Formation and Function of Social Capital for Forest Resource Management and the Improved Livelihoods of Indigenous People in Bangladesh
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the status and formation of social capital, and its contribution to forest resource management and to the livelihoods of Bangladeshi indigenous ethnic groups in these forest environments. We draw on empirical data from three villages associated with two participatory forestry projects. Components of social capital were associated with both enhanced livelihood of villagers and improved forest conditions in terms of area, stock, growth and diversity. Where the project (e.g. the Upland Settlement Project) authority failed to build up social capital, non-government organizations (NGOs) stepped in to play a pivotal role in the formation of social capital among the villagers. Even though NGOs created bonding social capital, villagers, however, further expanded their networks through the formation of bridging social capital that helped them to capture several local government social development services. High social capital was found to be related to better forest condition. Recommendations are made to involve NGOs along with other stakeholders for greater success in such participatory forestry projects. Keywords: social capital, forest resource management, forest conversation, indigenous ethnic groups, participatory forestry projects
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".