MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3173869429 · doi:10.1016/j.spc.2021.06.022

The impact of COVID-19 on alternative and local food systems and the potential for the sustainability transition: Insights from 13 countries

2021· article· en· W3173869429 on OpenAlexaff
Gusztáv Nemes, Yuna Chiffoleau, Simona Zollet, Martin Collison, Zsófia Benedek, Fedele Colantuono, Arne Dulsrud, Mariantonietta Fiore, Carolin Holtkamp, Tae‐Yeon Kim, Monika Korzun, Rafael Mesa Manzano, Rachel Reckinger, Irune Ruiz-Martínez, Kiah Smith, Norie Tamura, María Laura Viteri, Éva Orbán

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainable Production and Consumption · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicOrganic Food and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersAustralian Research CouncilHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeEuropean CommissionNemzeti Kutatási Fejlesztési és Innovációs HivatalResearch Institute for Humanity and NatureFondation de France
KeywordsSustainabilityScope (computer science)Food systemsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MainstreamBusinessSocial systemEnvironmental economicsEconomic growthEconomic systemPolitical scienceEconomicsSociologyFood securitySocial scienceAgricultureGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic has been a major stress test for the agri-food system. While most research has analysed the impact of the pandemic on mainstream food systems, this article examines how alternative and local food systems (ALFS) in 13 countries responded in the first months of the crisis. Using primary and secondary data and combining the Multi-Level Perspective with social innovation approaches, we highlight the innovations and adaptations that emerged in ALFS, and how these changes have created or supported the sustainability transition in production and consumption systems. In particular, we show how the combination of social and technological innovation, greater citizen involvement, and the increased interest of policy-makers and retailers have enabled ALFS to extend their scope and engage new actors in more sustainable practices. Finally, we make recommendations concerning how to support ALFS' upscaling to embrace the opportunities arising from the crisis and strengthen the sustainability transition.

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)0.003
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations133
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainable Production and ConsumptionSame topicOrganic Food and AgricultureFrench-language works237,207