MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W320734755

Quality, Origin and Globalization: Overall Justifications and National Frameworks: The Geographical Indication case./Qualite, Origine et Globalisation: Justifications Generales et Contextes Nationaux, le Cas Des Indications Geographiques

2006· article· en· W320734755 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bertil Sylvander, Gilles Allaire, Dominique Barjolle, Erik Thévenod‐Mottet, Andrea Marescotti, Angela Tregear

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian Journal of Regional Science · 2006
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineAgricultural and Biological Sciences
ThématiqueOrganic Food and Agriculture
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésContext (archaeology)SustainabilityGlobalizationRegional scienceQuality (philosophy)Political scienceBusinessGeographyLaw
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract This article is based on research undertaken in the context of the European project Dolphins (Development of Origin Labelled Products: Humanity, Innovation and Sustainability). This project (2000-2004) involved a European collaborative action, bringing together 15 research teams from 9 European countries (France, Italy, Switzerland, Germany, Spain, Portugal, the United Kingdom, Belgium and Finland). Its objectives were to: (i) better understand the characteristics and the evolution of Geographical Indications (GIs) in agri-food systems; (ii) provide tools to assess public policy concerning the markets for, and the development of, these products; and (iii) provide recommendations to the European Community in the context of WTO negotiations. The project work was structured around 7 themes: assessment of technical and regulatory aspects, the economic structure of the production chains, the impact on rural development, the relationships with consumers and citizens, a synthesis of the characteristics of Gis, the production systems of Gis, their corresponding markets and the public implications of these GI production systems, assessment of public policy, and a general synthesis and the formulation of recommendations. The work involved the identification of the production systems involved, an analysis of the literature on the question of products with their geographic origins identified and more generally on production chains of 'quality' products, and a comparative analysis of national rules and strategies (the bibliographic base is available on the web site: www.origin-food.org). The results have been published in six interim reports and a synthesis. This article is based upon the results of this project. Products the names of which make reference to their geographic origin are, first of all, recognized by the actors in the market place and by consumers, at least the connoisseurs. Historically, some of these products achieved broad recognition, which has raised for a long time (the 19920s onwards) the issue of the protection of Geographic Indications at the national and international levels. At the same time, the issue of the organization of producers and the protection of their collective reputation was also posed. France and other South European countries developed legislation very early on (the 1940s). The Common Market led the European Union to develop common legislation (regulation 2081/92). This coincided with the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) of 1992 and the development of local initiatives in relation to this regulation; it came to be recognized as one of the objectives of rural development. This objective has been reiterated and reinforced via various programs (measures of accompaniment in 1994, agenda 2000, and the 2003 reform). If the development of these products has become a public objective, it is important to ask the question concerning what are the conditions for success for the development of their markets and the innovation processes based on constructing value for the specific resources involved. In August 2002 in the EU, there were 597 labels registered as AOP (Appelation d'Origine Protegee--Protected Label of Origin) and IGP (Indication d'Origine Protegee--Protected Geographic Indication); there were 696 in 2005 (405 AOP and 291 IGP) (in addition to the roughly 2,500 labels related to wine production). Italy and France are the countries with the greatest number, followed by Portugal and Spain. It should be noted that Greece, Germany and the United Kingdom, countries where this tradition had not been important, have been submitting more and more requests for approval of such labels. Placing the geographic origin on the name of products is first of all a commercial practice; in the first stages of marketing, the categorization of products by geographic origin is the approach most frequently met, in the absence of other certified characteristics. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,014
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,986
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,076

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0140,016
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0050,006
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0060,049
Communication savante0,0160,012
Science ouverte0,0010,008
Intégrité de la recherche0,0060,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,043
Tête enseignante GPT0,302
Écart entre enseignants0,260 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations6
Publié2006
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian Journal of Regional ScienceMême sujetOrganic Food and AgricultureTravaux en français237 207