Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide a structured demand chain design framework that can be linked with gateway and corridor management practices. Design/methodology/approach The model in this paper presents supply and demand thrusts that could leverage Canada's position in international food trade. Findings Since a direct correlation exists between the wealth of a nation and how it consumes food, the paper first presents five utilities and several factors that are perceived differently by customers once a nation becomes affluent. Then it presents supply and demand thrusts that could leverage Canada's position in international food trade. Finally, a demand chain design framework is suggested. Research limitations/implications The framework is meant to be organically generic and not applied to one specific commodity or market, as all commodities and targeted markets necessitate an idiosyncratic approach. Although it is met to be applicable to topographies that offer logistical challenges such as Canada. Practical implications It has been recognized that agriculture and food companies have a long tradition of being commodity‐driven, with an emphasis on production technology, high volumes, and quality consistency. In the context of global hyper‐competitivity, the ability to understand customer needs and adapt to a wider variety of customer situations will become crucial. Originality/value Without being specific to a targeted market or commodity, a demand chain management framework for food products is presented which provides an integrative approach for demand chain design based on food marketing practices, and which requires continuous evaluation of perceived utilities by customers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".