MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403304303 · doi:10.1002/fes3.70012

How Do Household Coping Strategies Evolve With Increased Food Insecurity? An Examination of Nigeria's Food Price Shock of 2015–2018

2024· article· en· W4403304303 on OpenAlex
Justin Quinton, Glenn P. Jenkins, Godwin Olasehinde‐Williams

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

VenueFood and Energy Security · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural risk and resilience
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood insecurityShock (circulatory)Coping (psychology)Food securityEconomicsNatural resource economicsBusinessPsychologyAgricultureMedicineBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Faced with a significant devaluation of its currency and a surge in food prices, the Nigerian government prohibited the use of foreign currency for food imports. This essentially blocked the importation of numerous food items under the guise of stimulating the domestic output of these staples. Consequently, food prices in Nigeria increased despite a global decline in food prices, and the incidence and severity of food insecurity escalated. This study examines the changes in the types and severity of coping mechanisms for food insecurity resulting from the food price shock caused by the oil price crash, currency devaluation, and restrictions on foreign exchange. Nigeria's General Household Survey Panel data from 2012 and 2015, during periods of high oil prices, is compared with data from 2018 when oil prices had remained low, the currency had been devalued, and the treasury had been depleted. Alongside detailed descriptive statistics, logistic and hurdle regressions are employed for statistical analysis. Findings indicate a rise in the percentage of Nigerian households grappling with food insecurity from 2015 to 2018. During this period, 68.7% of households resorted to at least one coping mechanism, 31.8% adopted six or more coping strategies, and 43.2% resorted to severe coping strategies. The issue stems not primarily from natural disasters or conflicts but from a failure in macroeconomic and agricultural economic policies. Our findings confirm that these policies come at great cost, particularly to female‐headed households, single‐parent households, households headed by elderly people, and other vulnerable populations, pushing them deeper into food insecurity.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.686
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.182 · 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