A Crossed Analysis of Participations in Labor and Grain Markets: Evidence from Malawi
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
Abstract This study contributes to the literature on the identification of factors shaping the decision to participate in the grain market in Africa. Unlike previous studies, we introduce labor market participation into the farm household model to highlight heterogeneities in decision making. Empirically, we rely on an extension of Heckman's approach and introduce control functions to mitigate endogeneity issues related to the adoption of agricultural technologies. We find that limited access to transportation infrastructure, by discouraging the supply of grain, constrains households to experience an excess of labor; price incentives may have a reverse effect on the choice of market regimes, even though the effect on production may be positive for households that are already participants. We also show that farmers' responses to grain prices are not sensitive to their labor market position. The use of agricultural technologies encourages cereal production and employment of external agricultural labor. This study thus provides a better targeting when designing policies promoting marketing and rural employment.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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