MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992767125 · doi:10.1080/15693430500424238

Managing for resource sustainability: the potential of civic science

2006· article· en· W1992767125 on OpenAlexaff
Herbert Ryan Plummer

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPanacea (medicine)SustainabilityFunction (biology)Natural resourceSustainable developmentResource (disambiguation)Environmental ethicsTheme (computing)Mechanism (biology)Political scienceSociologyEngineering ethicsEpistemologyEcologyComputer scienceEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Discovering a means to reconcile ecological integrity and resource use is an enduring theme in human societies and the central question of sustainable development. This paper examines the philosophical assumptions, the general approaches and the substantive challenges associated with three tactics used to manage natural resources. In this essay, it is argued that civic science is an emerging paradigm to pursue sustainable development and that adaptive co-management is a potential mechanism for implementation. Although civic science is not a panacea, it elucidates and clearly informs the science-policy domain in which resource managers function.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.191
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental SciencesSame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207