MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Community-defined Food Security and the Socio-Cultural Economic Cost of Food Insecurity in Eeyou Istchee, Québec

2022· article· en· W4408460472 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Stephen Penner

Bibliographic record

VenueRural Review Ontario Rural Planning Development and Policy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Rural Development Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood insecurityFood securitySocioeconomicsEconomicsPolitical scienceEconomic growthGeographySociologyAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This co-developed community-based research project seeks to understand the role and place of ‘ᒦᒋᒼ ᐄᔨᔫ ᒥᔪᐱᒪᑎᓱᐃᐧᐣ Eeyou meechum miyo pimatisiwin (Good life of Cree food) to the residents of Eeyou Istchee, Québec. This awîyak kanisitohtahk ᐊᐄᐧᔭᐠ ᑲᓂᓯᑐᐦᑕ or an understanding comes from the lived experience and sharing of knowledge keepers and community food activist. Firmly grounded in Indigenous Research Methods and expressing a deep respect for my relatives. This project is central to my PhD dissertation and is a love letter to the Territory. The journey begins with defining the ontology of Eeyou meechum miyo pimatisiwin through an analysis of food systems discourse related to Indigenous law and food security. The story will then travel into the territory; to navigate and understand the origins of how the Eeyou Cree developed an ecosophy and philosophy regarding food. This section will look at the history of settler-Eeyouch relations in negotiations, sovereignty, and food. The last leg of the journey will share the stories and learnings that contain the meaning of what contemporary Eenouch are looking for in the quest for Eeyou meechumhood (A Cree food system).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRural Review Ontario Rural Planning Development and PolicySame topicAgriculture and Rural Development ResearchFrench-language works237,207