MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410184152 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v18n3p122

How Women’s Leadership and Entrepreneurship Development Programs Facilitate Long-term Change: A Narrative Analysis

2025· article· en· W4410184152 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shreya Chawla, Maya Neumann, Khanjan Mehta

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Diversity and Inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeEntrepreneurshipTerm (time)Narrative inquiryBusinessLiteratureFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In many developing countries, women are central to agricultural production and possess valuable, often underutilized, knowledge of crop diversity and local food systems. Despite significant global efforts to address food insecurity and gender inequality, the impact of many well-intentioned initiatives is frequently diminished by local, institutional, and bureaucratic barriers. This article examines a selection of agricultural programs that have demonstrated measurable success in promoting gender equity and improving food security by actively investing in women’s skills, leadership, and economic participation in agribusiness. Through an in-depth analysis of eight such initiatives that prioritize personal development and capacity building, this study identifies key implementation strategies that have contributed to their effectiveness. The findings offer practical guidance for policymakers, development practitioners, and organizations seeking to design future interventions that are contextually grounded, inclusive, and capable of delivering long-term, sustainable outcomes for marginalized communities.

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)0.008
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.149 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicGender Diversity and InequalityFrench-language works237,207