MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2281918999 · doi:10.1080/08941920.2015.1089611

Making Space for Community Use Rights: Insights From “Community Economies” in Newfoundland and Labrador

2015· article· en· W2281918999 on OpenAlex
Paul Foley, Charles Mather

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSociety & Natural Resources · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNational Eye InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFishingSpace (punctuation)Fisheries managementEconomyGeographyPolitical scienceEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Community use rights are rarely considered to be an economically viable or efficient option in conventional fisheries management policy. Our analysis challenges this view by pointing to the positive economic and social outcomes of community use rights in the Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador. We argue that resources allocated to community-based organizations can be used to build “community economies,” in the theoretical vocabulary of J. K. Gibson-Graham. By combining insights of Gibson-Graham’s diverse economies framework with an empirical analysis of how ethical decision making helped build and sustain community economies in three fishing regions, the article promotes the allocation of new community use rights in fisheries and beyond.

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.

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 score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.107 · 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