MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2236375846 · doi:10.5751/es-08092-210102

Local perceptions as a guide for the sustainable management of natural resources: empirical evidence from a small-scale society in Bolivian Amazonia

2016· article· en· W2236375846 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Álvaro Fernández‐Llamazares, Isabel Díaz‐Reviriego, Maximilien Guèze, Mar Cabeza, Aili Pyhälä, Victoria Reyes‐García

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Society · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKansainvälisen Liikkuvuuden ja Yhteistyön KeskusAcademy of FinlandEuropean Commission
KeywordsNatural resourceNatural resource managementEnvironmental resource managementIndigenousSustainable managementPerceptionScale (ratio)Empirical evidenceAmazon rainforestGeographyEcosystem managementNatural resource economicsSustainabilityEcologyEconomicsEcosystemPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

are highly contingent upon the social, economic and cultural conditions within which the Tsimane' have experienced changes in the availability of the resource, thus giving a better reflection of the historical, rather than of the ecological, dimensions of the changes undergone. While local perceptions might fall short in precision when scrutinized from an ecological standpoint, their importance in informing sustainable management should not be underestimated. Our findings show that most of the harvesting and management actions that the Tsimane' undertake are, at least partially, shaped by their local perceptions. This paper contributes to the broader literature on natural resource management by providing empirical evidence of the critical role of local perceptions in promoting collective responses for the sustainable management of natural resources.

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)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations80
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology and SocietySame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207