MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2621779506 · doi:10.22004/ag.econ.256743

The Welfare Economics of Dismantling Dairy Quota in a Confederation of States

2017· preprint· en· W2621779506 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
G. Cornelis van Kooten

Bibliographic record

VenueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTreasuryStylized factCommon Agricultural PolicyWelfareSupply managementPaymentEuropean unionCompensation (psychology)BusinessEconomicsPublic economicsEconomic policyAgricultural economicsMarket economyFinancePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supply-restricting marketing boards shift the costs of agricultural support payments from the treasury to consumers. Canada, Australia and the European Union adopted quota regimes in dairy, but Australia and the EU subsequently dismantled their programs, while providing milk producers with compensation, but the dairy quota system remains entrenched in Canada. In this paper, dairy policies in the aforementioned jurisdictions, plus the U.S. and New Zealand are reviewed, and a stylized description of the EU reform is provided. An applied welfare economics framework based on the EU experience is then used to investigate potential mechanisms for reforming Canada’s dairy quota regime. The main issue regards producers’ compensation. The analysis shows that one has to be careful not to overcompensate producers, which could make a reform program prohibitively expensive on the treasury. The analysis provides a framework within which policy discussions regarding compensation can take place.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA)Same topicAgricultural Economics and PolicyFrench-language works237,207