Fish and meat demand in Canada: Regional differences and weak separability
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this paper is to gauge to what extent there are regional differences in meat and fish demand across Canada. Three regions are defined for this purpose and the notorious problem of zeros in survey data is addressed by endogenizing the probability of purchase through the Shonkwiler and Yen approach applied to a QUAIDS demand system for each region. Probabilities of purchase and marginal effects are computed and compared as well as price and expenditure elasticities. The empirical distributions of the elasticities are simulated through bootstrapping. This allows us to formally test the null hypothesis of no regional differences between elasticities for central, western and Atlantic Canada and the null hypothesis of weak separability of fish from meats. While some significant regional differences were uncovered that can be exploited by food retailers, other findings were robust across regions. For example, the demand for fish tends to be more price and expenditure inelastic than the demand for meats. [EconLit citations: D120, C150, L660]. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Agribusiness 22: 175–199, 2006.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it