MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084498606 · doi:10.2993/0278-0771-29.2.339

The Paradigm of Management, Management Systems, and Resource Stewardship

2009· article· en· W2084498606 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ethnobiology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStewardship (theology)Cognitive reframingSustainabilityResource management (computing)Ecosystem managementPolitical scienceEnvironmental resource managementNatural resource managementBusinessSociologyEnvironmental ethicsEcologyEcosystemNatural resourceComputer scienceEconomicsPoliticsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractThe idea of “management” is central to our understanding of how people interact with their resources, but many challenges have arisen to traditional concepts of western, science-based resource management. Management is a set of actions taken to guide a system towards achieving desired goals and objectives. A Management System is the sum of these actions, goals and objectives, the process through which they are legitimized by social norms, and the institutions and actors involved in carrying them out. Reframing the concept from management to management system provides a tool for better understanding how social and ecological dynamics act as coupled drivers of managed ecosystems. Seen from this perspective, there are strong parallels between the traditional resource management systems of indigenous peoples and western science-based management systems. Stewardship is a western concept which resonates with the foundations of traditional resource management systems. Both systems of management can be understood on gradients of human influence on ecosystems and of management intensity. Sustainability can emerge across various locations along these gradients. Achieving an integrated understanding of the coupled dynamics of social and ecological systems is a central challenge for both managers and for researchers. ResumenLa idea de “manejo” es central para nuestro entendimiento de cómo la gente interactúa con sus recursos. Sin embargo, muchos retos han surgido a los conceptos tradicionales occidentales sobre el manejo de recursos basados en la ciencia. Manejo es un conjunto de acciones tomadas con el fin de guiar un sistema para alcanzar metas y objetivos deseados. Un Sistema de Manejo es la suma de estas acciones, sus metas y objetivos, el proceso a través del cual éstas se legitiman por normas sociales, y las instituciones y actores involucrados en llevarlas a cabo. Replantear el concepto de manejo por el de sistema de manejo proporciona una herramienta para el mejor entendimiento de cómo las dinámicas sociales y ecológicas actúan como conductores acoplados de los ecosistemas manejados. Desde esta perspectiva, existen fuertes paralelismos entre los sistemas tradicionales de manejo de recursos de los pueblos indígenas y los sistemas de manejo occidentales basados en la ciencia. Stewardship es un concepto occidental que armoniza con las bases éticas de los sistemas tradicionales del manejo de recursos. Ambos sistemas de manejo pueden ser entendidos como gradientes de influencia humana sobre los ecosistemas y la intensidad de manejo. La sustentabilidad puede emerger en varios puntos a lo largo de estos gradientes. Alcanzar un entendimiento integrado de la dinámica acoplada de los sistemas sociales y ecológicos es un reto central tanto para manejadores como para investigadores.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.372
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.210 · 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