MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413325005 · doi:10.1016/j.glt.2025.08.002

Integrating climate change, food security, and innovative agriculture in Newfoundland and Labrador (NL): A Water-Energy-Food (WEF) nexus approach

2025· article· en· W4413325005 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Transitions · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater-Energy-Food Nexus Studies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNational Research Council CanadaCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsNexus (standard)Food securityAgricultureFood energyClimate changeWater energyFood systemsEnvironmental protectionAgricultural economicsGeographyEnvironmental scienceWater resource managementEconomicsEngineeringEcologyArchaeologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the intersection of climate change, agricultural innovation, and food security in Newfoundland and Labrador (NL), a province characterized by a short growing season, poor and acidic soils, and a small agriculture sector highly vulnerable to climate change. Despite being one of Canada’s most food-insecure provinces, there is a significant lack of comprehensive studies on the Water-Energy-Food-Climate Change (WEF-CC) nexus and agricultural innovation in NL. The study aimed to (1) inventory innovative agricultural practices that promote food security and climate resilience, (2) identify key stakeholders in agricultural innovation, (3) explore factors influencing innovation in the province, and (4) assess the use of by-products in agriculture. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and analyzed using NVivo content analysis. The findings revealed two primary types of relevant agricultural innovation in NL: practice-based and technology-based. Six key stakeholders in agricultural innovation were identified. However, the lack of an independent third-party innovation enabler or connector was perceived as a barrier to progress. To address this gap, the study proposes the establishment of the Newfoundland and Labrador Agricultural Innovation Centre (NLAIC), a collaborative body designed to support agricultural innovation. Additionally, opportunities for utilizing agricultural and industrial by-products, including plant-based and animal-based innovations, were identified as emerging in the province. Tackling innovation barriers and promoting nexus thinking and collaboration among stakeholders and sectors could enhance climate resilience and food security in NL.

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.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.951

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.207 · 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