MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prospects for Ecosystem Management in the Crown of the Continent Ecosystem, Canada–United States: Survey and Recommendations

2003· article· en· W2149445615 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Dena Pedynowski

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation Biology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Resources CanadaU.S. Geological Survey
KeywordsEcosystemEnvironmental resource managementPublic involvementEcosystem managementBusinessResource management (computing)Ecosystem servicesPublic landResource (disambiguation)Scale (ratio)GeographyEnvironmental planningEnvironmental protectionPolitical scienceEcologyPublic relationsEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: I examined prospects for international ecosystem management in the Crown of the Continent Ecosystem ( COCE ), a transboundary region of the Rocky Mountains that straddles the border between Canada and the United States. From the spring of 2000 to the fall of 2001, I conducted 33 semi‐structured interviews with middle‐ and upper‐level public land and resource managers, administered a brief attitude survey to the interviewees, and analytically reviewed the management policies of and historical cooperative ventures between public land and resource jurisdictions in the region. Through a qualitative analysis of the data collected, I identified 10 challenges to enhancing transboundary cooperation in the COCE that were consistently present throughout the region. I describe and analyze these issues in terms of ( 1 ) determining common policy goals and management priorities, ( 2 ) developing information resources at the scale of the greater ecosystem, and ( 3 ) supporting a political and institutional atmosphere conducive to collaboration. Survey results suggest that international transboundary cooperation is less supported, in terms of higher management support, support from staff and colleagues, and access to sufficient information, than transboundary cooperation within a province or state. I conclude with recommendations for three concrete initiatives that public land management jurisdictions in the COCE can undertake to facilitate further ecosystem management opportunities: ( 1 ) formalizating transboundary cooperation, ( 2 ) developing a cumulative‐effects analysis of the COCE, and ( 3 ) thoughtfully presenting transboundary efforts within agencies and to the public.

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)0.001
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 score0.715
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.199 · 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.

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

Citations22
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConservation BiologySame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207