2015
DOI: 10.15740/has/arjss/6.1/51-55
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impact of bee keeping training on socio-economic status of rural women

Abstract: Bee keeping is an ideal activity for the socioeconomic development of rural people. It does not require any sophisticated equipments and the technology employed is simple and within easy grasp of illiterate rural people. The study was conducted in Pusa block of Samastipur district selected purposively. A list of women trainees, who have obtained from Apiculture Research Training Centre, Pusa. From these lists 50 trained women were randomly selected who have attained seven days duration of training programme. E… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Similarly, studies conducted in other parts of the world on the impact of training in agriculture also employed merely descriptive analysis. For instance [17,18,19], in Pakistan [20]; in Iraq [21]; in Zambia; and [22,23,24,25,26], in India, all used descriptive than econometric analysis for their study. But [27], in Zimbabwe used multiple regression using ordinary least squares (OLS) which is often blamed to yield a biased estimate [28,29,30,31,32] as it does not account for systematic differences between training participants and non-participants.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly, studies conducted in other parts of the world on the impact of training in agriculture also employed merely descriptive analysis. For instance [17,18,19], in Pakistan [20]; in Iraq [21]; in Zambia; and [22,23,24,25,26], in India, all used descriptive than econometric analysis for their study. But [27], in Zimbabwe used multiple regression using ordinary least squares (OLS) which is often blamed to yield a biased estimate [28,29,30,31,32] as it does not account for systematic differences between training participants and non-participants.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%