MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6992884369

Microfinance and feminist capacity development: a case of rural women in the Central Andes of Peru

2021· dissertation· en· W6992884369 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Atrium (University of Guelph) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMicrofinance and Financial Inclusion
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGovernment of Canada
KeywordsMicrofinanceNegotiationNarrativeSocial constructivismPower (physics)Citizen journalismRural areaSocial changeParticipatory action research
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study analyzes rural women and capacity development from a constructivist feminist standpoint theory of knowledge that privileges women's voices. The research study was carried out in the Central Andes of Peru with clients of four microfinance institutions in the Ayacucho Region and the Mantaro Valley that are operating in areas where agriculture, livestock and informal commerce are the principal activities. Participatory qualitative methodology was used to gain their insights and reflections employed as self-assessments to examine women's capacities for rediscovering the knowledge of the 'self' and 'others' in the relational and collective dimension. This thesis presents insights into a unique approach to women's power relations and roles to reinforce the sense of the 'self' and relationships using a rich narrative and interpretative approach based on feminist research and concepts of capacity development. Findings include the pathway to gain control over their bodies, their own lives and exercise their agent role to negotiate and change relations in order to achieve social transformation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.010
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.180 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Atrium (University of Guelph)Same topicMicrofinance and Financial InclusionFrench-language works237,207