MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ghost biofuel projects: Abandoned Jatropha Curcas plantations and community wellbeing in Tana River County of Kenya

2024· article· en· W6947941308 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Taxonomy and Phylogenetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJatropha curcasJatrophaAgricultureBioenergyBiofuelPromotion (chess)Land useAfforestation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ontext and background In the mid-2000s there was aggressive promotion of large scale farming of Jatropha Curcas in Sub-Sahara Africa as a means to mitigate climate change through promotion of clean energy production and green energy security. However, many of these Jatropha projects were abandoned before reaching the production stage and ended up as a non-operational projects. The impact of abandoned Jatropha projects to the local communities that hosted them are an understudied phenomenon in Kenya and elsewhere. Goal and Objectives: The objective of this article is to explore how the failed Jatropha projects impact the wellbeing of local communities using the case study of Bedford biofuels project implemented by a Canadian investor in the Lower Tana Delta area of Tana River County in Kenya. Methodology: Empirical evidence of this article was obtained through individual and focus group interviews, observation and complemented with secondary sources. Results: This article unpacks the impact of a non-operational land deals on the local communities to advance the growing literature on the consequences of large scale land investments projects that get abandoned before the production phase and it submits that

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.354
Threshold uncertainty score0.866

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.225
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicPlant Taxonomy and PhylogeneticsFrench-language works237,207