Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction This chapter outlines some of the key events in agricultural policy from the beginning of the twentieth century until the recent reforms of the European Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in 2003, the 2002 US Farm Bill and ongoing world trade negotiations. It describes the widespread introduction of subsidies to support farm prices and the unprecedented expansion of agricultural production, to the advent of food surpluses and concerns over the environmental impact of modern agricultural practices. The development of agri-environment measures and the change in emphasis from an agricultural policy that supports production agriculture to one that supports the environment and rural development is explained and the principles behind agri-environment measures examined. Agricultural policy: the start of government intervention The regulation of agricultural markets and intervention by national governments to support farm incomes is not a new phenomenon. Throughout the course of history national governments employed various policies to support and protect agricultural production, such as the Corn Laws designed to protect British cereal farmers from foreign imports. However, it was not until the long-lasting economic depression of the 1920s and 1930s, which was also a period of agricultural depression with low commodity prices and depressed farm incomes, that national governments systematically intervened in agricultural markets to ensure the home production of food and to support their national industries.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".