MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7039285507

Manitoba harvest: rural livelihood contributions of community shared agriculture and farmers' markets

2004· dissertation· en· W7039285507 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Atrium (University of Guelph) · 2004
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicOrganic Food and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLivelihoodDiversification (marketing strategy)AgricultureSocial capitalCapital assetCapital (architecture)SustainabilityRural areaRural economy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis investigates the rural livelihood contributions of two consumer-direct marketing models, Community Shared Agriculture and farmers' markets in southern Manitoba. While the majority of existing CSA literature focuses on the theoretical benefits of CSAs few studies have critically examined the model and there is limited existing literature on farmers markets. The study critically examines the experiences of Manitoba producer and consumer households with these models through the lenses of sustainable livelihoods and social capital. Manitoba producers initiating CSAs are motivated primarily by ideological convictions, and in the case of farmers' markets, a desire to diversify and increase household financial assets, and the social aspects of the model. Findings indicate that the financial benefits of these models in Manitoba are marginal, and although they have the potential to provide opportunities for livelihood diversification and social capital development, producers should be cautious that these models do not increase household vulnerability.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score0.947

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.180 · 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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Atrium (University of Guelph)→Same topicOrganic Food and Agriculture→French-language works237,207→