MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1570068248 · doi:10.1111/joac.12094

Can the State Foster Food Sovereignty? Insights from the Case of<scp>E</scp>cuador

2015· article· en· W1570068248 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agrarian Change · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood sovereigntySovereigntyState (computer science)Agrarian societyInstitutionalisationPoliticsPolitical scienceAgricultureFood policyFood securityGovernment (linguistics)Political economyEconomic systemEconomicsLawGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper contributes to the discussion on food sovereignty and the state by analysing the case of E cuador. It presents a theoretical framework and literature review focused on the question of food sovereignty, the state and agrarian political economy. The case study of E cuador, one of a handful of countries that has attempted to institutionalize food sovereignty in state policy, examines the political processes that led to the institutionalization of food sovereignty and the rural development and agricultural policies of the ‘post‐neoliberal’ government of R afael C orrea. The analysis of the E cuadorian case concludes that the implementation of public policies reflecting food sovereignty principles has largely proven elusive, with the exception of some institutional changes and developments at the local levels of the state.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.511
Threshold uncertainty score0.373

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.155 · 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