MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2734966628 · doi:10.5558/tfc2017-016

The taxation of privately owned forest land in Canada: A review of the taxation systems in all ten provinces

2017· review· en· W2734966628 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Tony Rotherham

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncentiveBusinessProperty taxGoods and servicesLand tenureNatural resource economicsFinanceEconomicsGeographyEconomyAgricultureMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada has 400 million ha of forest land. Only 25 million ha (5%) is in private ownership. This private forest land is generally divided in two categories: 450 000 private woodlots covering about 15 million ha in the settled regions of Canada and about 5 million ha in larger blocks owned by pension funds, investors, and forest products companies. The private woodlots are subject to municipal or provincial property taxes. The provinces use several approaches to determine the level of tax to be paid. In some cases, the tax system is used to provide an incentive to manage the land. The property tax system offers a policy tool to encourage active management of the land and help ensure a healthy, diverse, and productive forest that contributes forest-related ecological goods and services to the community as well as timber to the local economy. It is in the long-term interests of rural communities that land remains in production and that forested land is managed to maintain the forest in a healthy condition and produce both forest-related environmental goods and services and timber to support the rural economy. A well-designed property tax structure based on incentives that is accepted as fair and is supported by taxpayers can help to achieve these objectives. The survey of provincial property tax systems shows several approaches to the application of property tax systems on forest lands. Property tax systems applied to forest land that are based on incentives to actively manage the land and are coupled with financial assistance for tree planting on idle land offer simple and practical ways to keep rural land in production. This is particularly true of marginal/sub-marginal land that has been cleared but is no longer used for agricultural production. Incentives help to ensure that forested land is managed to maintain the forest in a healthy condition and produce forest-related environmental goods and services (EG&S) as well as timber to support the rural economy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.026
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207