Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
table 4.2 (continued)
Impact of Githima community's Goals based on Geometric analysis
community Goals
Ver
tex
32
(Health care)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
33 (
Lifestyle)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
34 (
Birth rate)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
tot
als
+
122
21
5
20
19
1
19
6
10
21
−
15
2
1
2
2
0
2
2
2
2
Pro
blem ranking
a
6
4
2
5
7
1
8
3
2
Goa
l status
b
0
2
0
0
3
3
0
1
0
+ Positive impact; − negative impact; ± ambivalent; . no impact; # indeterminate
a
Ranking by communities during the initial village workshops
b
Goal status as ranked by communities in January 2000 (0, no change; 1, slight improvement; 2, mod-
erate improvement; 3, improved a lot)
The digraph is unstable under all simple autonomous pulse processes if all arcs are
assumed to have equal weights and time lags, the highest eigenvalue being 2.26. Sim-
ple positive autonomous pulses representing community goals (except security, which
is a sink) lead to negative impacts at vertices 6 (agrochemical use), 12 (soil erosion
and infertility), and 30 (school committee) (Table 4.3). In addition to these, improved
access roads produces ambivalent impacts at vertex 9, while increased knowledge
produces ambivalent impacts at most of the other vertices (Figure 4.3). Ambivalent
impacts also occur at vertices 18, 19, and 21, resulting from increased literacy.
The arcs with a change in weight that results in changes in the number of posi-
tive impacts of community goals are shown in Appendix 2. Of the 193 impacts of
community goals, 165 are sensitive to changes in the weights of at least one arc in
the digraph (Table 4.3). The only indirect and nonambivalent impacts that are not
sensitive to weight changes are those of roads and AI on vertices 2, 4, and 5. Impacts
of community goals were most sensitive to increases in the weight of arcs [3, 12] and
[12, 3]. Increases in the weight of any one of these arcs increase the number of oscil-
lating impacts of community goals. A weight of 10 resulted in oscillations of all but
nine of the impacts of community goals. Of all the arcs, [31, 21] produced the most
changes in the impact of community goals when the weight of each was reduced to
values below 1 and above 0.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search