MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008057558 · doi:10.7202/019373ar

Decolonizing Diet: Healing by Reclaiming Traditional Indigenous Foodways

2008· article· en· W2008057558 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Monica Bodirsky, Jon Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueCuizine The Journal of Canadian Food Cultures · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFoodwaysIndigenousColonialismTraditional knowledgeCultural assimilationAnthropologySociologyHistoryEnvironmental ethicsSocial sciencePolitical scienceEthnic groupEcologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional Indigenous foodways remain important for the ongoing health and well being of contemporary Indigenous North American peoples. Drawing partly on primary research on food-related knowledge and experience within the First Nations community of Toronto, the authors trace how colonial policies of assimilation attempted to destroy Indigenous knowledge and in so doing spawned numerous trans-generational health consequences for Indigenous populations, which are still felt today. While colonial attempts at assimilation seriously undermined the integrity of traditional Indigenous foodways, today this cultural knowledge is undergoing a resurgence. Contemporary Indigenous peoples have expanded upon oral traditions with written stories of food gathering and recipes as a means to revitalize food knowledge, cultural integrity and community -- all inextricably linked to health. As such, the authors argue that fostering the resurgence of traditional Indigenous knowledge about food is a necessary in healing the trauma emerging from colonialism. Indigenous cookbooks provide opportunities to share information about traditional culture and food knowledge along with the recipes more conventionally associated with cookbooks.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.012
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations48
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCuizine The Journal of Canadian Food CulturesSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207