MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012204131 · doi:10.1080/08941920903484263

Youth Views on Environmental Changes, the Future of the Environment, and Stewardship: The Case of a Canadian Coastal Community

2011· article· en· W2012204131 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rob Hood, Debbie Martin, Brian McLaren, Lois Jackson

Bibliographic record

VenueSociety & Natural Resources · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversityDalhousie UniversityThompson Rivers University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStewardship (theology)Environmental stewardshipNatural resourceEnvironmental planningLocal communityFocus groupNatural (archaeology)Rural communityPerceptionPolitical scienceEnvironmental resource managementEconomic growthGeographySociologySocioeconomicsBusinessPsychologyPoliticsMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses and provides insights concerning rural youth's perceptions of their natural environment and the future role of rural youths in environmental stewardship. Insights are based on two focus groups with youths 17–24 years of age living in an isolated coastal Canadian community. The youths expressed a strong attachment to place, as well as a concern for local, natural resources. However, because of the economic instability of their local community, many youths are planning a future in places far away with more lucrative employment and education opportunities. We suggest that strategies need to be developed that allow youths to engage in environmental stewardship activities “from away.” Some suggestions for “virtual stewardship” 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0340.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations11
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociety & Natural ResourcesSame topicEnvironmental Education and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207