MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398149097 · doi:10.58567/ete02010005

Does Education Predict Women’s Use of Unsustainable Biomass Cooking Technologies? Evidence from a Natural Experiment

2024· article· en· W4398149097 on OpenAlexaff
Jean-Louis Bago, Marie Madeleine Ouoba

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Technologies and Environment · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnergy and Environment Impacts
Canadian institutionsGouvernement du Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomass (ecology)Natural (archaeology)Natural experimentNatural resource economicsEnvironmental scienceEconomicsAgricultural economicsGeographyEcologyMathematicsStatisticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In developing countries, the dependence on traditional biomass for domestic energy consumption is one of the major causes of deforestation and environmental poverty. This paper investigates the impact of women’s education on the probability of using Unsustainable Biomass Cooking Technologies (UBCT) as the household main fuel of cooking instead of clean energy. Combining data from four rounds of Nigeria DHS conducted between 2003 and 2018, we take advantage of a natural experiment, the implementation of Uni-versal Primary Education policies in 1970, to obtain an exogenous variation in women’s education levels. Using an instrumental variable approach to control for the endogeneity issues, we find that women with higher levels of education are less likely to use UBCT as their primary source of cooking. This result implies that environmental policies in developing countries should rely not only on income transfers policies as suggested in the literature but also on increasing women's human capital to reduce women’s dependence on unsustainable biomass cooking practices.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy Technologies and EnvironmentSame topicEnergy and Environment ImpactsFrench-language works237,207