MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890473534 · doi:10.7892/boris.130618

Systems thinking: an approach for understanding ‘eco-agri-food systems’

2019· book-chapter· en· W2890473534 on OpenAlexaff
Wei Zhang, John M. Gowdy, Andrea M. Bassi, Fabrice DeClerck, Adebiyi Adegboyega, Georg K.S. Andersson, Anna Augustyn, Richard Bawden, Andrew Reid Bell, John A. Dearing, James Dyke, Carlos Calvo Hernandez, P. Johnson, P. Kleppel, Adam M. Komarek, Agnieszka E. Latawiec, Ricardo Mateus, Alistair McVittie, Enrique Ortega, David Phelps, Claudia Ringler, Kamaljit K. Sangha, Marije Schaafsma, Sara Scherr, Jessica Thorn

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Twente Research Information · 2019
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
FundersConsortium of International Agricultural Research CentersFoundation for Advanced Studies on International DevelopmentCYTED Ciencia y Tecnología para el DesarrolloEuropean Environment AgencyEuropean CommissionFHI 360
KeywordsNexus (standard)Transformational leadershipUnderpinningLivelihoodExternalityFood systemsAgricultureEquity (law)Systems thinkingEnvironmental resource managementBusinessEnvironmental planningPolitical scienceEconomicsFood securityEngineeringEcologyGeographyPublic relationsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chapter 2 makes the case for using systems thinking as a guiding perspective for TEEBAgriFood’s development of a comprehensive Evaluation Framework for the eco-agri-food system. Many dimensions of the eco-agri-food system create complex analytical and policy challenges. Systems thinking allows better understanding and forecasting the outcomes of policy decisions by illuminating how the components of a system are interconnected with one another and how the drivers of change are determined and impacted by feedback loops, delays and non-linear relationships. To establish the building blocks of a theory of change, systems thinking empowers us to move beyond technical analysis and decision- tool toward more integrated approaches that can aid in the forming of a common ground for cultural changes.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score0.908

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations26
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Twente Research InformationSame topicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental ImpactFrench-language works237,207