Equity for Women and Marginalized Groups in Patriarchal Societies during Forest Landscape Restoration: The Controlling Influence of Tradition and Culture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary We explore the difficulty of achieving equity for women in two forest and livelihood restoration (FLR) pilot projects, one each in Papua New Guinea (PNG) and the Philippines. We use institutional bricolage as a framework to explain the context and background of stakeholders’ decision-making and the consequent impact on equity and benefit distribution. In the Philippines, material and institutional support was initially successful in assisting participants to establish small-scale tree plantations. A structured approach to institutional development has successfully evolved to meet the needs of women, even though corruption has re-emerged as a destabilizing influence. In PNG, despite success in establishing trees and crops, the participation of women was subjugated to traditional customs and norms that precluded them from engaging in land management decisions. The capacity-building and gender-equity principles of FLR consequently became compromised. We conclude that in some patriarchal societies achieving equity for women will be difficult and progress will be contingent on a detailed understanding of the effects of traditional customs and norms on participation and decision-making.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".