Corporate and business domination of food banks and food diversion schemes in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Critics have identified the corporate and business sector as contributing to household food insecurity through its endorsement of low wages, anti-union activities and lobbying for retrenchment of the Canadian welfare state. It is therefore troubling that this same corporate and business sector has come to dominate positions on the boards of directors of civil society organizations with missions to reduce household food insecurity. Fisher uses the term ‘Big Hunger’ to describe how this ‘hunger-industrial complex’ of food banks, food diversion schemes and corporations and companies are accruing benefits to themselves yet do little to reduce household food insecurity. We consider such processes as illustrating two key political economy concepts: (1) Marx’s concepts of base and superstructure and (2) Gramsci’s cultural hegemony. We carry out a critical case study of the relevance of these concepts to the Canadian household food insecurity scene by examining how the corporate and business sector now dominates the boards of directors of four major civil society organizations concerned with reducing household food insecurity. We find evidence of these civil society organizations exhibiting agenda distortion, reciprocity and loss of integrity, all reflecting their becoming part of the superstructure of capitalist society whose ruling elites come to dominate the ideas and values of society. Issues of wages, unionization and collective agreement bargaining, taxes and taxation, income inequality and retrenchment of the welfare state – all important contributors to household food insecurity and key concerns of the corporate and business community – are for the most part absent from these civil society organizations’ reports, documents and statements. We specify the implications these developments have for addressing household food insecurity and the inequitable distribution of other social determinants of health.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.032 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".