MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792981519 · doi:10.1080/02255189.2017.1410470

State food security and people’s food sovereignty: competing visions of agriculture in China

2018· article· en· W2792981519 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Matthew Gaudreau

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d études du développement · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooBalsillie School of International Affairs
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversity of WaterlooChinese University of Hong KongUniversity of Hong Kong
KeywordsVisionFood securityChinaMultinational corporationAgribusinessState (computer science)AgriculturePolitical sciencePeople's RepublicFood sovereigntyFood systemsSovereigntyResistance (ecology)Capital (architecture)Political economyEconomyEconomic systemEconomicsPoliticsSociologyGeographyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines reactions to global agribusiness concentration in the People’s Republic of China (PRC). In many countries, there is a trend of agribusiness concentration among relatively few multinational corporations (MNCs), which is often challenged by various forms of resistance from local food movements. The article identifies distinct overlap in discourses within the PRC. Arguments made by Chinese state/corporate actors and those by actors from alternative food movements focus on contesting global agricultural capital. These commonalities reveal a discursive battleground in China that creates unique constraints (and opportunities) for food activists, given state food security priorities.

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)0.001
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 score0.920
Threshold uncertainty score0.854

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d études du développementSame topicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207