Food Security in Cuba: A Comparison of TRDs, Bodegas, and Agricultural Markets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Cuba entered a period of economic hardship known as the Special Period in Times of Peace. Since then, changes in Cuba’s food policy have reflected a shift away from strictly regulated food rationing to a mixed system including the libreta system or rationing as well as agricultural markets and stores using convertible pesos (TRDs). This system has lead to overall greater food security but also greater disparities in food accessibility. This study reviews and analyses food prices in bodegas, agricultural markets, and TRDs in several municipalities in Cuba. Most of the food items found in the TRDs were unavailable in bodegas and agricultural markets. This confirmed a trend in which more food items are becoming available only in TRDs. In addition, TRDs only accepted converted pesos (CUCs) as opposed to national pesos (CUPs), creating a disparity between those with access to the tourism industry and those who do not. While food availability is greater than it was in the early 1990’s, there are still issues surrounding food access for those without access to CUCs, linking food security to the tourism industry in Cuba. However, policy changes regarding currency unification and changes regarding the libreta system will impact food security issues in the future.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".