Making Markets Work: Modeling Agri‐food Systems in Transition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite a decade of transition, the agri‐food sectors of the former command economies consistently underperform relative to their potential. Underproduction and underinvestment are generally observed. This paper develops a model of bilateral monopoly linkages between firms along an agri‐food supply chain. In the absence of competitive market forces and an efficient system of commercial law, deficient production and investment should be expected. If the agri‐food sectors of the former command economies are to realize their potential, more resources will have to be devoted to reducing the transaction costs associated with broadening markets and enforcing contracts. Bien que dix années aient passé, le secteur agroalimentaire des anciennes économies dirigées ne cesse d'enregistrer un rendement inférieur à celui auquel on pourrait s'attendre. La sous‐production et le sous‐investissement sont monnaie courante. Les auteurs proposent un modèle reproduisant le monopole bilatéral qui existe entre les entreprises du circuit d'approvisionnement agroalimentaire. En l'absence de concurrence sur le marché et d'un régime efficace de droit commercial, une production et des investissements insuffisants sont inévitables. Pour que le secteur agroalimentaire des anciennes économies centralisées réalise son potentiel, on devra investir plus de ressources afin de réduire les frais de transaction associés à l'élargissement des marchés et de garantir le respect des contrats.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".