MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7072089136

Volunteer Participation in Ecological Restoration: Motivations, Organizations, and Conviviality

2024· dissertation· en· W7072089136 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2024
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueTourism, Volunteerism, and Development
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésWork (physics)Government (linguistics)PopulationContext (archaeology)Order (exchange)Quality (philosophy)
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The state of ecosystems worldwide are increasingly dire. Ecological restoration is a practice that has the potential to remedy ecosystem degradation. Engaging people in ecological restoration can help ensure project success, increase community acceptance and spread the practice of restoration beyond professionals. Research that focuses on volunteer engagement has revealed varying motivations for volunteering and a preference for well-organized projects. That research has seldom examined community-led ecological restoration (i.e. voluntary activities not organized by a non-profit). Despite extensive research into volunteer motivation, there remains little consensus on what motivates people to participate in ecological restoration and, accordingly, no clear guidance for practitioners who seek to appeal to motivations. Similarly, while project organization has been identified as an important characteristic, it is not clear what constitutes a well-organized project. By filling knowledge gaps around community participation in ecological restoration, the science and practice can have a cultural impact as well as an ecological one. The UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (2021-2030) has a stated goal of creating a culture of restoration. A better understanding of participation can help meet that goal. \nThis dissertation consists of three studies conducted in order to expand knowledge of volunteer participation. First, a systematic map of the literature on volunteer motivation resulted in a typology of the 15 most commonly studied motivations. Second, a survey of volunteers for nature-based non-profits clarifies project organization and its connection to volunteer engagement. Third, a qualitative case study of a community project operationalizes grassroots ecological restoration, specifically exploring the concept of a convivial community tool. Together they reveal the importance of relationships between volunteers and the ability of interconnected groups to overcome barriers to engagement in ecological restoration. \nEngagement is a core principle of ecological restoration, and volunteering is a central means by which communities become engaged in ecological restoration projects. This chapter addressed the question: What are the motivations to participate in ecological restoration projects? The systematic literature map method was used to answer these questions. The research resulted in a typology of motivations examined by the studies that consists of 15 categories. A network analysis of those categories revealed five core and ten additional motivations that co-occur most in the literature: having a positive environmental impact, acquiring and sharing knowledge, caring for the environment, social interactions and community, and human health and wellbeing. Barriers to volunteering and the demographics of volunteers were also mapped in the literature as they appeared frequently alongside motivations. The five core motivations should be taken as a set of widely studied and well-understood motivations which can inform program design. The systematic map also highlights three major areas for future research: extrinsic motivations, demographics of volunteers who participate in ecological restoration and project organization as a motivation. \nProject organization is an under-studied but important aspect of motivation to participate in ecological restoration that contributes to long-term engagement in restoration. Early studies on volunteer commitment recognized people are more engaged in well-organized projects, but there is a lack of understanding around what aspects of project organization are tied to volunteer engagement. One framework links performance of community-based initiatives to three aspects: social capital, transformational leadership and organizational capacity. We tested and extended that framework using a survey of volunteers for ecological restoration and conservation projects in Ontario, Canada. Volunteer engagement is a primary goal of many nature organizations. Social capital was most strongly correlated with volunteer engagement. A path analysis of four latent variables resulted in a model that shows transformational leadership (β = 0.37; P < 0.001) and organizational capacity (β = 0.297; P < 0.01) are strongly correlated with social capital, which in turn is correlated with volunteer engagement (β = 0.653; P < 0.01). Practitioners seeking to improve the engagement of their volunteers should emphasize building social capital to enhance volunteer engagement in community-based initiatives. \nThe majority of restoration research focuses on professional practices rather than community-led initiatives. As a result, there is little understanding of how laypeople engage in ecological restoration. Native plant gardening is growing in popularity as a means of addressing the degradation in urban landscapes, but it remains in opposition to the norms of wider society, and particularly the horticultural industry. The Ottawa Wildflower Seed Library is an organization that is trying to change the norm by supporting native plant gardeners with free seeds, advice and a supportive community. We expand and adapt Illich’s ‘convivial community tool’ to ecological restoration through a case study of the seed library. A convivial community tool is an approach to providing a tool (e.g. native seeds) that emphasizes accessibility rather than restricting who can access the tool. Through semi-structured interviews, participants discussed themes including accessibility, community and emergence. By focusing on accessibility, the seed library distinguishes itself from other non-profits with similar missions. \nThis dissertation contributed knowledge on community engagement in ecological restoration, adding to the field’s understanding of volunteer motivations, project organization and grassroots action. Taken together, these papers reveal the importance of relationships to restoration outcome and outline a convivial approach to restoration practice. This research will help practitioners engage more people in ecological restoration, which will ultimately result in increased project 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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,011
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,011
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,060

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0110,021
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0060,007
Communication savante0,0060,003
Science ouverte0,0010,005
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,014
Tête enseignante GPT0,256
Écart entre enseignants0,242 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Même sujetTourism, Volunteerism, and DevelopmentTravaux en français237 207