Cultural group selection and the design of REDD+: insights from Pemba
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evolutionary analyses of the ways humans manage natural resources have until recently focused on the costs and benefits of prudent resource use to the individual. In contrast, the fields of environmental resource management and sustainability focus on institutions whereby successful practices can be established and maintained, and the extent to which these fit specific environmental conditions. Furthermore, recent theoretical work explores how resource conservation practices and institutions can emerge through co-evolutionary processes if there are substantial group-level benefits. Here we examine the design of a prominent yet controversial institutional intervention for reducing deforestation and land degradation in the developing world (REDD+), and its ongoing implementation on Pemba Island (Zanzibar, Tanzania) to determine the extent to which the features of REDD+ might allow for the endogenous adoption of sustainable forest management institutions. Additionally, we consider factors that might impede such outcomes, such as leakage, elite capture, and marginal community participation. By focusing on prospective features of REDD+ design that could facilitate the spread of environmentally sustainable behavior within and between communities, we identify distinct dynamics whereby institutional practices might coevolve with resource conservation practices. These insights should contribute to the design of more effective forest management institution in the future.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it