The impact of power outages on households in Zambia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract As global average temperatures rise, so does the frequency and intensity of El Niño-induced droughts, which in turn threaten the reliability of hydropower. 1.4 billion people live in countries where hydropower constitutes more than a quarter of the electricity production and which have experienced El Niño droughts, meaning many more power outages can be expected around the world. Little research has been conducted on the impact of power outages on mental health. This study takes Zambia as its case study to examine the impact that El Niño droughts have had on the lives of householders connected to a highly hydropower-dependant electricity grid, and includes the impact it has had on their physical and self-reported mental health. Using 54 online responses to a survey, we found that the greatest impacts of outages spoiled food, compromised entertainment, compromised ability to work and limitation in cooking options. More than a fifth of respondents reported experiencing self-reported depression to a major degree or all of the time due to power outages, with individuals writing their own responses that they felt debilitated, experienced reduced communication and reduced activities, and stress. Using Bayesian inference, we found that changes in sleeping patterns arising from power outages was a statistically significant predictor of self-reported depression. 63% of surveyed households were willing to pay approximately USD 0.10/kWh as of the end of 2019, about double the tariff that they did, to ensure reliable electricity supply. Household income was a statistically significant predictor of willingness to pay more.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".