U.S. Hog Production and the Influence of State Water Quality Regulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The U.S. hog industry is experiencing an increase in both the average size and in the geographical concentration of feeding operations. These increases have caused public attention to focus on the environmental consequences of hog production and on the regulations imposed to limit these consequences. This study examines the influence of state water quality regulatory stringency on hog production in the United States. The results of this analysis provide evidence that environmental compliance costs are significant for small hog feeding operations, while production on large operations does not appear to be influenced by the level of state environmental regulatory stringency. On assiste présentement à une augmentation de la taille des exploitations et à une concentration géographique des établissements d'engraissement dans le secteur américain de l'élevage porcin. Ces changements ont amené la population à s'intéresser aux répercussions de la production porcine sur l'environnement et aux réglements adoptés en vue d'atténuer de telles répercussions. L'auteur détermine de quelle maniére la sévérité des réglements d‘État sur la qualité de l'eau influe sur l'élevage des pores aux États‐Unis. Les résultats de son analyse prouvent que le respect des règlements sur la protection de l'environnement engendre des coûts appréciables pour les petits éleveurs, alors que les exploitations de plus grande envergure ne sont pas aussi affectées par la rigueur de la réglementation d'État en matiére d'environnement.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".