MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3049066859 · doi:10.1080/03066150.2020.1786812

Food sovereignty, gender and everyday practice: the role of Afro-Colombian women in sustaining localised food systems

2020· article· en· W3049066859 on OpenAlexafffund
Katherine Turner, C. Julián Idrobo, Annette Aurélie Desmarais, Ana María Peredo

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Peasant Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Victoria
FundersUniversidad de los AndesSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsFood sovereigntyProvisioningAutonomySovereigntyOptimal distinctiveness theoryPoliticsEveryday lifeSociologyFood systemsFood securityPolitical sciencePolitical economyGender studiesSocial psychologyGeographyPsychologyAgricultureLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While social and political movements are the scale of action most often identified with food sovereignty-related struggles, everyday provisioning practices are critical for sustaining the distinctiveness and relative autonomy of localised food systems. We examine gendered provisioning in a Colombian, Afro-descendent community as a case study of how food sovereignty is enacted in daily life. Women's everyday food provisioning practices nourish households, sustain socio-cultural and ecological relationships, and maintain greater self-sufficiency within market economy integration processes. Deeper analysis of gendered provisioning highlights complexities, power relationships and challenges within localised food systems and refines understandings of gender dimensions of food sovereignty.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations42
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Peasant StudiesSame topicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207