MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7163381909 · doi:10.3126/jfl.v24i1.72007

Green Enterprises: A pathway to Women’s Economic Empowerment

2024· article· W7163381909 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Usha Thakuri, Srijana Baral, Kanchan Lama, Aarati Khatri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Forest and Livelihood · 2024
Typearticle
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsEmpowermentCommunity forestryPhoenixProcess (computing)LoggingCommunity participationYield (engineering)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Approximately 80 per cent of Nepal’s rural population, predominantly women, rely on NonTimber Forest Products (NTFPs) for their livelihoods. Despite ample studies on NTFPs, their role in economically empowering women is scant. Taking the case from four community forests in Nawalparasi, this paper examines how NTFPs such as the leaves of Shorea robusta (Sal) and Phoenix loureiroi Kunth (Thakal) are evident means to empower women. To understand how the process empowered women, the researchers emphasise their firsthand observations to serve as valuable data, complemented by key informant interviews (n=55), workshops (n=2), and formal and informal observations.. The results show that the annual harvestable yield of Sal leaves (3 CFs) and Thakal leaves are 207020.75 kg and 5089.35 kg respectively. This would create 448565 days of green employment opportunities for marginalised women and men. The research concludes that involving women in the inventory process aids in enhanced technical forestry knowledge, increased control over access to resources, attitude change, and shifts in power relations Hence, incorporating NTFPs in community forest operational plans and upscaling is recommended to promote economic, technical, and socio-cultural empowerment for both women and men.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.195 · 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.

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 venueJournal of Forest and LivelihoodSame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207