Growing Food in the Suburbs: Estimating the Land Potential for Sub-urban Agriculture in Waterloo, Ontario
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study uses Geographic Information System analysis to measure the land potential for urban agriculture in four sub-urban neighbourhoods in Waterloo, Ontario. Findings show that 49–58% of land measured has potential to support urban agriculture. In older post-war sub-urban neighbourhoods, the land potential is primarily in the form of private yards. Contrary, newer sub-urban neighbourhoods, incorporating new urbanist ideals, have smaller yards but more public green space. Challenges and opportunities for urban agriculture will differ between new and older sub-urban areas due to differences in neighbourhood design. The findings have implications for planning practice in terms of linkages between neighbourhood design and urban agriculture potential. Promotion of urban agriculture could be beneficial in post-war sub-urban neighbourhoods, which experienced decline in several North American cities. Conceptually, consideration of sub-urban agriculture opens up the possibility of exploring a novel dimension of the now internally diverse sub-urban landscape and the changing functions of suburbs within metropolitan areas.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it