Dos modalidades de participación ciudadana en política ambiental
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En las discusiones sobre desarrollo sustentable, la participación ciudadana es el común denominador, el fundamento sobre el que se construye el desarrollo de una nación de manera sustentable (ecológica, económica y socialmente aceptable). Hay una gran diversidad de modalidades de participación. El propósito de este artículo es examinar dos modalidades de participación ciudadana en materia de política de medio ambiente: la formación de coaliciones ambientales y los procesos de construcción de consensos (mesas redondas multiparticipativas o procesos multiparticipativos). Nuestra tesis es que la sociedad ha reclamado su posición en una democracia incipiente, y que la participación es prerrequisito para un desarrollo sustentable. Hacemos un análisis descriptivo de ambas modalidades en el contexto de la sustentabilidad y comparamos las dos modalidades para determinar cuál es su relevancia y la posibilidad de aplicar cualesquiera de ambas al proceso de política pública ambiental en México.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".