Bibliographic record
Abstract
The organic farming movement has been expanding for more than 50 years in North America. Systems of organic certification have a much shorter history. Organic regulation and certification in Canada was introduced federally in 2005 and became operational in 2009. To trade agricultural products under an organic label in Canada requires third party organic certification if the product crosses a provincial boundary. Organic certification is provided by a number of certification organizations. But organic certification has not been embraced by all members of the organic movement and there has been a proliferation of labels for agricultural products claiming some degree of environmental sensitivity including: natural, pesticide free, free range, pastured, grass-fed, and local. While the demand for these products has been growing only certified organic products are regulated by law. This paper examines the diffusion of organic certification in Canada. It identifies the rate of diffusion and examines the different factors – policy and regulations, competition, pressure from consumer and environmental groups, business and farming associations that are influencing the decision to undertake and maintain organic certification in the face of the increasing competition from non-regulated alternatives. This paper is part of a research project funded by Canada’s Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council under its Partnership Development Grant. An early version of the paper was presented in the panel entitled "Diffusion of environmental innovations among micro small and medium enterprises: learning across disciplines and across cultures".
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".