Three keywords in the campaign against farmland consolidation and the loss of small farms through the lens of the Prince Edward Island Chapter of the National Farmers Union
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis uses an ethnographic approach to examine campaigns against farmland consolidation and the loss of small farms through the lens of Prince Edward Island chapter of the National Farmers Union (NFU PEI). Using Raymond Williams’ Keywords concept, I trace three terms — “absentee landlords,” “family farm,” and “soil health”—as used by NFU PEI participants and their interlocutors at a time when loopholes to the Prince Edward Island (PEI) Lands Protection Act were publicly debated. Through this examination of meaning, I show how specific language used by participants and other groups illuminates underlying issues, debates, areas of consensus, and shifts in the agricultural landscape of PEI. These issues included contested claims to authenticity, remnants of colonialism, and the erasure of Temporary Foreign Workers, refugees and immigrants. Additionally, I show how an emphasis on issues such as heritage, obscure challenging questions around who owns land, who works the land and what makes “good” land. These arguments are supported by evidence from fieldwork in PEI from August 2021 to early June 2022, with additional meeting attendance in 2023 and 2024. Fieldwork consisted of library research, 15 interviews with NFU PEI members and members of related organizations, 8 farm visits with NFU PEI members and attendance at organization meetings, NFU conventions and other community meetings related to PEI land issues.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".