MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008184233 · doi:10.5539/ijb.v2n2p149

Indigenous Knowledge Systems for Promoting Community Conservation Education in a Nigerian Protected Area

2010· article· en· W2008184233 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Francis E. Bisong, Elizabeth Andrew-Essien

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Biology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicIndigenous Knowledge Systems and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraditional knowledgeIndigenousCitizen journalismSociology of scientific knowledgeNational parkLocal communityNatural resourceEnvironmental planningGeographyEnvironmental resource managementCommunity-based conservationEcologyPolitical scienceSociologySocial scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study has explored the adoption of indigenous knowledge systems of local populations living at the margins ofprotected areas to promote community conservation education. It assessed the ethno-ecology and ethno-biologyknowledge of valuable wild and cultivated plant species by local people inhabiting the ‘support zone’ of the CrossRiver National Park, South-Eastern Nigeria. It explored paradigms for the successful convergence of ‘insiders’local knowledge with the ‘outsiders’ professional/ scientific knowledge as tools for promoting community basedconservation education and achieving nature conservation objectives. Participatory research methodologies areadopted in eliciting information from the study communities. The results indicate a broad indigenous knowledgebase of the ecology and biology of the valuable species in the region. The implications of the convergence of thisknowledge with scientific information, to further community based nature conservation education are harmonizedfor effective conservation of natural resources.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations17
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of BiologySame topicIndigenous Knowledge Systems and AgricultureFrench-language works237,207