MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047431509 · doi:10.1890/0012-9623-92.4.388

Land Stewardship and the Sempervirens Fund (SVF)

2011· article· en· W2047431509 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Philippe S. Cohen

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of the Ecological Society of America · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStewardship (theology)BusinessEnvironmental resource managementEcosystem servicesNatural resourceSustainabilityEnvironmental stewardshipEnvironmental planningEnvironmental ethicsEcosystemPolitical scienceEcologyGeographyEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a prelude to my description of what stewardship means, there are three characteristics of the notion of “stewardship” that I attempt to maintain and view as essential elements of successful land stewardship (as opposed to preservation and protection). Stewardship implies privilege bounded by responsibility. Stewardship, historically, is an act of managing possessions or property for someone other than oneself. Hence it is, at the core, an act of altruism. So, for SVF, stewardship is about taking care of lands for future generations. Stewardship is about a deeply held inner conviction that motivates landowners and land managers to take good care of the land, not merely for personal gain, but for future generations and for the benefit of society. We must explicitly acknowledge what successful land stewardship is not—benign neglect as a strategy for maintaining or enhancing ecosystem health and native biodiversity is no longer a viable strategy for successful stewardship of biological resources. Therefore, land stewardship implies actions designed to sustain or accelerate the recovery of degraded ecosystems by complementing or reinforcing natural processes. With that in mind, here is my first stab at it: 1) Actions designed to emulate natural ecosystem structure and function; 2) A set of actions designed to promote beneficial human/wildland interactions compatible with the range of natural variability of native ecological systems. In the case of SVF, that refers primarily to redwood forest ecosystems; 3) To actively engage in the prevention of habitat loss by facilitating recovery in the interest of long-term sustainability (adapted from Fisheries and Oceans Canada, “Stewardship in Action” program). 4) Stewardship is land management that provides public benefit while envisaging other species as a form of “stakeholder” in management decisions. In some respects, the idea of “Planetary Stewardship” is a bit of a misnomer. Stewardship, it seems to me, is deeply rooted in the particulars of a place. To be a good steward, one must have a very clear and specific place or set of things to steward. Now of course, this begs the question, at what scale does one lose the particulars, and I have no ready answer. However, the examples of success and challenges are all rooted in particular places and relationships. I can image talking about a sustainable or healthy planet, but stewarding a planet is not, it seems to me, the sort of thing that is accessible through the act of stewardship. However, it is likely achievable through the compounding benefits of cumulatively successful stewardship efforts at the local level.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.368
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of the Ecological Society of AmericaSame topicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207