Against the Grain - Globalization & Agricultural Subsidies in Canada and the US
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis investigates whether developments associated with globalization and regional integration have caused the levels of government support provided to agricultural producers in Canada and the United States to converge in a downward direction. The literature is sharply divided as to whether governments retain the ability to pursue an independent agricultural policy course. To shed light on this debate, the levels of government assistance payments made to farmers in six contiguous Canadian provinces and American states (Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Montana) are compared over the 1990-2001 period. This time-frame allows for sufficient periods both before and after the establishment of NAFTA and the WTO to study the effects of these developments on the relevant policy outcomes. After outlining the programs and policy changes that drove the shifts in levels of government support provided to farmers, the paper argues that although the levels of government payments made to farmers in the six sub-units converged in the mid-1990s, they diverged thereafter. The evidence drawn from this examination supports the contention that governments do possess considerable room to manoeuvre in the agricultural policy making arena and significant ability to chart an independent policy course.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".