MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010165104 · doi:10.3920/jcns2014.x015

The Sustainable Agriculture Initiative Platform: the first 10 years

2015· article· en· W2010165104 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

VenueJournal on Chain and Network Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Innovations and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityContext (archaeology)AgribusinessMarketingAgricultureBusinessSupply chainSustainable developmentSustainable agriculturePublic relationsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This teaching case, appropriate for senior undergraduate and MBA students as well as for mid-career managers, challenges students to appreciate different facets of agribusiness sustainability, and to reflect on the potential consequences on all players in the global supply chain, from farmers to retailers, of the different methodological and philosophical approaches, definitions, and practices that are developed and adopted by the different constituencies, from independent industry organizations, to food processors and retailers. The case ‘story’ is structured around a strategic decision on what further development activity should be adopted by the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI) Platform. SAI has just turned 10, its activities have proven quite successful, and the Platform is considering the next strategic move. The case frames the challenges facing SAI in a broader context, illustrating what SAI as well as an independent organization, the world largest food processor and largest retailer are doing about defining and measuring sustainability. The broad question is: what is the best way forward for SAI and what are the key implications of what SAI may decide, given the ongoing development of what is the reasonably new sector of defining, measuring and promoting sustainability in agribusiness? The reading materials provide context and methodological underpinnings to the case, which is designed to be discussed over two classes, ideally on separate days. The coach should withhold Part Two until the discussion of Part One has been completed. The Teaching Note, available to verified instructors considering the use of the case, provides additional suggestions on the classroom use of this material.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.214 · 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