“It’s a big, round circle of knowledge to me. I don’t know how else to explain it”: strengthening cultural identity through Indigenous placekeeping and food sovereignty practices in Kingston, Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indigenous identity is supported by connections to land, community, and culture and is a key aspect of health. Cultural identity is threatened by settler colonialism, and urban Indigenous Peoples experience unique challenges including the myth that Indigeneity is incompatible with urban areas, even though most Indigenous Peoples in Canada live in cities, and many express their identities through urban Indigenous food sovereignty (IFS) practices. Kingston Native Centre and Language Nest, Indigenous Diabetes Health Circle, and Queen’s University researchers created IFS programming in Kingston, Ontario, Canada, to support wholistic health. Impacts on Indigenous participants’ cultural identities were explored through one-on-one interviews ( n = 11), one programme participant sharing circle ( n = 8), and one programme facilitator sharing circle ( n = 12). Ribbon skirt analysis with storytelling methodology produced storied results. Findings demonstrate how participants express their cultural identities within processes conceptualized as Indigenous placekeeping through IFS practices that benefit wellbeing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".