MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012096169 · doi:10.3390/socsci9030027

Understanding Motivations for Volunteering in Food Insecurity and Food Upcycling Projects

2020· article· en· W3012096169 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sabrina Rondeau, Sara M. Stricker, Chantel Kozachenko, Kate Parizeau

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Sciences · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNonprofit Sector and Volunteering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersArrell Food Institute, University of GuelphUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsEnthusiasmSocial enterpriseMarketingFood insecurityPublic relationsBusinessAltruism (biology)Food securityPsychologyPolitical scienceSocial psychologyAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For non-profit organizations relying on volunteers to operate, investigations into the motivations of volunteerism are critical to attract new volunteers and to support the current ones. This study looked at volunteerism in the not-for-profit project The SEED in Ontario, Canada, which is looking to address food insecurity through a new social enterprise project that will create value-added “upcycled” products from second-grade produce while offering training opportunities for youth facing barriers to employment. The aims of this paper were to explore why volunteers chose to offer their time to this project and to gauge the current volunteers’ interest in volunteering with the organization’s new “Upcycle Kitchen”. Thirty-seven volunteers responded to a self-administered survey. They reported altruism, self-development, and social life improvement as their main motivations for volunteering. The volunteers expressed enthusiasm toward the Upcycle Kitchen initiative, which seems to be attributable to the multidimensional, creative, and educational aspects of the project. Tackling food insecurity and reducing the environmental impact of food waste are values which would most likely influence the respondents’ willingness to volunteer in food upcycling activities. We believe that this study is a good model to learn about the many facets of volunteerism for social enterprises developing upcycling-based food 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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.406
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.371
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.000 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations18
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial SciencesSame topicNonprofit Sector and VolunteeringFrench-language works237,207