MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314080564 · doi:10.5751/es-07303-200134

Integrative learning for practicing adaptive resource management

2015· article· en· W2314080564 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Society · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWater Research CommissionAustralian Government
KeywordsKnowledge managementComputer scienceAdaptive managementReflexivityAdaptive learningProcess managementContext (archaeology)Artificial intelligenceBusinessEnvironmental resource managementSociologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adaptive resource management is a learning-by-doing approach to natural resource management. Its effective practice involves the activation, completion, and regeneration of the "adaptive management cycle" while working toward achieving a flexible set of collaboratively identified objectives. This iterative process requires application of single-, double-, and triple-loop learning, to strategically modify inputs, outputs, assumptions, and hypotheses linked to improving policies, management strategies, and actions, along with transforming governance. Obtaining an appropriate balance between these three modes of learning has been difficult to achieve in practice and building capacity in this area can be achieved through an emphasis on reflexive learning, by employing adaptive feedback systems. A heuristic reflexive learning framework for adaptive resource management is presented in this manuscript. It is built on the conceptual pillars of the following: stakeholder driven adaptive feedback systems; strategic adaptive management (SAM); and hierarchy theory. The SAM Reflexive Learning Framework (SRLF) emphasizes the types, roles, and transfer of information within a reflexive learning context. Its adaptive feedback systems enhance the facilitation of single-, double-, and triple-loop learning. Focus on the reflexive learning process is further fostered by streamlining objectives within and across all governance levels; incorporating multiple interlinked adaptive management cycles; having learning as an ongoing, nested process; recognizing when and where to employ the three-modes of learning; distinguishing initiating conditions for this learning; and contemplating practitioner mandates for this learning across governance levels. The SRLF is a key enabler for implementing the "adaptive management cycle," and thereby translating the theory of adaptive resource management into practice. It promotes the heuristics of adaptive management within a cohesive framework and its deployment guides adaptive resource management within and beyond typical single-loop learning, across all governance levels.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.231 · 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