MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Implementing Social and Environmental Policies in Cities: The Case of Food Policy in Vancouver, Canada

2008· article· en· W2132681429 on OpenAlexaffabout
Wendy Berry Mendes

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Urban and Regional Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicOrganic Food and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityGovernment (linguistics)Political scienceInclusion (mineral)Public policyEnvironmental policyUrban sustainabilityEconomic growthPublic administrationSociologyRegional scienceEnvironmental planningGeographySocial scienceEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recent years have seen the appearance on urban agendas of social and environmental issues not conventionally understood as municipal concerns. Often framed as policy areas that promote sustainability, quality of life or social inclusion, these new arrivals are complex not only because they are often cross‐sectoral, but equally because there are few regulatory tools and resources to support their implementation. This trend has resulted in a growing body of research that asks what factors result in some social and environmental policies being adopted by municipalities, while others are not? And why in certain places and not others? Such research typically focuses on factors and processes that contribute to getting an issue on the official agenda of a municipality, but offers comparatively little by way of analysis of what happens next. This article addresses this gap by providing an in‐depth analysis of the early stages of implementation of an emerging urban issue, food policy, in the City of Vancouver, Canada. The article draws attention to the often overlooked spaces and contours of governmental institutions as sites of organizational learning and capacity building in support of sustainability. In this way, the analysis brings deeper understandings of a specific case of food policy implementation by a municipal government, while also advancing research on how similar cross‐cutting social and environmental issues are implemented by local governments elsewhere. Résumé Depuis peu, on voit apparaître dans les programmes urbains des aspects sociaux et environnementaux qui, traditionnellement, n'entraient pas dans les préoccupations municipales. Souvent formulés comme des domaines politiques défendant approche durable, qualité de vie ou inclusion social, ces nouveaux venus sont complexes, souvent parce qu'ils sont inter‐sectoriels, mais également parce qu'il existe peu d'outils et de ressources réglementaires pour faciliter leur mise en oeuvre. Il en a résulté une multiplication des recherches sur les facteurs qui permettent, ou non, l'adoption par les municipalités de certaines politiques sociales et environnementales? Et pourquoi dans certains lieux et pas ailleurs? En général, ces recherches s'attachent aux facteurs et processus qui contribuent à faire entrer une question dans le programme officiel d'une municipalité, mais apportent relativement peu quant à l'analyse de ce qui se produit ensuite. L'article traite cette lacune par une analyse approfondie des premiers stades de mise en oeuvre d'un thème urbain récent, la politique alimentaire, dans la ville canadienne de Vancouver. Il attire l'attention sur les espaces et profils souvent ignorés des institutions gouvernementales en tant que lieux d'apprentissage organisationnel et de construction de capacités permettant de favoriser la durabilité. Ce faisant, l'analyse permet de mieux appréhender un cas particulier d'application de politique alimentaire par les autorités municipales, tout en faisant progresser la recherche sur la façon dont, ailleurs, les gouvernements locaux traduisent concrètement des questions sociales et environnementales similaires couvrant plusieurs domaines.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score0.875

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations127
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Urban and Regional ResearchSame topicOrganic Food and AgricultureFrench-language works237,207