MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Agricultural taxation in developing countries: a survey of issues and policy

2001· article· en· W1972019741 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAgricultural Economics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLocal Government Finance and Decentralization
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersWorld Bank Group
KeywordsAgricultureDeveloping countryRevenueContext (archaeology)Tax revenueEconomicsPublic economicsTax policyAgricultural policyBusinessEconomic policyAgricultural economicsEconomic growthTax reformFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study surveys the experience of agricultural taxation in developing countries in the context of the ongoing policy debate about the tax structure and administration affecting agricultural producers. Using the examples of a number of countries, it analyzes the conceptual and practical problems associated with different tax regimes. Governments in most countries have reduced indirect (export) taxes on agricultural producers. However, the revenue from direct taxes on farmers has not increased. A major problem in most countries has been the measurement of (actual) agricultural income. Different measures for presumed income have been used with varying success. They seem to have the most potential for increased revenue in many countries, but their effective implementation is constrained by the political and administrative considerations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.227
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.256 · 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