MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Braiding Food Systems: Co-Constructing Indigenous Seed Systems in Northern Ontario for Food Sovereignty, Security and Climate Adaptation

2025· article· en· W4408835169 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Charlotte Potter, Justina Walker-Mohamed, Paul Benalcazar, Dakota Cherry, Firoz Alam, Paul Sitsofe, Margarita Fontecha, Silvia Sarapura–Escobar

Bibliographic record

VenueRural Review Ontario Rural Planning Development and Policy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood sovereigntyIndigenousFood securityAdaptation (eye)Food systemsSovereigntyClimate change adaptationFood studiesEnvironmental resource managementClimate changeGeographyPolitical scienceNatural resource economicsEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceEcologyEconomicsAgriculturePsychologyBiologyArchaeologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indigenous communities in the Northern Great Lakes Region of Ontario have diverse food systems with distinct practices and knowledge connected to the land. Traditional food systems in this region are often reduced to hunting, fishing, and gathering activities, but they have also involved planting, growing, maintaining, and harvesting for thousands of years. Climate change and mutually reinforcing processes of settler colonialism, systemic marginalization, and land dispossession limit the capacity and presence of food growing in Northern Ontario First Nations and impact access to and availability of traditional foods, presenting a major barrier to addressing food insecurity. Responding to calls from Indigenous leaders to support food growing strategies that complement existing food systems, the Braiding Food Systems (BFS) project is a three year collaboration between Red Rock Indian Band, Netmizaaggamig Nishnaabeg, Biinjitiwaabik Zaaging Anishinaabek, Mamaweswen - The North Shore Tribal Council, and the Ontario Agri-Food Innovation Alliance. The project collaborates with First Nations to co-develop and re-localize seed systems in Northern Ontario and to enhance food security and food sovereignty. This presentation will highlight the research and knowledge mobilization activities, progress, and outcomes from year two of the BFS project. We will outline how we continue to build trust and relationships with partners, and reflect on what we have learned in gardening - Citizen Science, engagement with community schools and research activities. We will also overview our collaborative knowledge mobilization process and recent activities and outputs: community profiles, food fairs, garden knowledge sharing, toolkits, infographics, and curriculum development. We will conclude with considerations for year three and share opportunities and key takeaways to strengthen future community engaged research with Indigenous communities.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.305 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRural Review Ontario Rural Planning Development and PolicySame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207