MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2600621182

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF BENEFICIAL MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN SOUTHERN MANITOBA

2017· dissertation· en· W2600621182 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J G Mingle

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic analysisGeographyEnvironmental planningEconomicsAgricultural economics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Public concern of the value of environment quality has risen over the past three decades and numerous policies, programs and strategic plans have been developed to address damage to the quantity and quality of environmental attributes. The adoption of agricultural beneficial management practices (BMPs) by producers can result in increased environmental benefits and/or decrease the negative environmental impacts from certain agricultural activities. In Canada, farmers have been encouraged to adopt BMPs through government payments that are designed to partially offset the costs of BMP adoption on their land. The purpose of this study is to develop estimates of the social value of environmental improvements caused by the adoption of BMPs by farms in Manitoba. A contingent valuation method (CVM) is used to estimate the social value of improvements in water clarity, water odour, water quantity (flood reduction), and recreation and fish habitat using two sample population; 1) South Tobacco Creek (STC) watershed area in south western Manitoba, 2) Ag Days Farm show in Brandon, Manitoba. Heckman selection models (Probit and OLS regressions), are used to estimate respondent’s willingness to pay for some environmental quality improvements. The results suggest that society ascribes positive value to the selected environmental quality improvements with water quantity (flood reduction) attributed the highest value.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.220

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207