MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138926224 · doi:10.1093/ajae/aap022

The Effect of Strict Agricultural Zoning on Agricultural Land Values: The Case of Ontario's Greenbelt

2010· article· en· W2138926224 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Agricultural Economics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZoningLegislationMetropolitan areaAgricultureAgricultural economicsBoundary (topology)GeographyLand useLand ValuesAgricultural landEnvironmental protectionEconomicsArchaeologyLawPolitical scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2004, the provincial government of Ontario passed legislation that imposed a moratorium on urban development of agricultural land within a “Greenbelt” boundary. This legislation, which became known as the Greenbelt legislation, has a direct effect on over 1.8 million acres of land located near one of the larger metropolitan areas in North America: the Greater Toronto Area. We use a hedonic model to examine 7760 farmland sales and we find evidence that the Greenbelt legislation influenced farmland property prices; the effect depends on the proximity of the farmland to the Greater Toronto Area.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.179 · 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