MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606570638 · doi:10.1505/146554817820888627

Optimism, hopes and fears: local perceptions of REDD+ in Nepalese community forests

2017· article· en· W2606570638 on OpenAlexafffund
Rishi Ram Bastakoti, Conny Davidsen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Forestry Review · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOptimismPerceptionPsychologyPolitical scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY This paper examines local views and experiences of Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) in Nepal, using a mixed-method political ecology approach in three community forest user groups across Nepal's diverse forest ecoregions with varying levels of REDD+ experience. The study finds positive expectations of REDD+ to varying degrees, paired with key concerns arising throughout REDD+ implementation. In particular, forest products needed for livelihood practices cannot be fully replaced by monetary benefits of REDD+ for forest harvesting restrictions. Further, increased elite capture, corruption, and power shift away from the community through the alliance of local elites with external actors in response to increased upward accountability for carbon increments. The findings urge that REDD+ should scrutinize and mitigate local adverse effects on existing community governance, and its goals need to be carefully reconciled with the local non-monetary livelihood needs.

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)0.000
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.769

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Forestry ReviewSame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207