Food security, food insecurity, and Canada’s national food policy: Meaning, measures, and assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We review the Canadian federal government‘s recently enacted Food Policy for Canada (FPC). Three arguments are developed. First, the development and vision statement of the FPC implies that improving Canadian food security is a specific objective of the policy. Second, if assessed by the measure of food insecurity promulgated by Statistics Canada, the effectiveness of the FPC in reducing Canadian food insecurity will primarily depend on the extent to which it improves household incomes and/or lowers food prices. We evaluate the current programmatic content by these criteria. Third, and related to the second point, we argue that the variation in the severity of food insecurity is an important consideration in assessing the effectiveness of FPC programs in reducing food insecurity as measured by Statistics Canada. Finally, we combine these three arguments into a simple figure/heuristic that can serve as a guide to the assessment and development of FPC programs seeking to enhance food insecurity in Canada.
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 | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.030 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".