MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111769620 · doi:10.1017/s0376892903000298

People and mangroves in the Philippines: fifty years of coastal environmental change

2003· article· en· W2111769620 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Conservation · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal wetland ecosystem dynamics
Canadian institutionsMount Allison University
FundersInternational Tropical Timber Organization
KeywordsMangroveFirewoodGeographyBayAgroforestryEnvironmental protectionEcologyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historical research has enhanced understanding of past human influences on forests and provides insights that can improve current conservation efforts. This paper presents one of the first detailed studies of mangrove forest history. Historical changes in mangroves and their use were examined in Bais Bay and Banacon Island, Philippines. Cutting to make space for fish ponds and residential settlement has dramatically reduced the distribution of mangroves in Bais, although forest has expanded rapidly near the mouth of the largest river where soils from nearby deforested hillsides have been deposited as sediments along the coast. Heavy cutting of mangroves for commercial sale of firewood occurred under minor forest product concessions in Bais and Banacon between the late 1930s and 1979. Cutting for domestic consumption of fuel and construction wood by local people has been widespread in both areas, although rates of cutting have varied in space and over time as a result of changing demographic pressures and in response to cutting restrictions imposed by firewood concessionaires, fish pond owners and government officials. People in both Bais and Banacon have responded to declining local forest availability by planting mangroves. Early motivations to plant reflected the desire to have a ready supply of posts for construction of fish weirs. Many have also planted to protect fishpond dykes and homes from storm damage, and increasing numbers now plant as a means to establish tenure claims over mangrove areas. However, planted stands have tended to be species monocultures and to bear only limited resemblance to natural mangrove forests. In contrast to many upland forests, opportunities for protection and restoration of mangroves are limited by virtue of a highly restricted natural distribution and by competing land uses that are likely to intensify in the future. Understanding historical patterns of change can be instructive to conservationists, but the future remains laden with uncertainties.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.748

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.174 · 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