MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Table_1_The value of Canadian agriculture: Direct, indirect, and induced economic impacts.XLSX

2022· dataset· en· W6927736352 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2022
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
Topiclinguistics and terminology studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgricultureValue (mathematics)Investment (military)Economic impact analysisGross domestic productUpstream (networking)Gross value addedProduct (mathematics)Gross output

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>While the value of agriculture to the Canadian economy is well established, its extensive indirect and induced value through upstream and downstream industries is not. Input-Output (I/O) analyzes are a common tool that measure the direct, indirect and induced impacts of an industry to the entire economy. We reviewed I/O analyzes that used economic multipliers to estimate the total contribution of agricultural industries to Canada's economy. Reports underwent data extraction for output, Gross Domestic Product (GDP), jobs, labor income and taxes generated. We found that when indirect and induced economic impacts are considered, the value of agricultural industries is much greater than traditional valuations indicate. Beef and canola were the two largest industries in terms of GDP and jobs, with direct impacts constituting less than half of their total impacts. Recent and thorough I/O analyzes are available for only a limited number of agricultural industries. There is a need for I/O analyzes covering key agricultural industries at the regional and national level using uniform methodology and recent data and multipliers. This information is essential to gain a systemic understanding of the true economic value of agriculture and to inform policies and investment that maximizes the potential of agricultural industries.</p>

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.583
Threshold uncertainty score0.949

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)0.5840.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.171 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topiclinguistics and terminology studiesFrench-language works237,207