MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W575295967

Farmers on Welfare: The Making of Europe's Common Agricultural Policy

2009· book· en· W575295967 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCadmus - EUI Research Repository (European University Institute) · 2009
Typebook
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWelfareAgricultureAgricultural economicsCommon Agricultural PolicyNatural resource economicsEconomicsBusinessGeographyMarket economyArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2007 the farm subsidies of the European Union's common agricultural policy took over 40 percent of the entire EU budget. How did a sesctor of diminishing social and economic importance manage to maintain such political prominence? The conventional answer focuses on the negotiations among the member states of the European Community from 1958 onward. That story holds that the political priority given to the CAP, as well as its long-term stability, resides in a basic devil's bargain between French agriculture and German industry. In <em>Farmers on Welfare</em>, a landmark new account of the making of the single largest European policy ever, Ann-Christina L. Knudsen suggests that this accepted narrative is too neat. In particular, she argues, it neglects how a broad agreement was made in the 1960s that related to the national welfare state policies aiming to improve incomes for farmers. Drawing on extensive archival research from a variety of political actors across the Community, she illustrates how and why this supranational farm regime was created in the 1960s, and also provides us with a detailed narrative history of how national and European administrations gradually learned about this kind of cooperation. By tracing how the farm welfare objective was gradually implemented in other common policies, Knudsen offers an alternative account of European integration history. "This remarkable and rich book sheds much light on the origins and evolution of European agricultural policy. The combination of deep archival research with nuanced political analysis makes it required reading for both historians and political scientists interested in this cornerstone of European integration." Helen Wallace, Centennial Professor, European Institute, London School of Economics and Political Science. "<em>Farmers on Welfare</em> is an important work that provides the most detailed account to date of the creation of the common agricultural policy. Employing newly tapped archival sources, Ann-Christina L. Knudsen challenges much of the received wisdom about the formation of the CAP and, in doing so, offers valuable insights into the nature of European politics and about policy-making in general." Adam Sheingate, The Johns Hopkins University. "<em>Farmers on Welfare </em>is a must-read for serious scholars of European integration. Its core argument that the CAP is a type of social policy and should be viewed as a key component of an international agricultural welfare state rather than simply as a commercial agreement is both provocative and well documented. Its emphasis on the role of ideas as well as its use of historical institutionalism as an organizing framework resonates with ongoing theoretical debates in the social sciences. Ann-Christina L. Knudsen has written an important book that deserves attention." Alberta Sbragia, Jean Monnet Chair <em>ad personam</em> and Director, European Union Center of Excellence, University of Pittsburgh.

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.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.517
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.215 · 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