Food strategies and restitution of urban agriculture illustrated by the case of selected solutions of metropolitan areas
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the paper was to present and emphasise the importance of the concept of food strategies in creating sustainable development of metropolitan areas and restitution of agriculture. By reviewing Canadian and French solutions, among other things, an attempt was made to indicate the importance of urban agriculture in shaping sustainable development (SD) of metropolitan areas. Design/methodology/approach: In order to illuminate the phenomenon of urban strategic planning in the restitution and development of urban agriculture, a descriptive case study was adopted as the methodology of qualitative research, where the empirical basis consisted mainly of urban plans of selected cities, study of the subject literature and analysis of selected legislative acts. Findings: The presented models of coherence building at a local level show that only planning and new generation strategic plans of a metropolis that take into into account urban food systems are able to balance long-term development objectives and protect natural resources for future generations. Such a model is characterised by not only innovative methodology of planning, but also innovative operational instruments and new ways of implementation. Practical implications: using accumulated knowledge and experience in managing sustainable development of cities. Originality/value: presenting world standards in planning sustainable development of cities and emphasising the importance of urban food production and agriculture as a zone of a metropolis's natural balance.
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 it