MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Consumer quest for embeddedness: a case study of the Brantford Farmers' Market

2009· article· en· W1965710076 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Robert Feagan, David Morris

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Consumer Studies · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicOrganic Food and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooWilfrid Laurier University
FundersWilfrid Laurier University
KeywordsEmbeddednessSituatedMarketingFraming (construction)SustainabilityBusinessValuation (finance)Context (archaeology)SociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Farmers' markets (FMs) in the US, Canada and Britain are often held as one key response to the unsustainability of conventional food production systems, as they provide consumers with a potentially more comprehensive valuation venue for their food purchases. This paper categorizes and examines the range of consumer motivations at the Brantford FM in Ontario, Canada using the concept of embeddedness. Though not a simple concept, embeddedness proves useful for framing non‐economic values sought by consumers at FMs in a way that helps to build our understanding of the context‐specific quality of patron motivations at FMs. In the study, values of social embeddedness (social interaction, knowledge of vendors, etc.) and spatial embeddedness (food freshness, supporting the ‘local’, etc.) emerge as core sets of consumer motivations at this FM, while natural embeddedness values (organic production, ‘food‐miles’ concerns, etc.) are less strongly held. This case study helps advance that specific sets of embedded values are expressed at FMs – consumer motivations partly reflect their historic and situated contexts, while contributing to our understanding of the importance of the embeddedness concept to alternative food system arguments for change.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0220.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations150
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Consumer StudiesSame topicOrganic Food and AgricultureFrench-language works237,207