Social Contexts and Consequences of Institutional Change in Common-Pool Resource Management
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This introduction provides a conceptual overview of a special collection of articles focusing on social processes related to the use of common-pool resources experiencing acute environmental and institutional change. Drawing on case studies of common-pool resources in various sociopolitical and economic contexts, the articles in this collection advocate a socially focused analysis of changing common-pool resource management institutions. In terms of achieving more sustainable and equitable use of common-pool resources, two themes emerge: (1) Historically, culturally, politically, and economically shaped social relationships and structures play a fundamental, yet underanalyzed, role in how institutional change occurs; (2) processes of common property institution building have potentially far-reaching social consequences, but as yet are not adequately understood. Understanding the social structures and relationships that both shape and are shaped by processes of institutional change is essential not just in terms of strengthening institutional design, but for evaluating the effectiveness of collaborative resource management in meeting a wide range of conservation and development goals.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it