MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124748802

Value of Insect Pest Management to U.S. and Canadian Corn, Soybean and Canola Farmers

2015· preprint· en· W3124748802 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Terrance M. Hurley, Paul D. Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect and Pesticide Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCanolaIntegrated pest managementAgricultural scienceAgriculturePEST analysisValue (mathematics)BusinessAgroforestryAgronomyBiologyMarketingMathematicsEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objectives of this research were to assess 1) the value of alternative insect management practices to farmers and 2) how these values relate to nonpecuniary factors such as simplicity, convenience, yield risk, and human and environmental safety. To accomplish these objectives, we conduct¬ed telephone surveys in 2014 of corn and soybean farmers in the U.S. as well as corn, soybean and canola farmers in Canada. Corn farmers were queried about their use in 2013 of Bt corn, insecticide seed treatments, soil insecticides and foliar insecticides. Soybean and canola farmers were queried about their use in 2013 of insecticide seed treatments and foliar insecticides. All farmers were queried about their educational background, farming experience, insect pests of concern, sources of insect management information and nonpecuniary factors influencing their insect management decisions. Finally, all farmers were asked about the value they receive from these various insect management practices. Factor analysis was used to better understand the nonpecuniary factors influencing farmer pest man¬agement decisions. Also, econometric methods were used to better un¬derstand regional difference in pest management practices and the value of these practices as well as how differences in these pest management practices and the value of these practices related to various nonpecuniary factors. Finally, the results of the econometric analysis were used to esti¬mate the value of these different insect management practices to farmers. Based on these results, neonicotinoid seed treatments were the most valued insect management practice for North American corn, soybean and canola farmers, with a total farmer value of $1.43 billion in 2013. Bt corn was second, with a total farmer value of $1.3 billion in 2013. The total farmer values of foliar and soil insecticides were $306 million and $175 million respectively. Taken as a whole, these results demonstrate that neonicotinoid seed treatments provide substantial value to North American corn, soybean and canola farmers.

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)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.201

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicInsect and Pesticide ResearchFrench-language works237,207