Do perceived inequalities in safe water access manifest in collective action? Evidence from urban Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Access to safe drinking water is critical in improving health and well-being. It is estimated that >40% of urban households in Ghana do not have access to safe drinking water. Although the willingness and ability of community members to collectively take local initiatives are essential to curtailing inequities in water access in Ghana, the determinant of collective action is less explored. This paper explores determinants of collective action in water-insecure neighbourhoods and examines how perceived inequities in access to water and trust mediate the relationship between lack of access to water and collective action in urban Ghana. The results show that the urban poor OR = 12.047 (p = 0.000) were more likely to participate in water-related collective action compared to wealthy individuals. Primary decision-makers were 1.696 times more likely to participate in collective (p = 0.02). We also found that perceived inequities OR = 0.381 (p = 0.00) significantly predict participation in collective action to address water insecurity. Water service providers should be subjected to a rigid state-level framework that ensures inclusivity, fairness and justice in their distribution systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 teacher head, 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".