MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1577006556

Competitiveness of the European Food Industry : an economic and legal assessment 2007

2007· book· en· W1577006556 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J.H.M. Wijnands, B.M.J. van der Meulen, K.J. Poppe

Bibliographic record

VenueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) · 2007
Typebook
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Trade and Competitiveness
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood industryLegislationBusinessProductivityNegotiationEuropean unionInternational tradeValue (mathematics)Eu countriesInternational economicsEconomicsEconomic growthPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The competitiveness of the European food industry is weak compared to the US and Canada and at approximately the same level as the Australian and Brazilian industry. Scenarios show that unless the productivity growth in the EU is higher than in the rest of the world, EU competitiveness remains weak. Despite the weak competitive performance, a fair number of world leading food enterprises are located in the EU. Moreover the importance of the food industry in total manufacturing is growing, and the sub-sectors value added is higher than that of most other sub-sectors in manufacturing. The impact of food legislation does not seem to affect EU competitiveness negatively compared to the US. In general, EU companies’ view on the food legislation is positive. EU authorities can increase their support for the European industry by engaging in export negotiations. This study is one of the few or maybe even the first one, which included all subsectors of the food industry and benchmarked these with important non-EU countries.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations111
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)Same topicGlobal Trade and CompetitivenessFrench-language works237,207