Vers une gouvernance privatisée et internationalisée de la conservation. Étude de cas autour du « partenariat public-philanthropique » du parc national de Gorongosa, au Mozambique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le secteur de la conservation, entendue comme la protection de la biodiversité, est marqué en Afrique subsaharienne par la forte présence d’acteurs internationaux : bailleurs de fonds, organisations internationales de la conservation et fondations privées. Le contexte d’extraversion de l’État, c’est-à-dire d’une forte dépendance vis-à-vis des ressources et des acteurs internationaux, sous-tend un discours faisant la promotion d’une privatisation de la nature. L’accent est en effet mis sur l’implication du secteur privé, et notamment sur les partenariats public-privé – maîtres d’oeuvre d’un développement efficace, alliant prise en compte sociale et efficacité économique. L’exemple du parc national de Gorongosa, dans la région centre du Mozambique, cogéré depuis 2008 par l’État et la fondation Carr, fondation philanthropique américaine, illustre ce nouveau mode de gouvernance de la conservation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".