Group Preferences for Rural Amenities and Farmland Preservation in the Niagara Fruit Belt
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the production of agricultural commodities, an agricultural landscape is simultaneously being produced. In many regions, agriculture is no longer valued for just the production of food and fibre but also for the social, cultural and environmental amenities associated with the landscape. The paradigm of multifunctional agriculture has become concerned with the joint production of agricultural products and these rural amenities. The loss of agricultural land especially in areas around the urban-rural fringe has greatly affected the demand for these rural amenities. In response, governments and volunteer organizations have developed programs to preserve farmland. The Niagara Region is home to some of the best fruit growing land in Canada but has a long history of fighting to maintain its farmland. Drawing from the multifunctional paradigm, this study analyzes the preference for different rural amenities and farmland preservation in this unique region. Survey and interviews conducted with both the non-farm population and farmers indicated that demand exists for maintaining rural amenities and for farmland preservation. Consideration of these preferences will enhance the development of farmland preservation in the Niagara Fruit Belt.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".