MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415218814 · doi:10.1016/j.sftr.2025.101357

Scenario analysis using community insights for improving local food system planning: Application of a climate-biodiversity-health framework

2025· article· en· W4415218814 on OpenAlex
Jofri Issac, Robert Newell

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainable Futures · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicOrganic Food and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsRoyal Roads University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research CouncilSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLeverage (statistics)Scenario planningStakeholderFood systemsCorporate governanceFood securitySystems thinkingSustainability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Addressing the complexities of local food systems planning requires integrating community insights to design policies that meet stakeholder expectations and guide targeted interventions. This study employs systems to analyze local food systems planning within a Climate-Biodiversity-Health framework. By gathering stakeholder input and community perspectives, it aims to identify critical leverage points within the complex network of interconnected challenges affecting food systems. Using a survey designed around the connections of a systems map, 138 responses were gathered, and 15 nodes functioning as leverage points were identified across various domains, including climate, biodiversity, food, and governance. Mental Modeler software was used for a ‘what-if’ scenario analysis to explore the potential implications of the identified leverage points on overall food systems concerning climate, biodiversity, and health factors. This research contributes methodological and empirical insights to the literature by experimenting with a systems-based approach for comparing perspectives of practitioners and broader community members on food systems issues and strategies. The research revealed both areas of alignment and divergence that highlight the need for planning approaches that are effective and publicly trusted. The study identifies a mix of agro-ecological and governance interventions for building a resilient food system that supports climate action, biodiversity, and community well-being. Furthermore, the study aims to showcase the practical application of community knowledge in system analysis and intervention identification, contributing to the advancement of sustainable and resilient food systems.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.229 · 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