPrecarityPandemicSocial distanceEconomic growthInequalitySocioeconomic statusDevelopment economicsPolitical scienceGeographySocioeconomicsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)SociologyEconomicsPopulationGender studiesMedicineDemographyAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic on the existing health inequalities disproportionately affecting vulnerable populations. It explores the impact of COVID-19 pandemic response measures to “curb the spread” on informal sector workers in Ghana. In Ghana, like many other developing countries, the informal sector was impacted by a higher risk of exposure to the COVID-19 infection and the slew of pandemic response measures, for example, lockdowns and stay-at-home orders, as well as guidelines around social distancing implemented by their governments. Given the high level of precarity that undergirds work in the informal sector and the intersectional forces that contribute to and maintain their marginality—class, race, ethnicity, gender, religion, and geographic location—this paper creates a space for dialogue about the unintended consequences of pandemic response measures on the livelihood security of informal sector workers.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.514
Threshold uncertainty score0.442

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Asian and African StudiesSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207