“Part of Who We Are…”: A Review of the Literature Addressing the Sociocultural Role of Traditional Foods in Food Security for Indigenous People in Northern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indigenous people in northern Canada have relied on sustained and safe access to traditional foods for millennia. Today, however, they experience higher rates of food insecurity than non-Indigenous people or Indigenous people living in urban settings. Changing socioeconomic and environmental conditions in the Canadian north have altered traditional food acquisition and consumption patterns, with implications for health and wellbeing, and cultural continuity. To assess the breadth and depth of scholarship on the sociocultural role of traditional foods in northern Indigenous food security, we conducted a scoping review of online peer-reviewed articles. The 22 articles selected and screened for comprehensive review affirmed that traditional foods remain vital and central to food security for northern Indigenous populations. However, our review brings to light a recurring tendency in these studies to disregard or inadequately consider the complex sociocultural dimensions of traditional foods, such as the critical role of food processing, cooking, and sharing in supporting Indigenous food security. To address this gap and ensure food security is aligned with Indigenous-defined needs and priorities, community-led research is needed, grounded in Indigenous knowledge that promotes access to traditional foods and affirms Indigenous food sovereignty.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".