MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2181558821

Examining Place-based Governance Principles in Two Atlantic Canada Protected Areas

2006· dissertation· en· W2181558821 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Sami Rehman

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2006
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNature Conservancy of Canada
KeywordsCorporate governancePolitical scienceGeographyEnvironmental planningPublic administrationManagementEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A historical approach to preserving biodiversity throughout the world is the establishment of protected areas, with the underlying philosophy that the greatest public benefit is achieved by protecting natural resources, despite exclusion of affected human communities. Consequently, protected areas can become arenas of struggle between local communities and state conservation agendas. Some suggest socio-ecological sustainability is gained by shifting to decentralized governance structures and interjurisdictional arrangements. Biosphere reserves allow for policies, management and institutional arrangements that integrate social, economic, political and environmental issues and better aligns them with decision-making processes, place-based governance and dynamic socio-ecological systems. This research project explores the real-life experiences and unanticipated outcomes of public participation in conservation projects and compares them against the scholarly discourse to examine our understanding of public participation and place-based governance in two Atlantic Canada protected areas. Using case studies of South West Nova Biosphere Region, Nova Scotia and Burnt Cape Ecological Reserve region, Newfoundland and Labrador, this study assesses levels of public participation by various stakeholder groups within the two case studies, examines the credibility of the public participation criteria and explores the challenges and opportunities of implementing community-based conservation projects. The case studies were assessed against eight criteria for effective public participation, focusing on public engagement (strategic, inclusive, transparent), the decision-making process (enabling, respectful, constructive) and desired outcomes (instrumental and meaningful). Based on semi-structured interviews, participant observation and a literature review, results suggest that open and public deliberative activities seeking and incorporating public interests into decision-making processes throughout an initiative contributes to local legitimacy, credibility and fairness. The case studies provide insight into the value of the public participation criteria, the long-term regional commitment required, the complexity in shifting to place-based governance arrangements and the importance of linking individual and collective identity with public participation. The primary research findings advocate a comprehensive, flexible, pluralistic, bioregional and contextually responsive approach to public participation and place-based governance.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.644

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0130.013
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.207
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)→Same topicFrench Urban and Social Studies→French-language works237,207→