MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Environmental change and adaptation in degraded agro‐ecosystems: the case of highland Madagascar

2009· article· en· W2146033896 on OpenAlexaff
Jon D. Unruh, Bill McConnell, Joe Rodman

Bibliographic record

VenueArea · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)Environmental changeOrder (exchange)AgricultureFood securityEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningPerspective (graphical)Climate changeFace (sociological concept)GeographyBusinessEcologyEconomicsSociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While the view that the poorer agricultural populations in developing countries will be at the forefront of negative consequences due to environmental change is widely accepted, this perspective must become considerably more nuanced in order to recognise and take advantage of emerging opportunities for realistic adaptation. This paper presents a case from Madagascar that suggests adaptation opportunities involve more than looking for alternatives to what are presently perceived to be negative socio‐ecologic processes. In Madagascar the severe erosion occurring on the deforested central plateau actually appears to create, over time, opportunities for increased food security and environmental management compared with uneroded portions of the same landscape. The paper proposes that while concern and action are needed to attend to the problems that the poor of the developing world will face due to impacts from environmental change, the repercussions of such change on agricultural systems also need to be looked at in ways that involve recognising the local and aggregate potential opportunities that they may present in certain systems, in order to realise the prospects for adaptation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.152 · 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

Citations10
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAreaSame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207