MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1812768356 · doi:10.15451/ec2015-5-4.4-1-16

A Pluralistic Approach to Protected Area Governance: Indigenous Peoples and Makuira National Park, Colombia

2015· article· en· W1812768356 on OpenAlexafffund
Julia Margareta Premauer, Fikret Berkes

Bibliographic record

VenueEthnobiology and Conservation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsIndigenousCorporate governanceNegotiationCommonsLegitimacyNational parkAllianceCollaborative governancePolitical scienceIndigenous rightsGovernment (linguistics)Protected areaPublic administrationEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningGeographyPoliticsBusinessLawEcologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on a study of collaborative governance (Spanish cogobierno, literally co-government) in Makuira National Park overlapping with an Indigenous collective territory of the Wayúu people recognised by the Government of Colombia, we analyse how Indigenous rights and conservation interests are negotiated between the national parks authority and local Indigenous governing authorities. Recognised common interests provide a basis for collaboration in protected area governance even where conflicting interests exist. The arrangements arrived at by negotiation incorporate Indigenous commons governance and parks conservation objectives, enabling territorial use planning which allows for both conflict management and protected area management. Ongoing collaborative governance based on common interests, brings both benefits and tradeoffs. The Wayúu give up part of their self-determination rights and the Park gives up part of the ideals of ecosystem conservation based on biological criteria. The strategic alliance works because it is based on the recognition of the legitimacy of Indigenous governing authority, the Parks’ role in protecting Wayúu territory, and the complementary strengths of the two parties. The core message of the case is that designing an inclusive and broad practice of conservation requires an approach involving processes that acknowledge common interests and tradeoffs for both parties.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations39
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthnobiology and ConservationSame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207