Reflecting On The Past to Envision The Future: Visions for food security and food sovereignty in Northern Ontario First Nations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2024, Northern Ontario First Nations community members came together to share memories of past and present food systems, and to envision the future of food systems. Discussions from participatory focus groups and “wisdom dialogues” emphasized desires to be self-sustaining, to bring back traditions, and to (re)learn to use what already exists from the land. In this presentation, we will outline our approach to community-led research dialogues that foster processes of communication, knowledge exchange, and problem-solving in a non-hierarchical space that supports engagement, mutual respect, community research ownership and collaboration. We will highlight how we (research team, community partners) co-developed and implemented locally adapted methods and tools to understand and reflect on community memories of food systems and climate change - and how we moved towards co-analyzing the current food system challenges, and envisioning futures through an iterative, action-learning process. We will share some of the high level findings and outputs from research, and outline avenues for further research and action.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".