MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106288150 · doi:10.1080/09654313.2014.945818

Linking Agricultural Policies with Decision-Making: A Spatial Approach

2014· article· en· W2106288150 on OpenAlexaff
Eric Vaz, Marco Paìnho, Peter Nijkamp

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Planning Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrban sprawlAgricultureLand useAgricultural landAppropriationContext (archaeology)Environmental planningPopulationLand coverSustainabilityEnvironmental resource managementBusinessGeographyRegional scienceNatural resource economicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The loss of agricultural land and its implications have been of great concern in the last decade. By undertaking a spatial analysis of the appropriation of agricultural land for urban use with an overlay of population and urban data, a focus on the consequences of certain regulations on the dynamics of land-use change is explored. This is achieved by integration of data inventories of agricultural land use for Portugal, and linking this information with CORINE Land Cover data as to assess change in the Algarve. An integrated assessment of agricultural land loss follows, undermined by the consequences of urban sprawl. In this sense, this paper expands on the currently existing decrees which provide support to sustainable development in the region while providing a qualitative assessment of future roles based on ethical values and economic efficiency and offering a feasible framework for policy-makers regarding the trends of urban/agricultural dichotomy in a planning and decision-making context.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0130.010
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations28
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Planning StudiesSame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207