MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067438931 · doi:10.3763/ehaz.2010.si05

Local institutions for floodplain management in Bangladesh and the influence of the Flood Action Plan

2010· article· en· W2067438931 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Parvin Sultana, Paul M. Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Hazards · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsCitizen journalismBusinessFloodplainLocal communityFlood mythParticipatory planningNatural resource managementResource (disambiguation)Resource management (computing)Environmental resource managementEnvironmental planningNatural resourcePolitical scienceEconomicsGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Institutional arrangements are a key issue for sustainable natural resource management. Recent water and fisheries management projects in Bangladesh have established new local institutions for floodplain management based on community organizations. Although the Flood Action Plan (FAP) was the culmination of an earlier emphasis on technical and structural ‘solutions’ to managing floods and water in Bangladesh, the expected large engineering works were never built. One legacy of FAP lies in a contested process that accelerated emphasis on public participation, smaller scale hazard adjustments and maintaining a wider range of floodplain resource values including conserving and restoring fisheries. This paper compares institutional arrangements and outcomes in two fisheries and two water management projects taken up after FAP. Local organizations appeared generally successful in sustaining themselves and continuing floodplain resource management. Facilitation, the extent of consensus among different stakeholders, and fit between institutional arrangements and scale of resource were all important influences on effectiveness. Local organizations have sustained in smaller floodplains, but in larger areas co-management bodies were a key to effective coordination and troubleshooting among a series of linked community organizations. Local leaders tend to dominate after projects end, especially where planning was less participatory and organizational structures were determined from above. Participants stressed that for continued success formally recognized well-run organizations are needed with accountable and adaptable decision-making processes and good leaders. This process built on participatory guidelines from FAP but the local institutions have not addressed hazard risks. Community resource management institutions could develop a more integrated approach that internalizes the interactions between water, land and fishery management. So far, local planning for floods has been a notable gap in the activities of community institutions, but the enhanced social capital could be a basis for adaptation to climate change. For this, an enabling policy environment is needed, which could be facilitated by the open high-profile debate on floodplain issues that characterized FAP.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations22
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental HazardsSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207