MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062347522 · doi:10.2202/1542-0485.1187

Agricultural Production Clubs: Viability and Welfare Implications

2008· article· en· W2062347522 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 of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMerger and Competition Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClubCertificationIncentiveWelfareProfit (economics)Production (economics)BusinessQuality (philosophy)AgricultureMicroeconomicsEconomicsPublic economicsIndustrial organizationMarketingMarket economyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Consumers are, in general, less informed than producers about the quality of agricultural goods. To reduce the information gap, consumers can rely on certification that ensures the quality and origin of the goods. Certification can be voluntarily adopted by a group of producers, as is the case for geographical indications. We model such a group as a club, and analyze the certification decision of the club and its welfare implication. We find that for intermediate values of certification costs, the industry and a club of a given size have divergent incentives, and there may be overprovision of certification. If club members can erect barriers to entry, an optimal size of the club exists. There may be a conflict between the efficient outcome (that maximizes the aggregate profit of the firms) and the equilibrium, which may be socially undesirable. In the absence of a barrier to entry, it is less likely that a club will emerge.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.400

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.158 · 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