MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187006280

Understanding the Agriculture Policy Environment in Newfoundland And Labrador - A focus on Farmer Attraction and Retention Interventions

2021· article· en· W3187006280 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Abdul‐Rahim Abdulai, Abigail Appong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of rural and community development · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionAgriculturePublic policyAgricultural policyPolicy analysisGeneral partnershipBusinessPublic economicsPolitical scienceEconomicsEconomic growthPublic administrationGeographyFinancePsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines agricultural policy interventions in Newfoundland and Labrador. We focus specifically on efforts geared towards building the capacity of agriculture through the attraction and retention of people into the industry. We found that the agricultural policy environment is a complex structure of private and public actors, who intervene both collaboratively and distinctively to make farming attractive to the general public and to keep farmers in the industry. These efforts manifest through financial incentivizing, informational and resources support, skill development and capacity building, land reforms, institutional support, and changes in program requirements and operational mechanisms. However, despite the multiactor driven diverse agricultural policy actions that target various industry capacity sectors, structural limitations in the policy environment, including unclear policy language, red tape, stringent program requirements, a one-sided focus of policy actions, and lack of partnership and silo approach to farm programs undermine how beneficiaries perceive, accept, and participate in policy interventions. More importantly, these challenges reveal the (in)effectiveness of policy actions by highlighting the lack of room for experimentation, inflexibility, and lack of even playing grounds for beneficiaries. Through these findings, this paper contributes to the literature on agricultural policy and policy evaluations by providing empirical case evidence of the dynamics in policy environments and how that could be improved. Keywords: farmer attraction, farmer retention, agricultural policy, policy evaluation, rural policy _________________________________________  Comprendre l'environnement de la politique agricole a Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador - Un accent sur les interventions d'attraction et de retention des agriculteurs Cet article examine les interventions en matiere de politique agricole a Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador. Nous nous concentrons specifiquement sur les efforts visant a renforcer les capacites de l'agriculture par l'attraction et la retention de personnes dans l'industrie. Ces efforts se manifestent par des incitations financieres, un soutien en matiere d'information et de ressources, le developpement des competences et le renforcement des capacites, des reformes foncieres, un soutien institutionnel et des changements dans les exigences du programme et les mecanismes operationnels. Cependant, malgre les diverses actions de politique agricole menees par plusieurs acteurs qui ciblent divers secteurs de capacite industrielle, des limitations structurelles de l'environnement politique, y compris un langage politique peu clair, de la paperasserie, des exigences de programme strictes, une focalisation unilaterale des actions politiques et le manque de partenariat et l'approche en silo des programmes agricoles sape la facon dont les beneficiaires percoivent, acceptent et participent aux interventions politiques. Plus important encore, ces defis revelent l'(in)efficacite des actions politiques en soulignant le manque de place pour l'experimentation, l'inflexibilite et le manque de terrain de jeu egal pour les beneficiaires. Grâce a ces resultats, cet article contribue a la litterature sur les politiques agricoles et les evaluations des politiques en fournissant des preuves de cas empiriques de la dynamique dans les environnements politiques et de la maniere dont cela pourrait etre ameliore. Mots cles : attraction  des agriculteurs, retention des agriculteurs, politique agricole, evaluation des politiques, politique rurale

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of rural and community developmentSame topicAgricultural Economics and PolicyFrench-language works237,207