Migrating Mennonites: Understanding the Impacts of Anabaptist Farmers on Local Food in Northern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the cost of farmland in southern Ontario continues to increase, many farmers are seeking alternate locations suitable for agriculture. Northern Ontario, with an abundance of productive, less expansive land, has proven to be an opportune location for many farmers. In particular, over the past fifteen years, a significant movement of Amish and Old Order Mennonite farmers to northern Ontario has occurred. These farmers have increased access to local food, broadened the productive spectrum of crops and improved food sovereignty for many communities. Their impact on local communities has been significant, as has their impact on the broader farm community. Utilizing traditional farming practices, the Anabaptist community has significantly broadened the productive potential of northern farms, producing fruits and vegetables previously not grown locally. The potential to expand agriculture in northern Ontario is apparent and food sovereignty and security may be improved with the growth of this industry. As the potential movement of more Anabaptist farmers to northern Ontario is likely, it is important to understand their motivations to farm in the north and the challenges they incurred during and after this move. As part of this, this presentation will identify the impacts of Anabaptist farmers on both the production and consumption of local food in northern Ontario. Additionally, challenges regarding the expansion of agriculture in the north for Anabaptist farmers will be identified and opportunities to apply these lessons to the overall agricultural industry will be provided.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".