Impacts of water and soil conservation strategies on households’ food security in North West of Benin.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims at analyzing the impact of water and soil conservation strategies on households’ food security in the North-western part of Benin. It was conducted in the municipalities of Boukombé and Ouaké. Three villages were studied. From random way, 180 producers were investigated. The causes of soil degradation, water and soil conservation strategies, available food supply and food consumption frequency were collected. Degradation factors were analyzed using discourse analysis and prioritized using the Friedman test. Food supply and frequency of consumption were compared between beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries of the projects using the Student t test. Land degradation is caused by socio-cultural factors (overexploitation of lands, trees’ cutting, late bush fires, grazing, agroforestry and monoculture) and natural factors (heavy rains and steep gradient of the soils). The first three factors are respectively the exploitation of land, trees’ cutting and late bush fires practice in both towns. Food reserves before the new crops were not affected by exogenous strategies released by the erosion control projects. But the frequency of food consumption is improved statistically among project beneficiaries than non-beneficiaries. This confirms the theory of Boserup
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".