MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1520330372 · doi:10.4000/vertigo.11515

Rôles des mangroves, modes et perspectives de gestion au Delta du Saloum (Sénégal)

2012· article· fr· W1520330372 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ngor Ndour, Sara Danièle Dieng, Mamadou Fall

Bibliographic record

VenueVertigO · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Rural Development Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceGeographyHumanitiesMangroveForestryPhilosophyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette étude a permis de déterminer divers rôles de la mangrove au Saloum. Au plan écologique, les moindres changements environnementaux sont préjudiciables aux mangroves (Ndour, 2005 ; Diaw, 1997 ; Thomas et al., 1997 ; Blasco, 1983). Les conséquences sont leur dégradation et la perte des fonctions de frayères, d’habitat et de niche écologiques. Dans le domaine socioéconomique, l’exploitation de leurs ressources fait jouer aux mangroves du Delta du Saloum le rôle de rempart des moyens d’existence des populations côtières (Sène, 2007 ; Cormier-Salem, 1999). Ainsi, les biens et services que la mangrove procure ont fait naître des intérêts divergents entre les différents acteurs ; ce qui rend difficile leur gestion. Entre autres obstacles, il y’a leur gestion sectorielle qui implique à la fois plusieurs services étatiques. Cette approche sectorielle ne facilite pas une harmonisation des mesures de conservation. Par ailleurs, malgré l’existence de plusieurs plans de gestion, il y’a toujours le non-transfert de la compétence pêche qui empêche en partie les acteurs de jouer pleinement leur partition. Dans ces conditions, les perspectives de gestion devraient s’articuler autour de l’harmonisation des mesures de protection, la prise de mesures conservatoires par le ministère de la Pêche, l’élaboration de plan d’aménagement des forêts classées et de codes de conduite au niveau local. Il s’agira aussi de promouvoir la cogestion des mangroves, puisque leur partage se fait dans une continuité écologique et socioculturelle entre les États voisins (Ndour, 2005).

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVertigOSame topicAgriculture and Rural Development ResearchFrench-language works237,207