MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413093648 · doi:10.69931/001c.142851

Food Crises in Nigeria: Why the Crisis Communication Professionals Should Care

2025· article· en· W4413093648 on OpenAlexaff
Nkemjika George Njinma, Ngozi Comfort Omojunikanbi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Crisis and Risk Communication Association Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsWorld Federation of Science Journalists
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrisis communicationBusinessPolitical scienceDevelopment economicsPublic relationsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Food ranks first in the hierarchy of man’s needs in society. It is the nucleus in which every individual’s survival is anchored. Nigeria as a nation has witnessed a series of ups and downs since the end of colonial rule. From the time agriculture and agro-allied industries were the main source of the nation’s economy to the period where crude oil and allied products have become the major source of export earnings and contribute about 90% of the nation’s gross income, Nigeria has experienced and is still experiencing ups and downs. With the current state of the nation where there is hyperinflation in prices of food and general services, this is perceived to be caused by government inefficiency, exchange rate, monetary policy, tax laws, subsidy removal, and insecurity/ The objectives of this study were to find out the underlying causes of the food crisis, It is believed that this study will help bridge the academic industry gap and cultural and geographical divides, as well as contribute to the current literature on crisis communication.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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 venueInternational Crisis and Risk Communication Association ReportsSame topicDisaster Management and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207