MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104391054

FINDING THE COMMUNITY IN COMMUNITY-BASE NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: THE CASE OF NDUMO GAME RESERVE, SOUTH AFRICA

2010· dissertation· en· W2104391054 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Talia Meer

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2010
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSouth African History and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGame reserveNatural resource managementRhetoricNatural resourcePolitical sciencePopularityIdeologySociologyEnvironmental resource managementGeographyPolitical economyEnvironmental ethicsPoliticsEconomicsWildlifeLawEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In  South  Africa  Community-­based  Natural  Resource  Management  (CBNRM)  has  recently  gained  popularity  as  the  dominant  approach  to  conservation  due  to  its  perceived  environmental  and  social  benefits  and  as  a  form  of  restitution  for  communities  that  were  forcibly  evicted  from  their  land  during  apartheid.  This  dissertation  investigates  the  disconnect  between  the  rhetoric  and  reality  of  CBNRM  in  South  Africa,  by  focusing  on  the  case  of  Ndumo  Game  Reserve.   It  aims  to  critically  evaluate  the  social  justice  and  economic  impacts  of  CBNRM  on  the  neighbouring  Mbangweni  and  Mathenjwa  communities.  It  argues  that  there  are  significant  tensions  between  the  community  focused  rhetoric  of  CBNRM,  the  predominantly  fortress-­style  of  conservation,  and  the  neo-­liberal  eco-­tourism  venture  at  Ndumo  Game  Reserve.  I  conclude  that  CBNRM  at  Ndumo  is  largely  guided  by  western  conservation  and  economic  ideologies  and  driven  by  the  support  of  state  and  private  interests  while  alienating  local  people  from  their  land  and  its  management. Â

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.811
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicSouth African History and CultureFrench-language works237,207