MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1810731508

Changing Community Perceptions of Sustainable Rural Development in Scotland

2015· article· en· W1810731508 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Frank Rennie, Suzannah‐Lynn Billing

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of rural and community development · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRural development and sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentSustainabilityLocal communityCommunity developmentSocial capitalLand tenureLocalismPolitical scienceEconomic growthSociologyGeographyEconomicsPoliticsSocial scienceAgricultureEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The growing popularity of community land trusts as a mechanism for greater community participation in the control of local improvement is a particularly significant aspect of sustainable rural development in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland. Combining purposive selective interviews with members of a local Land Trust, observations at public meetings, and a review of recent literature on the development of the region, a case study of the Galson Estate Trust, Isle of Lewis, Scotland, is presented. Community ownership of land is seen as being instrumental in the shift in perceptions from short-term, marginal, externally-dependent activities towards solutions that are long-term (as indicated by schemes for renewable energy generation and environmental enhancement), core identity (seen as greater community confidence and enhanced local democracy) and locally driven developmental priorities (supported by revenue income streams). The process of local empowerment accompanying this shift in perceptions is regarded as having substantial benefits for social capital and skills acquisition at the community level. Early results from Trust activities indicate that ownership of the land, together with the capacity-building process of community participation in its management, has encouraged growth in a sense of local empowerment, together with providing employment, confidence, and other social improvements. Keywords: Community, land, rural, sustainability, localism, crofting, energy ----------------------------------------------------- Resume La popularite croissante de la fiducie fonciere communautaire, comme mecanisme visant a faire participer davantage la communaute au controle des ameliorations locales, est un aspect particulierement significatif du developpement durable des Hauts plateaux (Highlands) et des iles d'Ecosse. En combinant une selection d'entrevues ciblees avec les membres de la fiducie fonciere locale, les observations durant les reunions publiques ainsi que les etudes de la litterature recente sur le developpement de la region, une etude de cas est presentee sur le patrimoine fiduciaire Galson, dans l'ile de Lewis, en Ecosse. La propriete collective des terres est vue comme un remede aux variations et aux activites externes et marginales a court-terme, dont les habitants dependent. Ils recherchent des solutions a long-terme (tel qu'indique sur les projets pour la production d'energie renouvelable et l'amelioration de l'environnement), une identite fondamentale (vue comme une plus grande confiance communautaire et une amelioration de la democratie locale) et des priorites de developpement orientees localement (qui s'appuient sur les sources de revenus). Le processus d'autonomisation local accompagnant ce changement de perceptions est percu comme ayant des benefices substantiels pour le capital social et l'acquisition de competences au niveau de la communaute. Des premiers resultats d'activites de fiducie indiquent que la propriete terrestre, associee au processus de renforcement des capacites de participation communautaire a la gestion, a encourage la croissance d'un sentiment accru d'autonomie locale, tout en developpant la creation d'emplois, la confiance et d'autres ameliorations sociales.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of rural and community developmentSame topicRural development and sustainabilityFrench-language works237,207