MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1912696344 · doi:10.1186/s40490-015-0051-x

New Zealand school children’s perceptions of local forests and the Montréal Process Criteria and Indicators: comparing local and international value systems

2015· article· en· W1912696344 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Karen Bayne, Barbara Höck, Harley Spence, Kirsten A. Crawford, T. W. Payn, Tim Barnard

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Zealand journal of forestry science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyForest managementEnvironmental resource managementSustainable forest managementPerceptionForestryPsychologyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A review of the international Montréal Process Criteria and Indicators (MP C&I) sustainable forests reporting framework required member countries to benchmark the Indicators against locally held forest values. Children constitute an important subgroup of the local stakeholders in forests: they may respond to forested environments in different ways and may hold values which are unique to their age group. This study reports on the values school children attributed to their local forests, across three New Zealand regions, and details the agreement of these values to the Montréal Process C&I, a values framework developed by international forestry experts. Workshops were held with local school children at three locations neighbouring a forested area (Tapawera, Nelson, South Island; Hunua and Kaiata, Auckland, North Island; and Lynmore, Rotorua, Bay of Plenty, North Island). Workshops were conducted using a similar facilitated structure, tailored to the age group of the children. The workshops used both interactive drawings and dialogue exercises to elicit the features of importance and cultural values the students held for their local forests. Following the workshops, these values were mapped to seven broad categories, and analysed for agreement with the MP C&I. Children aged 9–15 years valued forest access and experiences created by visits to their local forest. The children demonstrated an active relationship with their local forest environment, being aware of its landmarks and facilities. Deeper awareness extended across only quite a small geographical area of their forest. They had personal tacit knowledge of the usefulness of the forested environment, as opposed to abstract, generalised ideas, but only indirect allusion was made to legal, institutional and economic topics. Living organisms were by far the most frequently mentioned forest feature. Landscape amenity, also attachment to and identity with their local forest appear to be important to school children. Although the values held by children living close to forests in New Zealand differed across the three regions, they all fell within the purview of the Montréal Process C&I. Conversely, Criteria 5 (Carbon) and 7 (Legal and institutional) were only tenuously held values. School children’s views and understanding of forests in New Zealand offer an insight into the integration of local communities with forests and forestry, forestry activities and forest amenities. Taking children’s values into consideration has broadened our understanding of the comprehensiveness of the Montréal Process C&I. Results from our workshops provided input for New Zealand’s contribution to a revision of the Montréal Process C&I because delegates could cross-reference the proposed alterations to the Indicators against the nationally derived values, which included those of school children.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score0.944

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Zealand journal of forestry scienceSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207