“Sense of Place”: Human Wellbeing Considerations for Ecological Restoration in Puget Sound
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sense of place is increasingly recognized as key to human wellbeing in social-ecological systems. Yet there is limited understanding about how to define and evaluate it for restoration. Here, we examine the connections between sense of place and human wellbeing for Puget Sound in the context of ecological restoration for shellfish harvesting and other shoreline activities. Using a mixed-methods approach, including semi-structured interviews and participatory workshops with tribal and non-tribal residents, we examined sense of place in two regions of Puget Sound. Empirical results show that people's senses of place are multi-dimensional and derived from: (1) activities in the near-shore; (2) cultural practices and familial heritage; (3) sensory and emotional experiences; and (4) the maintenance and strengthening of social connections. We also found that three conditions play important roles in enabling and fostering place attachment: access, knowledge, and ecological integrity. Improved understanding of a practice-based sense of place is key to creating and enacting successful, resident-supported restoration activities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".