MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096750928 · doi:10.1631/jzus.2004.1533

Land degradation, government subsidy, and smallholders’ conservation decision: the case of the loess plateau in China

2004· article· en· W2096750928 on OpenAlexaff
Minjun Shi, Kevin Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Zhejiang University. Science A · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland Management and Livestock Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoil conservationLand degradationSubsidyAgroforestrySoil retrogression and degradationEnvironmental sciencePastureErosionChinaEnvironmental degradationAgricultureBusinessGeographyForestrySoil scienceSoil waterEconomicsEcologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Land degradation is one of the severe environmental problems in China. In order to combat land degradation, a soil conservation program was introduced since 2000 to reduce soil erosion by converting slope-cultivated land into forestry and pasture. This paper represents the first systematic attempt to investigate the impact of the soil conservation program on land degradation in the loess plateau. The results indicate that the soil conservation program to convert slope fields into forest or pasture is an effective way to combat soil erosion. However, a subsidy that is higher than profit of land use activity of slope fields before their conversion into forest and pasture is needed to encourage farmers to join the conservation program. A policy measure to encourage and assist farmers to develop sedentary livestock by using crops produced from fields as well as fodder and forage grass from the converted slope fields might contribute to combat soil erosion. Increase in off-farm job opportunities may encourage households to reduce cultivation in slope fields. That implies a policy measure to encourage rural urbanization might contribute to combat soil erosion.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.304
Threshold uncertainty score0.605

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations14
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Zhejiang University. Science ASame topicRangeland Management and Livestock EcologyFrench-language works237,207