Challenges to supporting social justice through food system governance: examples from two urban agriculture initiatives in Toronto
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Urban agriculture continues to gain traction in cities across North America. Many such efforts pursue social justice objectives with mixed success. This paper examines two urban agriculture projects in Toronto, Canada, to demonstrate the challenges of pursuing social justice goals via urban agriculture. Despite a long history of municipal and civil society support for urban agriculture in Toronto, stakeholders continually face bureaucratic obstacles that make growing food on public land inaccessible for groups without significant resources. Relying on Swyngedouw’s theories of the post-political condition, this paper finds that a seemingly depoliticized food governance focusing exclusively on processes of urban agriculture obscures questions about who benefits from such processes, which can pave the way for uneven development. This research contributes to literature on environmental justice and food governance by attending to municipal challenges to achieving social justice goals in urban agriculture projects.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it