MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2531438693 · doi:10.5539/enrr.v6n4p36

Social and Economic Impacts of Community Managed Reforestation and Natural Regeneration of Forestry Development, the Case of Humbo District, Ethiopia

2016· article· en· W2531438693 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Asamere Wolde, Tadesse Amsalu, Molla Mekonnen Alemu

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Natural Resources Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland Management and Livestock Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReforestationRespondentSustainabilityCommunity forestryGeographyEnvironmental planningForestryBusinessSocioeconomicsForest managementAgroforestryEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental resource managementPolitical scienceEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was undertaken in Humbo District, Ethiopia. The objective of this study is to assess the effects of reforestation initiatives on the socio-economy of the rural households brought by the existence of the Community Managed Natural Regeneration (CMNR) project. Four Kebeles (administration units in a district) were selected for the study, based on their geographical location. One Kebele Administration (KAs) from four corners (North, South, East and West) of the closure area was selected. A total of 203 households were involved in the survey. Data were generated through questionnaire, FGDs, KIIs, and physical observation. The study depicted that respondent households were participating in the designation process and subsequent management of the Humbo CMNR project which in fact is considered to be good indicator for its sustainability. They also have good perception on planting trees, reforestation programs and on the ownership of forests as well. It was noted that in some of the surveyed KAs, drought, water constraints and strong wind are the main challenges of the communities. There are available institutional setups and bylaws to manage and protect the forest which was formulated by many stakeholders including local communities. To mention some; bylaws workable for penalizing illegal intrusion into the closure, igniting fire on the forest and benefit sharing.

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 score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Natural Resources ResearchSame topicRangeland Management and Livestock EcologyFrench-language works237,207