MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Indigenous Climate–Food–Health Nexus

2019· book-chapter· en· W2935849458 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sherilee L. Harper, Lea Berrang‐Ford, César Cárcamo, Ashlee Cunsolo, Victoria L. Edge, James D. Ford, Alejandro Llanos‐Chea, Shuaib Lwasa, Didacus B. Namanya

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2019
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNexus (standard)IndigenousGeographyEcologyBiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The health impacts of climate change are not evenly distributed among the global population. Indigenous peoples are expected to bear a disproportionate burden of the climate-related health impacts given their close relationship with and dependence on the local environment for subsistence and food security, as well as existing gradients in health and colonial legacies. To understand how climate change affects indigenous peoples’ health vis-à-vis food systems, this chapter profiles research conducted in partnership with three indigenous populations: Inuit in the Canadian Arctic, Batwa from the Ugandan Impenetrable Forest, and Shawi in the Peruvian Amazon. Drawing from data captured in cohort surveys, focus group discussions, in-depth interviews, and a variety of participatory methods, this chapter characterizes climate-sensitive food-related health outcomes in each region. Finally, it examines the critical role of indigenous knowledge, equity, and research in health-related climate change adaptation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207