Placing Agriculture within Rural Development: Evidence from EU Case Studies
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
In the light of four competing models for rural development (agrarian, exogenous, endogenous, and neo-endogenous) we evaluate the relationship between agriculture, agricultural policy, and rural development in five regions in established EU member states: Borders, Midlands, and Western Region (Ireland), Navarra (Spain), Tyrol (Austria), Skåne (Sweden), and Altmark (Germany). Evidence suggests that both the agrarian and exogenous models are anachronistic. However, the Common Agricultural Policy remains closest to the agrarian model of rural development, and in its current form fails to promote a wider rural and territorial development. The LEADER programme, which is often perceived as a viable alternative approach to rural development, fits most closely with the neo-endogenous rather than with the endogenous model. Nevertheless, for EU policy to fully embody the neo-endogenous model a far more fundamental reform of the CAP would be required than that agreed in the wake of the Health Check.
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