MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Crop Diversification in Canada's Breadbasket

2001· article· en· W4402832640 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adrian Seaborne

Bibliographic record

VenueGeography · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Rural Development Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversification (marketing strategy)Agricultural diversificationGeographyCropBusinessForestryMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resource-based hinterlands such as Canada's western interior have been strongly influenced by the global economic forces and national strategies that have emerged over the last two decades. In combination, these factors have led to marked alterations in long established patterns of production, land use and trade. This article identifies these forces at the regional, national and international scales and examines the way in which they have led to the decline in importance of wheat production as the staple commodity in Saskatchewan's agricultural economy. The loss of transportation and other farm subsidies, high input costs, and continued low world prices for spring wheat, are seen as the major forces at work. In the second part of the article, the dimensions of crop diversification in the face of the demise of wheat farming are discussed. In this context the increased cultivation of oil seeds and speciality crops are identified as the main adaptive strategies adopted by grain farmers. The most important factors encouraging these developments are the liberalisation of trade, high market demand for the products concerned, the emergence of associated value added activity within the region, and government support through assistance in research and development.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.254

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations3
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeographySame topicAgriculture and Rural Development ResearchFrench-language works237,207