MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7000088531

The effects of untying Canadian food aid on the price sensitivity of commodity procurement decisions

2017· dissertation· en· W7000088531 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural risk and resilience
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcurementCommodityFood aidEmpirical evidenceEmpirical researchGovernment procurement
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ninety percent of Canadian food aid donations were tied to domestic procurement sources until 2005. Procurement restrictions were reduced to 50% in 2005 and were eliminated in 2008. Implementing agencies are now free to procure commodities of their choice in locations of their choice. This study investigates whether the untying of Canadian food aid procurement in 2008 has made procurement decisions more responsive to changes in the relative prices of wheat, maize, and rice in Canadian cereal food aid baskets. It applies a pooled empirical model with regional fixed effects to regional price data and data on Canadian government-funded food aid shipments to five recipient regions. The results are mainly counterintuitive, which is partly attributable to a number of data and model limitations. Consequently, this study does not provide empirical evidence of cereal commodity substitution after the untying of Canadian food aid in 2008. However, there is still reason to believe that donor agencies substitute between cereal food aid commodities, especially after the elimination formal procurement restrictions. Further research is however needed to generate empirical evidence for this.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.195
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicAgricultural risk and resilienceFrench-language works237,207