MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148406904 · doi:10.5558/tfc85293-2

Learning from community forestry experience: Challenges and lessons from British Columbia

2009· article· en· W2148406904 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Ryan Bullock, Kevin Hanna, D. Scott Slocombe

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
FundersWilfrid Laurier University
KeywordsCommunity forestryStakeholderForest managementEnvironmental resource managementNatural resource managementGeographyForestryNatural resourceEnvironmental planningResistance (ecology)Stakeholder engagementCompetition (biology)Resource management (computing)BusinessPolitical sciencePublic relationsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A multiple case study approach is used to investigate community forest implementation challenges in British Columbia, Canada. Stakeholder interviews, document review and visits to the case sites (Denman Island, Malcolm Island, Cortes Island and Creston) were used to collect data on events occurring between 1990 and 2005. In addition to case-specific challenges, our analysis confirmed common challenges related to a lack of support, consensus, and organizational resources as well as poor forest health and timber profiles, resistance from conventional forest management, and competition for land and tenures. Development pressure emerged as a challenge for communities without land use decision making authority. The final section offers some lessons and recommendations. Key words: community forest, community forestry, forest management, community-based natural resource management, local control, challenges, case studies

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 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

Citations27
Published2009
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207