MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Volunteering on Nature Conservation Projects: Volunteer Experience, Attitudes and Values

2003· article· en· W1971693520 on OpenAlexaffabout
Elizabeth Halpenny, Linda T. Caissie

Bibliographic record

VenueTourism Recreation Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTourism, Volunteerism, and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecreationPopulationPerceptionPublic relationsTourismNature ConservationValue (mathematics)Environmental ethicsSociologyPsychologyPolitical scienceEcologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In many countries volunteers are playing an increasing role in nature conservation. Many factors have lead to this trend including reduced government budgets assigned for conservation and an increased awareness and interest expressed by each country's general population to contribute to environmental health and nature conservation. This paper utilizes descriptions of volunteers' experiences participating in Volunteer for Nature, a volunteer programme operated by Canadian conservation NGOs, which facilitates the participation of Ontario-Residents' in 3 to 17-day working vacations involving habitat restoration and recreation infrastructure projects located in natural environments. This paper describes volunteer attitudes and values regarding nature, as highlighted through the description of their volunteering experiences and their characterization and perceptions of nature. Using a constructivist approach to data collection and analysis, the researchers found that volunteers conceptualized nature in four different ways: ‘nature in crisis,’ ‘nature as it should be,’ ‘nature as outside or something different,’ and ‘nature as nurturing.’ Volunteers' egoistic concerns centred on the self (e.g., my health, my favourite activity, my grandchildren), altruistic concerns centred on other people (society in general, people in my community) and biocentric or ecocentric concerns, centred on living things (e.g., plants, ecosystems, birds, the environment in general). While biocentric concerns were cited as important, they were not ascribed greater value than the egoistic or altruists concerns. The volunteer tourism experience generally failed to change the volunteers' perceptions of nature from an ‘external’ phenomenon to an ‘internal’ one, (i.e., changing treatment of nature as ‘other’ to a more ecocentric approach, which incorporates nature into ‘self’). Implications for generating a pro-environmental attitudes and behaviours amongst citizens are discussed.

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)0.006
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.330 · 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

Citations108
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTourism Recreation ResearchSame topicTourism, Volunteerism, and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207