MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7071531597

Three essays on agriculture and economic development in Tanzania

2016· dissertation· en· W7071531597 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSussex Research Online (University of Sussex) · 2016
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural risk and resilience
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTanzaniaAgriculturePovertyPopulationWageQuarter (Canadian coin)Rural povertyRural areaProductivity
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One cannot study poverty in Tanzania without understanding the agricultural sector, which employs more than two-thirds of the population and accounts for nearly a quarter of national GDP. This thesis examines three themes that focus on the difficulties that rural Tanzanians face in achieving a reasonable livelihood: the adverse legacy of a failed historical policy, a difficult climate, and market failures.
\n
\nThe first empirical chapter examines the legacy of the villagization program that attempted to transform the predominantly agricultural and rural Tanzania. Between 1971 and 1973, the majority of rural residents were moved to villages planned by the government. This essay examines if the programs e↵ects are persistent and have had a long-run legacy. It analyzes the impact of exposure to the program on various outcome measures from recent household surveys. The primary finding of this study is that households living in districts heavily exposed to the program have worse measures of various current outcomes.
\n
\nThe second empirical chapter examines the role of reliability of rainfall, which is important in Tanzania as agriculture is predominantly rain-fed and a small fraction of plots are irrigated. This chapter investigates if households cope with this major risk to income by re-allocating their labor supply between agriculture, wage labor, and self-employment activities. This chapter combines data on labor allocation of households within and outside of agriculture from the National Panel Survey with high-resolution satellite-based rainfall data not previously used in this literature. The primary finding of this study is that households allocate more family labor to agriculture in years of good rainfall and more labor to self-employment activities in years of poor rainfall.
\n
\nMarket failures are often cited as a rationale for policy recommendations and government interventions. The third chapter implements four tests of market failures suggested in the literature, all of which rely on the agricultural household model but di↵er in how market failures are manifested. The common finding of these tests is that market failures exist in agricultural factor markets in Tanzania, although significant heterogeneity exists. Markets are more likely to fail in rural areas, remote locations, and are more likely to affect female-headed households. Households are also more likely to face market failure when they try to supply labor to the market than when they try to hire labor from the market.

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.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.790

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.241 · 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