The (new) role of public forest administration in Western Balkans: examples from Serbia, Croatia, FYR Macedonia, and Republika Srpska
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Public forest administrations in the Western Balkans were challenged when facing novel forest policies following the breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s. To answer (i) what (formal) goals lead public forest administrations nowadays and (ii) how do public forest administrations fulfil these goals, we evaluated the implementation of forest policy goals in Serbia, Croatia, FYR Macedonia, and Republika Srpska by using existing criteria and indicators and the 3L model as a theoretical basis. Survey and document analyses focused on the effects observable in state and private forests. In state forests, all public or state forest enterprises were able to reach goals of multifunctionality and profitablity by prioritizing marketable goods. Sustaining forest stands is important, but it is met differently in practice. Performance in private forests is much weaker and the influence of ministry departments or sectors is weak. In conclusion, the potential for a new, stronger role of public forest administration exists: (i) the supply of marketable and nonmarketable goods could be increased, whereas securing sustained forest stands remains a permanent challenge; (ii) efficiency and profits could be improved if internal and external pressures grow; and (iii) joining forces of forestry actors could strengthen the currently weak political role and enable a strong forestry representative to emerge 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".