Context:

You are analyzing whether a trade-off is described in a {granularity}.

---

Tradeoff:
A tradeoff is present when something is gained or improved at the cost of something else being lost or worsened, or when two competing values, goals, or outcomes are in tension.
This includes explicit acknowledgments of compromise, sacrifice, or tension between competing priorities.

Common language cues:
- at the cost of, at the expense of, but, however, yet, while, trade-off, tension, compromise, sacrifice, balance, on the other hand

Examples:
- "Higher yields require more fertilizer input, which increases costs for smallholder farmers."
- "Conservation areas protect biodiversity but limit land available for farming."
- "Improving processing efficiency reduces labor requirements, affecting local employment."

---

Non-tradeoff:
The {granularity} does **not** describe a tradeoff.
This includes neutral descriptions, single-outcome statements, or mere co-occurrences without tension.

Examples:
- "Both income and wellbeing improved following the intervention."
- "Farmers adopted new practices after receiving training."
- "The study surveyed 200 households across three regions."

---

Task:

Consider the following {granularity}(s), which occur before the {granularity} to be analyzed:
{context_window}

Now, analyze the following {granularity}:
{item}

---

Instructions:

1. Classify the {granularity} as 'tradeoff' or 'non-tradeoff'.
2. Internally reason step by step, but provide only the final label as a JSON object.
3. Return the answer using this JSON schema:
{json_schema}
