Understanding the role of co-operatives in enhancing food security in East Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Policymakers and non-government organizations (NGOs) are increasingly looking to democratically governed co-operatives to address food insecurity. We provide what is, to our knowledge, a first-ever scoping review of scholarly literature published between 2000 and 2023 that considers the link between co-operatives and food security on the African continent, with emphasis on East Africa where food insecurity is most acute. Our PRISMA-guided review identified 13 studies that touch on food security after exploring the economic effects of co-operatives. We identify only five studies proposing a direct association between co-operatives and food security based on an empirical strategy connecting the outcome of food security to a dummy variable representing membership in a co-operative. We conclude that the mechanisms connecting co-operative to food security are under-explored. We also observe that while the literature allows us to infer that co-operatives can help address food availability and food access -- two of the four core dimensions of food security -- the link to food utilization (nutrition) and stability is much less clear. Our scoping review further suggests that scholars need to consider how social norms shape the household distribution of available and accessed food, and how co-operatives, as part economic and part social entities, might influence those norms. We conclude by outlining the mechanisms that could provide a richer understanding of how co-operatives shape the components of food security and by setting out some research questions that, if answered, could provide a more solid basis for future policy and NGO interventions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".