MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376223501 · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16026

Estimating the distributional impact of innovation platforms on income of smallholder maize farmers in Nigeria

2023· article· en· W4376223501 on OpenAlexaff
Adeolu B. Ayanwale, Temitope O. Ojo, Adewale Adolphous Adekunle

Bibliographic record

VenueHeliyon · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Innovations and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFriedreich's Ataxia Research Alliance
KeywordsRevenueAgricultureDisseminationBusinessPsychological interventionInstrumental variableAgricultural economicsQuantile regressionProduction (economics)EconomicsAgricultural scienceFarm incomeOrder (exchange)Public economicsGeographyEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research studies the distributional effects of IP adoption on the farm income of smallholder maize farmers in Nigeria in an effort to move beyond the standard mean impact assessment of agricultural interventions. In order to account for selection bias that may result from both observed and unobserved factors, the study used a conditional instrumental variable quantile treatment effects (IV-QTE) strategy. The use of IPs greatly affects the revenue distributions of maize producers, as empirical evidence from the outcomes shows. Particularly, the impacts of adoption are stronger at the lower tails and just above the mean of the income distributions, indicating that impoverished farming households benefit more from the strategic functions of IP adoption in boosting income. These findings highlight how important it is to effectively target and disseminate improved agricultural technologies in order to increase the revenue of smallholder maize farmers in Nigeria from maize production. Agricultural research information and access to extension services are two policy tools that can help improve the successful adoption and diffusion of any agricultural intervention without favoring any particular groups.

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 score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeliyonSame topicAgricultural Innovations and PracticesFrench-language works237,207