MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121330174 · doi:10.22004/ag.econ.165804

Between a Cap and a Higher Price: The Dairy Quota Trilemma

2013· article· en· W3121330174 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alex Chernoff

Bibliographic record

VenueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsInefficiencyValuation (finance)AgribusinessSupply managementAgricultural economicsCeiling (cloud)MicroeconomicsAgricultureFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The system of supply management in the Canadian dairy sector requires that farmers acquire quota to produce milk. In Canada's largest dairy producing province, Quebec, a ceiling on the price of quotas has been in effect since 2007. Previous research established that the use of quota price ceilings create a new source of inefficiency in the Canadian dairy sector. An alternative method for lowering quota prices is to lower the rent from quotas through lowering the farm price of milk. I determine the magnitude of the decrease in the farm price of milk that would be required to reduce the valuation of Quebec dairy quotas to the current price ceiling of $25,000 per unit. Accomplishing this task requires modeling the implicit valuation of quotas during the price ceiling era. Starting from a dynamic model of the demand for quotas, I develop an econometric model to estimate producers' discount factor. Using my econometric results and the modeled equilibrium price, I estimate the price of dairy quotas over the period 1993-2010. In 2010, I estimate that dairy quotas in Quebec would have traded at a price of $31,955 in the absence of the price ceiling. My results indicate that lowering the valuation of quotas to $25,000 per unit would have required an 11.83% reduction in the farm price of milk.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.312
Threshold uncertainty score0.621

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.170 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA)Same topicAgricultural Economics and PolicyFrench-language works237,207