A grower-centred examination into definitions of and impacts on success in aquaculture ventures in Nova Scotia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis explores, from the growers' perspective, perceptions of success in individual aquaculture ventures and the aquaculture industry in Nova Scotia through the use of four main sources--a review of published information on definitions of success in societal, corporate, and personal arenas; a review of published sources of aquaculture industry development globally, nationally and provincially; an examination of development in related regions; and, most importantly the observations and experiences of individual growers and industry associations. As well, this project was designed to highlight areas worthy of more in-depth research. \n \nExamination of individual leaseholders' self-declared objectives yielded measurements of success that extend beyond the traditional financial markers to include a rich blend of personal interests, core values, and quality of life elements. Positive impacts upon these objectives included supportive individuals within the government agencies responsible for development and regulation and good community relations, essentially any person or system that respected the individual grower's motivations and needs. Likewise, negative impacts included regulations and lease acquisition systems which seem designed solely for large-scale operations, and the public hearing process which sets the aquaculturist in a defensive role. Species choice and farm size also factored into individual abilities to meet objectives, with those producing shellfish, or operating multi-site farms, tending to have a greater chance of success. \n \nThis study is an indicator of the potential diversity within the Nova Scotia aquaculture industry, and the need for equally diverse regulatory and development support if this direction is to continue. It is also an indicator of individual satisfaction within the industry, which could be an asset for future development.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".