MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323050281 · doi:10.5751/es-07289-200142

The role of social learning for social-ecological systems in Korean village groves restoration

2015· article· en· W2323050281 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eun-Ju Lee, Marianne E. Krasny

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Society · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMario Einaudi Center for International Studies
KeywordsSocial learningPsychological resilienceContext (archaeology)Government (linguistics)IndustrialisationCorporate governanceSocial ecologyGeographyEnvironmental resource managementSociologyPolitical sciencePsychologyBusinessSocial psychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, social learning has been recognized as a means to foster adaptation to changing conditions, and more broadly, social-ecological systems resilience. However, the discussion of social learning and social-ecological resilience in different cultural contexts is limited. In this study we introduce the Korean Village Groves Restoration Project (VGRP) through the lens of social learning, and discuss implications of the VGRP for resilience in villages impacted by industrialization and decline of traditional forest resources. We conducted open-ended interviews with VGRP leaders, government and NGO officials, and residents in four villages in South Korea, and found that villages responded to ecosystem change in ways that could be explained by the characteristics of social learning including interaction, integration, systems orientation, and reflection. However, the processes of learning varied among the four villages, and were associated with different levels of learning and different learning outcomes related to changes in village grove management and governance. The cultural and historical context can be used to help understand social learning processes and their outcomes in the Korean cases.

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 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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations30
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology and SocietySame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207