The use of Photovoice to document and characterize the food security of users of community food programs in Iqaluit, Nunavut
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
INTRODUCTION: Food insecurity is a chronic problem affecting Inuit communities. The most comprehensive assessment of Inuit food security to-date, the Inuit Health Survey, reported that 70% of Inuit pre-school children lived in 'food insecure' households. Food banks and soup kitchens are relatively new in the Arctic but the number of users is increasing. Little is known about the experience and determinants of food insecurity among food program users who are often among the most marginalized (socially and economically) in communities. The use of participatory research methods when working in the north of Canada can promote meaningful knowledge exchange with community members and this approach was used in the present 'Photovoice' research. Photovoice uses photography to develop a baseline understanding of an issue, in this case the experience and determinants of food insecurity among users of community food programs in Iqaluit, Nunavut. The target population includes those who face significant social and economic marginalization, an often neglected group in Arctic food systems research. METHODS: Eight regular users of food programs were recruited and engaged in a Photovoice research project to document factors determining their daily food consumption. The research method was introduced in workshops and discussion included the ethical concerns related to photography and how to take pictures. Participants were supplied with digital cameras, and asked to answer the following question using photography: 'What aspects of your everyday life affect what you eat and how much you have to eat?'. In the final workshop, photographs were discussed among the group and participants identified key themes in the photographs, offering an understanding of food insecurity from their perspectives. The group then discussed what should be done with the knowledge gained. RESULTS: Factors improving food security were the customary systems for sharing 'country food', and the presence of social support networks in the community, such as the Food Bank, the Soup Kitchen and the Tukisigiarvik Center. Factors identified as negatively affecting food security were the high cost of food in the Arctic, and substance abuse. The participants decided by consensus whether and how the knowledge from this project would be disseminated. They decided that a museum exhibit of the photographs in the summer of 2010 and promotion of the results among policy-makers in Nunavut were of high priority. CONCLUSION: The use of participatory research approaches such as Photovoice offers promise for exploring food security issues among similarly disadvantaged and vulnerable populations elsewhere in the Arctic. This approach was found to be a useful method for gathering and sharing research data because the data was generated and analysed by the participants. The clear and concise messages developed by the participants can be used to inform policy. This research method can assist in making a valuable contribution to health research, both in the Arctic and worldwide, because it promotes an understanding of the experiences of individuals from their own perspective.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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