Financial inclusion strategies for slum households: insights from a conjoint analysis
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Slum dwellers continue to face exclusion from mainstream social, economic, and financial activities because of their lack of education and low income, leaving them vulnerable to income shocks and persistent poverty. The absence of empowerment compounds challenges and highlights the urgent need to address their financial inclusion. Designing an inclusive deposit product is imperative to ensure the financial inclusion of slum dwellers. We conducted a randomized conjoint experiment gathering 2500 choice responses from 250 respondents in slum households in Khulna, an industrial city in Bangladesh. Our study estimates the influence of each attribute on slum dwellers’ choice of deposit products, measures willingness to pay for the proposed inclusive deposit product, identifies heterogeneity in their preferences, and examines the impact of financial literacy on their preferences. Our hypothetical financial inclusion product provides valuable insights for policymakers when formulating comprehensive policies to ensure the financial inclusion of slum dwellers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it