MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6986809070

Redes, ideias e ação pública na agricultura urbana: São Paulo, Montreal e Toronto

2017· article· en· W6986809070 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmericanae (AECID Library) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicUrban Agriculture and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticipant observationAction (physics)Field researchCivil societyField (mathematics)PoliticsGovernment (linguistics)AgriculturePublic transport
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis deals with an analysis of different Urban Agriculture (UA) models of public action. The theoretical model adopted is the cognitive analysis of public action, based on Pierre Muller and Yves Surel, and the actor-network theory by Bruno Latour. The purpose of the thesis is to understand the relationship dynamics between ideas, organizations, networks of action and results in the field of UA public action. The results are understood as basic services for Urban Agriculture, that were defined according to the literature analysis in this field, and it can be offered by state and/or civil society organizations. Based on the literature review of 21 different cities, four different types of public action were identified. These types are formed by the intersection of modes of action of civil society and local government, and they have been termed as 'Marginal', 'Emerging', 'Society-driven', and 'State-driven'. To further understand each type of Urban Agriculture public action, it was carried out a multiple case study with three units of analysis, based on different types of public action. The municipality of São Paulo was selected to further understand the 'Emergent' type, to understand more broadly the 'Society-driven' type, it was selected the City of Montreal and, finally, the municipality of Toronto was chosen to better understand the 'State-driven' type. The research methodology is qualitative and more than 80 semi-structured interviews were carried out, besides document analysis, field visits and participant observation in gardens, political and social meetings of Urban Agriculture. The research demonstrates that, although UA started from different ideas and actions in each municipality, they have become increasingly similar and have mobilized actions in different sectors: community, social, economic and state. The forms of institutionalization of these ideas have also become more homogeneous and tend to be directed to the model of Toronto, where there is greater state support for Urban Agriculture. The results of public action, however, depend on both government actions and civil society. Thus, the municipalities of Montreal and Toronto have good structures for basic services directed to UA. Montreal achieved it due to its strong civil society, and Toronto due to its combination of governmental and non-governmental actions. However, while the city of Montreal needs better planning for this field, Toronto's public management needs to step up some actions to increase food productivity. The city of São Paulo has institutions and civil society under construction, and, although it has increased the structures for basic services directed to Urban Agriculture, it still presents different failures in some specific services.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.661
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.191 · 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