MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1933424460 · doi:10.1002/agr.21426

Market Dynamics Associated with Canadian Ethnic Vegetable Production

2015· article· en· W1933424460 on OpenAlexaffabout
Benjamin L. Campbell, Saneliso Mhlanga, Isabelle Lesschaeve

Bibliographic record

VenueAgribusiness · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicOrganic Food and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsVineland Research and Innovation Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnic groupProduct (mathematics)Conjoint analysisPreferenceProduction (economics)Scale (ratio)Value (mathematics)Quality (philosophy)BusinessMarketingCountry of originGeographyAgricultural economicsEconomicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Ethno‐cultural vegetables are increasingly in demand in Canada. Little research has examined differences in cultural preferences for these vegetables. Using conjoint analysis within an online survey of Canada and key export markets in the U.S., we examine consumer preference for external attributes of several (okra, yardlong bean, and Asian long purple eggplant) ethno‐cultural vegetables. Further, we examine how wide‐scale introduction of U.S., Ontario, and Quebec vegetables into Ontario impacts the market. Our results indicate differences between ethnic heritage group preferences. We find home country bias as most ethnic groups positively value product from their home country. Results also indicate that the value of external quality, such as freshness, appearance, size, and firmness, on the purchase decision is different across ethnic heritage groups. We also find that the introduction of Ontario product competes well with U.S. product in Ontario, however, Quebec product could be the biggest competitor to Ontario production.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgribusinessSame topicOrganic Food and AgricultureFrench-language works237,207