MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2759277871 · doi:10.1101/195396

Global Land Use Implications of Dietary Trends: A Tragedy of the Commons

2017· preprint· en· W2759277871 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sarah Rizvi, Chris Pagnutti, Chris T. Bauch, Madhur Anand

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAgricultureFood securityNatural resourceBusinessAgricultural landNatural resource economicsTragedy of the commonsExploitAgricultural productivityGlobal commonsAgricultural economicsEnvironmental resource managementGeographyCommonsPolitical scienceEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Global food security and agricultural land management represent two urgent and intimately related challenges that humans must face in the coming decades. Here, we quantify the changes in the global agricultural land footprint if the world were to adhere to the dietary guidelines put forth by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), while accounting for the land use change incurred by import/export required to meet those guidelines. We analyze data at country, continent, and global levels. USDA guidelines are viewed as an improvement on the current land-intensive diet of the average American, but despite this our results show that global adherence to USDA guidelines would require up to 1 gigahectare of additional agricultural land--roughly the size of Canada. The results also show a strong divide between Eastern and Western hemispheres. Because countries increasingly import most of their food, meeting USDA guidelines could cause a Tragedy of the Commons, where self-interested actors race to over-exploit the shared resource of global agricultural lands. National dietary guidelines and practices thus need to be coordinated internationally in order to spare our remaining natural lands, in much the same way that countries are coordinating greenhouse gas emissions.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact→French-language works237,207→