MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790463351 · doi:10.1111/acv.12396

Measuring the impact of an entertainment‐education intervention to reduce demand for bushmeat

2018· article· en· W2790463351 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Conservation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Disease Management and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsImpact
FundersU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceCedar Tree Foundation
KeywordsBushmeatIntervention (counseling)WildlifeOutreachCounterfactual thinkingControl (management)BusinessPublic economicsMarketingEnvironmental resource managementEconomicsPsychologyEconomic growthSocial psychologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The trade and consumption of bushmeat are a major threat to biodiversity across the tropics. Conservationists have traditionally advocated for stricter regulation and enforcement as a way to control these practices, with less attention given to consumers and the management of the demand. Yet, it is clear that without adequately tackling demand, it is impossible to effectively curb the bushmeat trade. In this paper, we describe an intervention to reduce demand for bushmeat in northern Tanzania. The intervention was centered around the 1‐h radio show My Wildlife – My Community which included 15‐min episodes of the radio drama Temboni . Each episode of the radio drama was accompanied by a 45‐min interactive call‐in show featuring interviews with experts and local information about available community resources. We evaluated this intervention using a Before‐After‐Control‐Impact framework based on longitudinal data from 168 respondents. To account for the fact that respondents volunteered to be exposed to the intervention, in this case the radio show, we used a matching algorithm together with regression to ensure that we could build a credible counterfactual group. Our analysis did not uncover any differences in outcomes between the treatment and control groups, and thus no evidence of the intervention achieving its initial goals. One potential causal mechanism that could have led to this outcome is the low audience penetration rate. Fewer than 40% of respondents listened to the show and among those who did, only about 20% listened to five of more episodes. This research highlights the challenges of implementing and evaluating interventions delivered through mass media in developing countries, and the importance of reporting on interventions even when there is no evidence that they achieved their initial goals. Only through robust evaluation of behavior change interventions and the sharing of lessons learned can conservationists successfully tackle complex issues such as the bushmeat trade.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.830
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.255 · 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