MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3166014033 · doi:10.1080/15528014.2021.1936788

The local contexts of meat consumption: analyzing meatification in Nigeria

2021· article· en· W3166014033 on OpenAlexaff
Mac Osazuwa-Peters

Bibliographic record

VenueFood Culture & Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobalizationConsumption (sociology)Thematic analysisContext (archaeology)Thematic mapGlobeFood consumptionEconomic geographyEconomicsMarketingBusinessSociologyGeographyQualitative researchMarket economySocial sciencePsychologyAgricultural economicsCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although food consumption habits across the globe have taken different paths, agri-food scholars are now pointing to a narrowing of choices on a global scale due to globalization. Adopting a food regime theory framework that is tightly connected to globalization theory, several thematic frameworks are used to provide a time-place-actor analysis of food consumption habits, identifying global trends as well as the factors driving those trends. This article employs meatification as a thematic framework for analyzing trends in meat consumption in the context of the third food regime. It argues that while global actors and factor should be acknowledged, in certain local contexts, they can be influenced, shaped or even constrained by local currents. Therefore, it opens a conversation about the danger of discounting or ignoring local currents when applying these thematic frames in food regime discourse. It shows that while meatification is taking place, in Nigeria, unlike in many other parts of the global south, the actors are not fast-food restaurants and supermarket, but bukaterias and open stall meat sellers in the local markets.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood Culture & SocietySame topicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207