MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362603291 · doi:10.1186/s40100-022-00240-9

Does contract farming affect technical efficiency? Evidence from soybean farmers in Northern Ghana

2023· article· en· W4362603291 on OpenAlexaff
Selorm Ayeduvor, D. B. S. Sarpong, Irene S. Egyir, Akwasi Mensah‐Bonsu, Henry An

Bibliographic record

VenueAgricultural and Food Economics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Innovations and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContract farmingUnobservablePropensity score matchingProductivityAgricultureMatching (statistics)Production–possibility frontierProduction (economics)Selection biasBusinessEconomicsAffect (linguistics)Agricultural scienceAgricultural economicsMicroeconomicsEconometricsEconomic growthGeographyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Understanding how and the extent to which contract farming arrangements impact agricultural productivity is important to ensuring that policies are designed to maximize the likelihood of success. Using cross-sectional data from 516 soybean farmers in Northern Ghana, we provide empirical evidence that contract farming increases soybean productivity and technical efficiency in Northern Ghana. We use propensity score matching to reduce bias from observables, and then estimate a stochastic production frontier model that addresses selection bias arising from unobservable variables. We find that the technical efficiency levels of contract farmers are 77 percent compared with 69 percent for non-contract farmers. We also find that access to credit, extension contact, and farmer group membership are key determinants of participating in contract farming.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.449
Threshold uncertainty score0.955

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations21
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgricultural and Food EconomicsSame topicAgricultural Innovations and PracticesFrench-language works237,207