Sources of Change in Community Forestry - The Roles of Learning and Beliefs in the Policy Process: A Comparative Analysis of Ecuador, Mexico and Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Community forestry has become a prominent policy instrument over the past decades as a response to deforestation pressures and rural poverty. Its political implementation involves a complex process with a profound structural change - away from state-based forestry to locally based decision-making authority. The research analyzes the internal development among policy actors in order to understand how community forestry can emerge in a regional policy system. It explores three different case studies with distinct policy processes towards community forestry: an international development project (Ecuador: Esmeraldas), a grassroot environmental movement (Canada: British Columbia), and an institutional restructuring process (Mexico: Quintana Roo). The theoretical approach is based on the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF). The ACF views policy change as a result of competing advocacy coalitions which act according to their policy beliefs. Policy change can be affected by internal changes (policy learning and changes of beliefs) or by external perturbations which affect the power constellation between the coalitions. Each policy process is analyzed over more than a decade, based on empirical data from semi-structured interviews with key actors and complemented by literature. The major actors and coalitions are identified, as well as their learning and changes of beliefs over time to understand their influence on the policy process. In summary, the research found that policy learning has a high importance for the internal development of community forestry policy, while often hidden behind the strong presence of an external perturbation. Although not as a singular force, policy learning has been shown to have a very potent role in enhancing, or sustaining, policy changes. Policy learning can have a stabilizing effect against adverse events, once the implementation process has started (Mexico). Policy learning can even generate the major momentum of change that unfolds when released by an external catalyst event (Canada). It can also, however, have a very limited influence, if not form an internal challenge to the implementation (Ecuador). It has been found that a change of policy beliefs is not a requirement for policy change in the early stages of community forestry, and cannot be indicated by visible changes in the policy network or local forestry arrangements. These might concern other adjustments of the actors to the changes, which do not reflect their substantial policy beliefs. The changes of policy beliefs in the three case studies show some similar patterns in the way the Community Forestry Coalition developed their policy goals over time, as well as in the way the State Forestry Coalition adjusted strategically to the new impact of the CFC on the network. The research discusses three distinct strategic approaches of the coalitions and their varying success.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,006 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».