MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395463113 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v17n3p28

Modeling the Economic Value of Green Spaces in Residential Areas of Dar Es Salaam City, Tanzania

2024· article· en· W4395463113 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nicholaus Mwageni

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban and Rural Development Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTanzaniaDar es salaamGeographyValue (mathematics)SocioeconomicsEnvironmental planningEconomicsMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The economic value of green spaces in residential areas has been advocated to raise the land and property values. However, the establishment of the economic value of green spaces need many data such that it is costly and needs expertise. The objective of this study was to develop a user-friendly mathematical model that employ few data to determine the economic value of green spaces in residential areas in Dar es Salaam City. The study was cross sectional and employed structured questionnaires as a data collection method. Linear regression model was developed by relating economic values of green spaces to various environmental and socio-economic conditions of households. The study revealed that the net economic value of home greenery was significantly influenced by income of the households, area covered, age of the respondents and green space type. The average net benefit calculated from the model (1,317USD per household per year) was not far from the normal arithmetic mean calculated through traditional methods (1,369USD per household per year). This implies that the model can best predict the overall mean of the net benefit by 96.2%. It is therefore, recommended that the model can be used to estimate the economic value of ecosystem services from home greenery, property value and can guide the establishment of compensation for households due to green space availability.

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)0.003
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.340
Threshold uncertainty score0.658

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicUrban and Rural Development ChallengesFrench-language works237,207