MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388448968 · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-15233-7_2

“Passion Alone Is Not Sufficient”: What Do We Know About Young Farmers in Canada?

2023· book-chapter· en· W4388448968 on OpenAlexaffabout
Joshua Nasielski, Sharada Srinivasan, Travis Jansen, A. Haroon Akram‐Lodhi

Bibliographic record

VenueRethinking rural · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRural development and sustainability
Canadian institutionsTrent UniversityUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLivelihoodAgricultureContext (archaeology)PopulationGovernment (linguistics)GeographySocioeconomicsEconomic growthPolitical scienceAgricultural economicsSociologyDemographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In 2016, Canada’s 271,935 farm operators represented less than 0.8 per cent of the Canadian population (Statistics Canada 2017a). This reflects a loss of close to 120,000 farmers over the past 25 years as Canadian livelihoods continue to shift away from agriculture (about 1.4 per cent of the population farmed in 1991). Considering that less than 10 per cent of Canadian farmers are under the age of 35, it is hard to imagine these numbers rebounding anytime in the near future (Statistics Canada 2017a). Clearly, Canadian farming faces a generational challenge (Qualman et al. 2018). However, despite these generational challenges, there has been little research that focuses specifically on young farmers in Canada and their experiences in becoming “successful” farmers. Therefore, the purpose of this chapter is to provide an overview of the information available on Canadian young farmers. This overview references existing research from scholarly literature and government statistics. This is done to offer an understanding of the context within which Canada’s young farmers are embedded. A young person’s desire to farm is partly shaped by but also shapes their experiences in becoming and being a young farmer. This overview helps inform the discussion in the next two chapters that are based upon interviews with young farmers in our two case study provinces: Ontario and Manitoba.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.873

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designOther design
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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRethinking ruralSame topicRural development and sustainabilityFrench-language works237,207