A Reflective Practitioner Approach to Food System Planning in Calgary, Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cities and municipalities across Canada are implementing food system assessments and action plans to better understand and address issues related to urban food systems. In 2012, the City of Calgary released “Calgary EATS!: A Food System Assessment and Action Plan” (CE), a comprehensive report and action plan that marked the culmination of city-wide stakeholder engagement and collaborative planning led by the municipality in partnership with the community. The goal of this plan was to support the growth of a sustainable and resilient food system in Calgary, and to inform future action and policy. However, challenges related to implementation has cast doubt on the plan’s long-term effectiveness. The purpose of this thesis was to identify the primary challenges affecting the implementation of the Calgary Eats! Action Plan, and identify potential opportunities to move the plan forward. This research was conducted collaboratively with members of the local urban food partnership involved in the development of the original Action Plan. A reflective practitioner approach and a critical planning approach were used in working with representative members of the CE Action Plan partnership as key informants with expertise in the original Action Plan development process. The qualitative methods employed in the research process included document analysis, participant observation, semi-structured interviews with key informants and collaborative consensus around key information. Findings identified key successes, highlighted procedural and interpersonal influences on outcomes, and confirmed that challenges to the implementation of the CE plan persist. Conclusions also discuss community impacts arising from the plan. The results of this research may help to inform strategies for developing and implementing local food system action plans and provide insight into the planning, management, and organizational challenges inherent in local food system planning involving community-based civic groups.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".