MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409726145 · doi:10.1080/19376812.2025.2494010

One Village, One Dam and development politics in northern Ghana

2025· article· en· W4409726145 on OpenAlexaff
Heidi Hausermann, Patrick Roan, Aliyu Adamu, Hegelar Badumah Kolobire, Zoey Walder-Hoge, C Stuart Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrican Geographical Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHydropower, Displacement, Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsRed River College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsPolitical scienceGeographyDevelopment economicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To increase water access in Ghana’s arid, northern agricultural communities, the Ghanaian government initiated the One Village, One Dam (1V1D) project in 2017. Under 1V1D, the government planned to construct or repair over 570 small-scale dams across northern regions, where water scarcity and social-ecological vulnerabilities are particularly high. This research examines implications of 1V1D in one rural agricultural community. We interviewed 29 community members and state officials in the Upper East Region to understand how 1V1D was rolled out, and implications for farmers. Our findings reveal that while state officials asked for community input and participation, community knowledge was ultimately sidelined for outside ‘experts.’ Furthermore, the dam has not met community members’ expectations and is not used for dry season farming. We situate these findings in a long history of water and development in northern Ghana and argue that development projects must move beyond recent party politics to truly incorporate local people’s insights and experiences in participatory development projects.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrican Geographical ReviewSame topicHydropower, Displacement, Environmental ImpactFrench-language works237,207