Opportunity and Survival in the Urban Informal Food Sector of Namibia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Literature on participation in the informal food sector in cities of the Global South is conventionally characterized by a survivalist or opportunistic perspective. The main difference is that opportunists, in contrast to survivalists, are motivated by entrepreneurial choice rather than necessity and see opportunities for economic and social advancement in the sector. Recent studies in Brazil and India conclude that research on informal sector participation requires a “both/and” rather than “either/or” approach. The main problem this paper addresses is whether the “both/and” model is also applicable in the African context. This is the first study to investigate the issue in the informal food sector of an African city; in this case, the capital city of Namibia, Windhoek. The paper evaluates five potential ways of distinguishing between survivalist and opportunistic food vendors and concludes that entrepreneurial motivation (EM) provides the most useful set of metrics. Selected EM responses are then used to construct four regression models—two survivalist and two opportunistic—in order to determine which individual and business characteristics are most strongly and consistently associated with survivalism and opportunism. Few vendors are both survivalist and opportunistic in orientation. There is a possibility of survivalists becoming more opportunistic over time but the models do not confirm this hypothesis. Apart from differences in EM, there are many similarities between the two groups and both would therefore benefit from a more enabling policy environment. The primary distinguishing business characteristic is the enterprise type with street food vendors most likely to be opportunistic. Ironically, it is street vendors who are seen as unsightly, unhealthy, and uncontrollable, and face the most difficult operating environment.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it