MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762821554 · doi:10.1136/oemed-2017-104636.308

0374 Multi-criteria decision analysis (mcda) comparing agricultural production methods: protocol for analysing british columbia (bc) blueberries and ecuador bananas

2017· article· en· W2762821554 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rami El-Sayegh, Jerry Spiegel, Craig Mitton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBanana Cultivation and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiple-criteria decision analysisSustainabilityProduction (economics)AgricultureEnvironmental economicsPopulationBusinessEconomicsOperations researchEngineeringGeographyEnvironmental healthMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Expansion of agro-industrial approaches has raised concerns over occupational and environmental exposures, for example through intensive agrochemical use. Agricultural production decisions are influenced by assumptions regarding unit-specific criteria of ‘productive efficiency’ (revenues and yields), with limited attention to the association between costs and consequences and broader health determinants (sustainability and health effects). This study applies a population health perspective to investigate the occupational and environmental consequences of production options by incorporating a comprehensive range of criteria. Specifically we investigate, in partnership with producers: what is the ”best” agricultural production method for producing bananas in Ecuador and blueberries in BC? Methods Two MCDAs per jurisdiction (Ecuador and BC) are used to calculate aggregate scores to rank production methods (agro-industrial, agro-ecological, and mixed-methods). The first MCDA is an ‘actual’ model, representing real-world decisions (constrained producer choices). The second MCDA is a ‘preference’ model representing no constraints (producer preferences). Additionally, discrete choice modelling is used to simulate hypothetical scenarios of components (e.g. policy instruments) that would sway producers towards their preferences, with sensitivity analyses to consider the implications. Results If agro-industrial production is not the highest rank, a case can be made for more sustainable agriculture. The sensitivity of how decisions could move towards sustainable solutions that produce less health consequences and policies to facilitate such pursuit are assessed. Conclusions As producers express greater concern for sustainability and certification that recognise that ”good practices” are applied, MCDA suggests a way that evidence can be collected and analysed to support decision-making, transparently and comprehensively.

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)0.043
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.411

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0430.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1230.011

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.286 · 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
GenreProtocol

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBanana Cultivation and ResearchFrench-language works237,207