MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2311584336

Between the Volcano and the Well: A Review of the Outcomes and Impact of the Tomas Project for the Mag-Antsi Aetas of Anupul, Bamban, Tarlac,Philippines

2013· review· en· W2311584336 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Noel Asiones

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of rural and community development · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIsland Studies and Pacific Affairs
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceWork (physics)Public relationsEconomic growthGeographyEngineeringEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2001, the University of Santo Tomas Office for Community Development of the University started to journey, through its Aeta Integrated Development Program (AIDP), with the Mag-antsi Aetas of Bamban, Tarlac, seeking to help them recover from the severe effects of the Mt. Pinatubo eruption in 1991. Towards a tangible and sustained development, it designed and implemented its Tomas Project in response to the Aetas' expressed needs and challenges at that time. The title of the study depicts its overarching intent to carve a path for the dispossessed and displaced people that hopefully will bring them from the volcano to a better place of choice and as symbolized by the well. Close to 10 years after its implementation, a comprehensive assessment of the Tomas Project seemed timely in order to take stock of its disaster reconstruction efforts and outcomes. A central underlying question in this endeavor is, Did the Tomas Project work? Using participative action research and triangulating data-gathering techniques, the study sought to answer this question. Findings suggest that the Aetas continue to struggle with the combined impact of displacement from their ancestral land and the needed socio-economic adjustments they have to make in the resettlement areas. In some respects, the desired tangible and sustainable outcomes of the Project have not led them yet to a geography of opportunity that can at least approximate what the hospitable mountain and forest of Pinatubo provided them since time immemorial. In spite of its unquestionable organizational commitment, proven capacity, good funding, and substantive control of the development process, it appears that the Tomas Project remains a work in progress and has not made a significant and sustainable dent on their grinding living conditions. This work may be relevant to studies on disaster recovery, vulnerability, and resilience of communities with similar experience. Keywords: indigenous people, community development, outcome and impact evaluation

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.016
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of rural and community developmentSame topicIsland Studies and Pacific AffairsFrench-language works237,207