MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059112733 · doi:10.1080/03066150.2014.990894

‘Pinstripes on the prairies’: examining the financialization of farming systems in the Canadian prairie provinces

2015· article· en· W2059112733 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Peasant Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinancializationAgricultureGeographyAgricultural economicsAgroforestryEconomicsEnvironmental scienceArchaeologyMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractDrawing on recent scholarship on the financialization of agro-food systems and the global land grab, this paper examines new forms of financial investment in agriculture in the Canadian prairie provinces. We examine the factors underpinning investor involvement in the sector, including its anticipated financial performance as well as processes of agricultural restructuring that, combined with government actions to liberalize farmland ownership, have facilitated the enrollment of land and labour into new financial vehicles. We focus in particular on the emergence of two new forms of investment vehicles – farmland investment funds and an exchange-traded farming corporation – comparing the business model and investment strategy of each. In doing so, we highlight the ways in which the new investment patterns may propel the restructuring of the agricultural sector, alter power relations among key actors, and introduce new logics into the farming landscape. Our findings allow us to comment on the relevance of the land grabbing frame for making sense of the financialization of agriculture in the global North.Keywords: financializationagriculturefarmlandCanadaprairieland grabindigenous peoples AcknowledgementsThe authors wish to thank Saturnino (Jun) Borras and three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments. This research was carried out with the aid of grants from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (www.sshrc-crsh.gc.ca), the International Development Research Centre (www.idrc.ca), and the Land Deal Politics Initiative.Additional informationNotes on contributorsMelanie Sommerville is a PhD candidate in the Department of Geography at the University of British Columbia, Canada. Her research explores the changing geopolitics and political economy of agro-food systems, with a specific focus on the intersection of processes of financialization, agrarian change, land reform and marginalization in Canada and South Africa.Notes on contributorsAndré Magnan is an associate professor in the Department of Sociology and Social Studies at the University of Regina, Canada. His research examines the political economy of local and global food systems, with a focus on the history and politics of grain marketing on the Canadian prairies and changing patterns of farm ownership and control in Canada and Australia. Email: andre.magnan@uregina.ca

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.493
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.147 · 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