MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111219077 · doi:10.5539/ass.v10n8p20

Agricultural Contract Farming with Social and Community Economy Adaptation. A Case Study: Hin Tang Village Moo7 Non Khong Sub District, Ban Phang District, KhonKaen Province

2014· article· en· W2111219077 on OpenAlex
Bodee Putsyainunt, Sekson Yongvanit, Prasit Kunurat

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueAsian Social Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Research and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContract farmingAgricultureBusinessInvestment (military)DisadvantageProduction (economics)Quality (philosophy)CroppingLivelihoodAgricultural economicsMarketingEconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to understand the history of contract farming at Hin Tang Village including the social and economic adaptation of the community with contract farming production. The study employed the concept of community economy. In-depth interviews were conducted through guided questionnaires; with twenty one key informants, that was concerned with the issues in the village as well as each general household’s information in the questionnaire, were used to collect data from 121 household representatives. The study was to find a model of agricultural, contract farming which incorporates a collaborative management between agricultural companies and farmers. The companies provided materials such as seeds, fertilizers and insecticides, techniques for cropping each type of plant and methods of marketing management. The farmers were responsible for the investment of their labor, land, equipments and devices. Both the companies and farmer signed a contract in advance that established the terms and conditions related to the number and quality of products the farmers were going to produce and sell to the companies. However, this contract farming yielded an inequity between the companies and the farmers as companies had an advantage over the farmers due to the fact that they controlled the production systems and markets. Although the farmers were at a disadvantage, the companies did not force them into a contract; rather, they compromised to solve the problem as an installment debt by reason of business. However, these farmers had already adapted to their economic and cultural lifestyles and social relationships to live under the contract farming based system.

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)0.002
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.243 · 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