Governing Old-Growth Forests: The Interdependence of Actors in Great Bear Rainforest in British Columbia
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
The article explores the interdependence of state, civil society, and market actors in resolving environmental conflicts through new governance arrangements. Based on policy documents and in-depth interviews, the study shows that the government-led Land and Resource Management Plans concerning the coastal rainforests in British Columbia depended for their success on governance efforts that environmental organizations and forestry corporations initiated and carried through independently outside the formal planning processes. These nonstate actors, on the other hand, chose to engage with the provincial government, the First Nations, and the planning processes representing a large number of stakeholders, in order to gain the necessary legitimacy, certainty, and resources for the solutions created during their bilateral negotiations. The results show that when able to consciously coordinate separate processes and roles in the governance of forests, actors can create space for new solutions in seemingly intractable situations.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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