MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385820190 · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-39039-5_4

Trade and Women’s Economic Empowerment: Qualitative Analysis of SMEs from Ghana, Madagascar, Nigeria, and Senegal

2023· book-chapter· en· W4385820190 on OpenAlexaff
Yiagadeesen Samy, Adeniran Adedeji, Augustine Iraoya, Madhurjya Kumar Dutta, Jasmine Lal Fakmawii, Hao Wen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Business and FDI
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentGeneral partnershipFocus groupContext (archaeology)Government (linguistics)Qualitative researchWork (physics)BusinessEconomic growthPrivate sectorPolitical scienceEconomicsSociologyGeographyEngineeringMarketingSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Using Ghana, Madagascar, Nigeria, and Senegal as case studies, this chapter elucidates the dynamics of trade and women empowerment in Africa through a qualitative analysis that involved focus group discussions (FGDs) and key informant interviews (KIIs) with managers and employers, and employees of SMEs, as well as government officials and Trade Support Organizations (TSOs). After presenting the operational context of trade and economic performance in the four candidate countries, the barriers to women’s participation in trade are discussed using the PESTLE framework. Our qualitative analysis shows that cross-cutting factors that influence job creation for women across the trade sectors include the nature of work, job demands in terms of physical strength and timing, and working conditions of employees. The chapter argues that trade has the potential to empower women. However, if finds that various challenges prevent women from maximizing the gains from trade and proposes that a strong public–private partnership is necessary for trade to lead to women empowerment.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInternational Business and FDIFrench-language works237,207