MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386768587 · doi:10.32920/24148026.v1

Harvesting rainwater for food security: farmers’ perceptions of the Boardwalk Cisterns Program in Alagoas, Brazil

2023· preprint· en· W4386768587 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRural Development and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood securityCisternAgricultural scienceRainwater harvestingGeographyAgricultureBeneficiarySocioeconomicsProduction (economics)PopulationFood processingAgricultural economicsBusinessEconomicsEnvironmental healthBiologyEcologyFood scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p><strong>Introduction</strong>: Boardwalk Cisterns is a government program that aims to attend a population with precarious access to water in Brazil. Developed as part of the Zero Hunger strategy, it intends to increase food security and contribute to the realization of the human right to food. The objective of this study was to assess farmers’ perceptions of the Boardwalk Cisterns program and its impact on the food security situation of beneficiary households.<br> <strong>Methods</strong>: Data were collected through a descriptive cross-sectional quali-quantitative survey. Questionnaires were applied to farming families selected from two municipalities in the state of Alagoas (Northeast Brazil), containing questions on sociodemographic characteristics, production methods, and food security status. The Free Evocation Technique for social representation, analyzed through the software <em>Ensemble of Programs Permettant L'analyze des Évocations</em>, was used to ascertain farmers’ perceptions of the program.<br> <strong>Results</strong>: The study showed a positive perception of the interviewees in relation to the boardwalk cisterns. The program brought some improvement in the agricultural production conditions and, consequently, in the food security situation of the households. Corn, beans and cassava were the most common crops, with almost half of this production (48.3%) destined for consumption by the families themselves. Farmers also reported having more water, allowing them to plant more fruit trees, as well as medicinal and ornamental plants. Nevertheless, 79.1% of the households interviewed were still in a situation of food insecurity, of which 28.1% were classified as mild food insecurity, 26% as moderate food insecurity, and 25% as severe food insecurity.<br> <strong>Conclusion</strong>: Farmers were correct in their perception that the Boardwalk Cisterns program improved their food security situation. The program resulted in greater access to water, and greater production and consumption of food. However, by itself, the Boardwalk Cisterns program was not enough to raise beneficiary families above their food-insecure status. The program alleviated the problem of food insecurity, but other complementary government interventions are needed to guarantee the food security of families living in extreme poverty.</p>

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 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 score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRural Development and AgricultureFrench-language works237,207