Assessing trajectories for innovation in farming from a profit theory perspective: The case of Ontario, Canada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A conceptual framework was developed for categorizing innovation environments and applied to the agricultural sector in Ontario, Canada. Literature pertaining to innovation and profit theory was explored to identify appropriate constructs from which to develop the framework. The fundamental assertion is that innovation trajectories can be influenced by two financial dimensions: profitability and efficiency, and that four distinct environments for farmers can be identified. A k-means cluster analysis was undertaken using geographic regions and farm sizes to illustrate the use of this framework. The research results in a diverse distribution across the identified environments and various innovation trajectories between those environments were assessed. The study supports policies to encourage an agricultural innovation system (AIS) that promotes capital investment, training in entrepreneurship and innovation, and product diversification while limiting the reliance on financial support mechanisms that can inhibit innovation. The results have implications for farmers, agriculture policy makers and entrepreneurs.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it