MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087038498 · doi:10.1111/1468-2257.00206

Social Capital, Networks, and Community Environments in Bangkok, Thailand

2002· article· en· W2087038498 on OpenAlexaff
Amrita Danière, Lois M. Takahashi, Anchana NaRanong

Bibliographic record

VenueGrowth and Change · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban and Rural Development Challenges
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial capitalConceptual frameworkBusinessEnvironmental planningCommunity organizationSample (material)Capital citySocial engagementLocal communityEconomic growthSociologyGeographyPolitical scienceEconomicsSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper considers the case of Bangkok where, as in many Asian cities, the expansion of urban areas has outpaced the ability of public entities to manage and provide basic services. One potential way to improve the capacity of neighborhoods to assist in provision or improvement in environmental services is to enhance the positive contributions provided by local social networks and social capital. A conceptual framework is presented to explore the role of social networks in environmental management in polluted urban environments. This is followed by a brief description of the methodology and survey instrument used to collect information from a sample of community households in Bangkok and an analysis of the results from this survey regarding environmental practices, community action, and social networks. Some of the results suggest that increasing the number of social interactions that residents of a community experience is associated with increased community participation as, apparently, is increasing knowledge about what happens to waste or waste water after it leaves the community. Local public education efforts that focus on useful knowledge about environmental impacts may well be an effective way to encourage community participation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 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

Citations35
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGrowth and ChangeSame topicUrban and Rural Development ChallengesFrench-language works237,207