MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Crops and Livestock Productivity Growth in the Prairies: The Impacts of Technical Change and Scale

2009· article· en· W1982086047 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
B. A. Stewart, Terrence S. Veeman, James R. Unterschultz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomie · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEfficiency Analysis Using DEA
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityLivestockAgricultureGeographyForestryAgricultural economicsEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study undertakes a comprehensive analysis of productivity growth in Canadian Prairie primary agriculture from 1940 to 2004. Total factor productivity (TFP) is measured using Törnqvist‐Theil indexing procedures for the Prairie provinces (Alberta, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan). During the 1940–2004 period, productivity growth in Prairie agriculture grew at a rate of 1.56% a year. This aggregate measure does not indicate the substantial variations in productivity growth that have occurred between crops and livestock, between the provinces, and over time: productivity growth in crops is considerably higher than productivity growth in livestock; Manitoba and Saskatchewan display consistently higher productivity growth than Alberta; and from 1980 to 2004 livestock productivity growth increased considerably in Manitoba and Saskatchewan. The productivity growth estimates are decomposed econometrically using a translog cost function to indicate the relative roles of technical change and scale effects. Productivity growth in crops has largely been the result of technical change while economies of scale have played a critical role in generating productivity growth in the livestock sector. La présente étude est une analyse approfondie de la croissance de la productivité du secteur de l’agriculture primaire dans les provinces des Prairies (Alberta, Manitoba et Saskatchewan), de 1940 à 2004. Nous avons mesuré la productivité totale des facteurs (PTF) à l’aide de l’indice Törnqvist‐Theil. De 1940 à 2004, la productivité de l’agriculture dans les provinces des Prairies a cru au rythme annuel de 1,56 p. 100. Cette mesure globale n’indique pas les variations substantielles de la croissance de la productivité entre le secteur des cultures et le secteur de l’élevage, entre les provinces, et au fil du temps. La croissance de la productivité dans le secteur des cultures a été considérablement plus élevée que celle observée dans le secteur de l’élevage. La croissance de la productivité au Manitoba et en Saskatchewan a été supérieure à celle observée en Alberta. De 1980 à 2004, la croissance de la productivité du secteur de l’élevage a enregistré une hausse considérable au Manitoba et en Saskatchewan. Nous avons décomposé la croissance de la productivité de façon économétrique à l’aide d’une fonction de coût de type translog afin de faire ressortir le rôle des changements technologiques et des économies d’échelle. Les changements technologiques ont joué un rôle important dans la croissance de la productivité du secteur des cultures, tandis que les économies d’échelle ont joué un rôle primordial dans la croissance de la productivité du secteur de l’élevage.

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 score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations18
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomieSame topicEfficiency Analysis Using DEAFrench-language works237,207