Foreign experience in the development of dairy cattle and directions of its use in domestic practice
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
The article analyzes the support for the US market, where the government has allocated almost $ 22.2 billion for the development of dairy cattle. direct and indirect subsidies to the country's dairy sector (35.02 c/l), which is equivalent to 73% of farmers' milk sales, showed relatively high domestic support, export subsidies, conservation programs, risk management programs, disaster relief programs, loan programs, crop insurance, livestock support. Surveys to support the Indian market, which ranks second in the world in raw milk production (9.5%), have shown that almost 80% of small-scale farmers are small-scale farmers. Milk collection is carried out by 130 thousand dairy cooperatives. NABARD (National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development) under DEDS, provides for subsidies of up to 25% of costs. China is investing heavily in the construction of large dairy farms and livestock complexes with up to 100,000 cows. The Australian market produces 9.3 million tonnes of milk, of which 36% is exported and is the world's fourth exporter of dairy products (6% of the world market). Australia's dairy cattle are characterized by a small amount of direct government support. During 2015-2016, agriculture received financial and commercial assistance over $ 147 million. US in the form of payments to farms. It has been established that price forecasting plays an important role in regulating the milk market in Australia, on the basis of which the profile Ministry, taking into account world prices, generates milk price indices. Analysis of milk production in Switzerland has shown that it remains highly subsidized. In 2013, state support for milk producers amounted to CHF 1.8 billion, incl. direct subsidies are estimated at 1.5 billion Swiss francs, which is 61 thousand Swiss francs per dairy farm, or 0.41 Swiss francs per 1 liter of milk. The state support system for dairy cattle in Canada has been found to include the following instruments: import tariffs that restrict dairy imports; minimum guaranteed prices for raw milk that are set at the maximum amount of milk sold to the dairies within the quota; a system of direct payments to farmers for milk production within the quota. The amount of direct payments per 1 liter of milk is set annually by the government. In order to support Canadian producers in technological modernization aimed at improving the efficiency of milk production, a dairy farm investment program (DFIP) is implemented with state support of $ 250 million. USA According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in Iceland, Japan, Norway and Switzerland, the level of support for dairy producers exceeds on average 70% of the gross income of farmers, in Canada, the EU, Hungary, Korea and the USA the amount of support is 40-55%. An analysis of the support for the development of dairy cattle in the EU countries showed that the following instruments are allocated for these purposes: production restrictions (milk production quotas); government interventions and storage; Establishment of product sales regulations / regulations; the dairy package (including regulating contractual relations in the dairy sector); foreign trade (import regulations, export subsidies); government subsidies. It is found that the main factor that increases the profitability of dairy production in developed countries is the improvement of quality and differentiation of the range. Major factors contributing to the successful development of dairy cattle are increased government support and economical use of resources. Also used are a set of financial incentives, including reducing the tax burden. Key words: Livestock, milk market, domestic support, development programs, cooperation, financial incentives, subsidies, import tariffs, quotas.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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