MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7139271357

Finding food suppliers & producers with aligned environmental and social justice values

2024· report· en· W7139271357 sur OpenAlexaff
Gabrielle Applegarth, Jinney Chang, Katie Newlove, Krijn Stufkens, Reta Wu

Notice bibliographique

RevuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2024
Typereport
Langueen
Domaine
Thématique
Établissements canadiensUniversity of British Columbia
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésFood systemsGreenhouse gasProcurementClimate changeFood processingGlobal warmingSustainable agriculturePurchasingAgriculture
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Global warming is likely to reach 1.5℃ warmer than pre-industrial levels between 2030 and 2052, with anthropogenic emissions contributing up to 1.0℃ (IPCC, 2019). The effects of climate change stemming from unsustainable energy use, land-use change, and production and consumption patterns are likely to cause global long-term challenges, particularly in agricultural production and food systems (IPCC, 2019). Research shows that 34% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are from food systems, and immediate action is required to mitigate and adapt to the effects of accelerated global warming (Crippa et al., 2021). Large institutions such as the University of British Columbia (UBC) have significant purchasing power in their food procurement processes, offering the opportunity to exemplify how institutions can play a vital role in mitigating GHG emissions, ultimately fostering more ethical and environmentally conscious food systems. This project is in alignment with UBC’s strategic commitment to creating a Climate-Friendly Food System (CFFS), which aims to reduce the GHG emissions of the campus’ food system by 50% by 2030 (UBC, 2021). One of the short-term actions to be executed by UBC in 2024 is the development and implementation of campus-wide sustainable food procurement guidelines to align with the goals of both CFFS and other international climate change agreements (IPCC, 2019 UBC, 2021). Overall, this research aims to contribute to the development of said guidelines. Guided by Community-Based Action Research (CBAR) principles, the methodology employed in this research included community engagement, shared decision-making, ethical considerations, cultural sensitivity, and transparent communication (Gullion & Tilton, 2020). Methodological tools included literature reviews to identify the sustainability practices of current and potential food suppliers at UBC, a review of UBC’s policies related to climate action and food systems, stakeholder meetings with UBC Student Housing and Community Services (SHCS), UBC Alma Mater Society (AMS), and UBC Social Ecological Environmental Development (SEEDS) representatives. Primary data was collected through surveys and interviews with current and potential suppliers, and an evaluation of this primary data through a sustainability matrix scoring system. The objectives of the research were to evaluate the sustainability and social practices of potential and current food suppliers of UBC SHCS and UBC AMS, identify potential food suppliers whose values align with UBC’s existing sustainability policies and commitments to create a more sustainable campus food system, and to propose a methodology for continuous improvement in the food procurement process for both UBC and other large educational institutions. Through our sustainability evaluation matrix, we were able to identify three potential suppliers in the categories of meat, grocery, and eggs that demonstrated exemplary performance in sustainable and just business practices. These food suppliers align with the university’s multiple strategic commitments to environmental sustainability and social justice and may serve as new food suppliers for UBC SHCS and UBC AMS. The project’s main deliverable was to utilize the analyzed primary and secondary data to conduct a “Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats” (SWOT) analysis for UBC's current and potential food vendors. This analysis may serve as a methodology for improving the food procurement processes at UBC and beyond. Through this analysis, it was revealed that a key strength of many suppliers was their efforts reduce their carbon footprint throughout the supply chain, as well as supporting local economies through local food sourcing. Conversely, a main challenge for many suppliers was their limited ability to scale production or supply to meet the demands of large institutions like UBC. Overall, our short-term recommendations for UBC SHCS and UBC AMS include maintaining and exploring new relationships with the identified ideal suppliers. In the long term, we recommend continued research into the role of educational institutions in supporting Climate Food System Action (CFSA), for example by supporting local food systems and economies, as well as collaborating with cross-sector organizations. Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.”

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,009
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: Autre
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,034
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,113

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0090,011
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0090,005
Communication savante0,0170,010
Science ouverte0,0010,011
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0340,007

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,014
Tête enseignante GPT0,200
Écart entre enseignants0,186 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Travaux en français237 207→