MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2753685137 · doi:10.1111/cjag.12144

Canadian Business Risk Management: Private Firms, Crown Corporations, and Public Institutions

2017· article· en· W2753685137 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Alan P. Ker, Barry J. Barnett, David Jacques, Tor N. Tolhurst

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomie · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural risk and resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubsidyRhetoricPublicsPolitical scienceWelfare economicsTransparency (behavior)Public administrationHumanitiesBusinessEconomicsPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper considers the current and possible institutions (programs, policies, participants, etc.) that govern public Business Risk Management (BRM) in Canada. This is an important policy topic for two reasons: BRM spending accounts for the vast majority of public monies funneled to Canadian agricultural producers and the upcoming Canadian Agricultural Partnership includes a mandated BRM review and thus presents an opportunity to change these institutions in meaningful ways. We pay particular attention to the rhetoric surrounding greater involvement of private insurance, the lack of rhetoric regarding the use of crown corporations, and issues of subsidization. We conclude with policy recommendations favoring commodity‐specific revenue versus whole‐farm net margin insurance, a possible reduction in subsidy levels, and a call to reconsider the role of crown corporations. We also make programming recommendations regarding the discontinued use of private reinsurance, a reduction in the level of program reserves, and greater transparency. Ce document examine les institutions actuelles et potentielles (programmes, politiques, participants, etc.) qui gouvernent la gestion des risques d'entreprises (GRE) au Canada. Deux raisons rendent important ce sujet politique : les dépenses liées á la GRE totalisent la grande majorité des fonds publics accordés aux producteurs agricoles, et le futur cadre politique agricole offre l'occasion de modifier ces institutions de manière significative. Nous portons une attention particulière á la rhétorique entourant l'implication plus soutenue des assurances privées, á l'absence de rhétorique au sujet de l'utilisation de sociétés d'État, et aux enjeux de subvention. Nous concluons avec des recommandations politiques favorisant les assurances de revenus provenant spécifiquement de produits agricoles versus celles de la marge nette de l'exploitation globale, une potentielle réduction des niveaux de subvention, et un appel á tenir compte du rôle des sociétés d'État. Nous proposons aussi des recommandations de programmation concernant l'arrêt de l'utilisation des réassurances privées, une réduction du niveau des programmes de réserve, et une transparence accrue.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0090.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.147 · 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 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

Citations23
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomieSame topicAgricultural risk and resilienceFrench-language works237,207