Of Milestones and Maelstroms: Two Centuries of the Common Property Debate
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
"The purpose of this paper is to build bridges. It therefore offers an insight into the manner in which the common property debate has crossed boundaries of several disciplines in history, jurisprudence, ethnology and biology in the course of the last century, and how this can nourish the environment discourse. In particular, the research in common property in the post war period has acquired a fairly critical insight into institutions of local governance of natural resources which can offer solutions for both sustained development and for remedying environmental damage where it has occurred. A greater part of this research has remained at the academic level because policy makers seldom see the necessity to consult micro level data. Also unfortunately, the environment discourse has profited little from the researched conclusions of common property studies because the developed economies have been leaders in the conservation movement whose concerns have remained at the global level of resource degradation and which often do not or minimally address situations at the ground level (see section III). \n \n "The intention here is not to de-escalate the environment discourse from contemplating global issues to those which are pertinent in a small area only; but rather to difuse the polarised perceptions to the environment problem of rich a poor countries (Kates, 1994). Ever since the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment was held in Stockholm in 1972 there has been a division in the ranks of the participants in the Environment Discourse. Developed countries argue that environmental degradation is caused by industrial pollution and economic development and therefore the issue is one of regulation; while the less developed countries specially the Indian spokesperson Indira Gandhi argued that poverty was the greatest pollutant which could be solved only by economic development. Both perspectives have much truth in them--in the absence of 'mutual co-ercion' features of economic development and under-development can both cause stress to the natural environment. Solutions to both rest in the realm of public policy no doubt, but one which has more 'public' in the content of the policy. If such were the focus of the Environment Discourse, the differences in perspective would more or less disappear. \n \n "This paper will examine the historical context of the two streams of discourse in three sections. Finally in the last section we touch the central theme of this essay at the ground level in two specific areas of concern from the author's research--the Chamba district of Himachal Pradesh in the Himalayas being the home of the Gaddi shepherds and the territories of the First Nations of British Columbia, Canada and with additional insights from Queensland in Australia."
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».