L’alimentation entre éthique, science et innovation
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
This article discusses the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment (hereinafter “right to a healthy environment”) within the framework of a “food systems approach” and from the perspective of the three main functions of law in the transition to sustainable and equitable food systems (hereinafter “SAD”). The article aims to demonstrate that the right to a healthy environment is an indispensable right for achieving the transition to SADs through the building blocks of food systems, namely food supply chains, food environments and consumer behavior. First of all, the article notes that the right to a healthy environment has been at the heart of SAD since it was recognized as a human right by Resolution 48/13 of the Human Rights Council and Resolution 76/300 of the United Nations General Assembly. As well as underpinning the sustainability and equity of food systems, the right to a healthy environment is inseparable from the realization of other human rights, most notably the right to adequate food, itself at the heart of food systems. Secondly, the article argues that the operationalization of the right to a healthy environment by States would benefit from a “food systems approach” to ensure the transition to SADs. In this perspective, the right to a healthy environment constitutes a genuine vector for the development and adoption of legal and policy measures that improve the sustainability and equity of food systems, and the implementation of the CFS Voluntary Guidelines on Food Systems and Nutrition adopted in 2021.
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 | 0.018 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it