The global food system, agro-industrialization and governance: alternative conceptions for sub-Saharan Africa
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
Global food security challenges give rise to contentious debates. Conventional approaches to agricultural development call for capital-intensive industrial-scale farming to increase global productivity. Sub-Saharan Africa is the main target for agro-industrial farmland investments. Critical scholars oppose these trends in the region, arguing that the large-scale farming model causes a devastating loss of land resources and harms rural livelihoods. Critical development scholars and critical globalization scholars generally intersect in their candid rejection of global capitalism and the commodification of agri-food resources. This paper adds to existing critiques by advancing a governance approach. In reviewing case study evidence from eight countries, it highlights the crucial role of governments, who ultimately wield sovereign authority to regulate the agricultural sector. This analysis represents a fusion of critical development studies and critical globalization studies. Rather than rejecting the global capitalist system, it sheds light on the need for effective regulation and identifies key actors and policy areas.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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