MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Self-Help Groups in Afghanistan: A Ploy of Economic and Social Empowerment of Women for Sustainable Development

2024· book-chapter· en· W4404157104 on OpenAlexaff
Nassir Ul Haq Wani, Bibi Sarah Majidi, Neeru Sidana, Richa Goel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMicrofinance and Financial Inclusion
Canadian institutionsCanadian Standards Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentSustainable developmentPolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Women's empowerment is nothing new; it has been acknowledged as an essential element of eradicating poverty and advancing the economy. However, it remains problematic in most developing countries, such as Afghanistan. This research evaluates women's empowerment experiences by utilising Self-Help Groups (SHGs) as a fundamental development method to empower women economically and socially. This study adopts a qualitative research style, with data mainly acquired from rural areas (Kabul province). The findings indicated that SHG involvement is closely associated with families' socio-economic well-being, meaning that SHG participants are more empowered than those who do not engage or are oblivious to SHGs. SHGs confront various obstacles in Afghanistan, including (but not limited to) erroneous cultural norms, security issues, inadequate financial assistance and poor member participation, all of which influence operations. This study makes important recommendations for promoting and achieving women's integration and active participation in SHGs, including increasing social awareness, support from civil society and the government, laws and regulations that support women, strategies to increase women's economic and social empowerment and linking groups to commercial banks.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.196 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 topicMicrofinance and Financial InclusionFrench-language works237,207