MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402377755 · doi:10.3390/land13091457

Characterizing Agroecology in North Africa, a Review of 88 Sustainable Agriculture Projects

2024· review· en· W4402377755 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mélanie Requier-Desjardins, Olfa Boughamoura, Elen Lemaître-Curri

Bibliographic record

VenueLand · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Universitaire de la FrancophonieEuropean Commission
KeywordsAgroecologyAgricultureSustainable agricultureFood securityGeographyEcosystem servicesEnvironmental resource managementLivelihoodAgroforestryEnvironmental planningBusinessNatural resource economicsEcosystemEcologyBiologyEnvironmental scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Agroecology refers to the greening of agrosystems with the mobilization of ecosystem services in order to limit exogenous inputs, enhance biodiversity and moderate the exploitation of natural resources. Agroecological practices offer pathways for transformation and transition not only of agricultural systems but of entire food systems. Through its objectives, agroecology aims at both sustainable land management and the strengthening of the livelihoods of producers and rural people and thus contributes to the fight against desertification. Currently, there is little scientific literature on the characteristics of agroecology in the Maghreb region. Several studies provide important information but they do not allow drawing up a global panorama of agroecology in the region. The proposed article highlights general characteristics of agroecology in North Africa from a review of 88 sustainable agriculture projects, which it analyzes, through an inventory of agroecological practices supported by these projects, from the frameworks of the High-Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition, 2019, on the principles of agroecology and the transition levels approach developed by Gliessman and fellows since 2007. The results show (i) differences in the observed practices depending on the agrosystems and (ii) predominant common practices across these diverse agrosystems; (iii) significant evolution in these practices over time. The majority of the agroecological innovations identified are at the plot and farm scales, with the exception of those found in oasis and mountain agrosystems, where practices integrate the scales of the territory and value chains in a more complete way.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLandSame topicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207