MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084420571 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.150608

Sustainable Management of Productive Cultural Landscapes: The Pascual Harriague Wineries in Salto as a Case Study

2020· article· en· W3084420571 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ander de la Fuente Arana, U. Llano Castresana

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrbanism, Landscape, and Tourism Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article proposes guidelines for the creative management of productive cultural landscapes.These guidelines are briefly illustrated with reference to a case study: the productive cultural landscape of wine and vineyards in the riverside city of Salto, Uruguay, during the last years of the 19th century.The proposed guidelines follow the order and approaches of the links in the Landscape Value Chain.These steps are applied to the landscape from a triple approach, as memory, image and socio-system.Thus, the identification of traces and narratives of memory, elements of image and poles of opportunity of the socio-system is proposed.Each element is valued, considering its potential for re-signification and its cost.An intervention is also proposed, based on reversibility and humility.And, at all times, a process of dissemination or accountability and socialization or social dialogue is maintained.In conclusion, the recovery of a landscape must be understood as something that implies re-signifying its memory (activating its traces with narratives), the restoration of its image (giving it continuity) and restoring its social system (reactivating the socioeconomic dynamics based on the feeling of belonging), through an adequate social participation and a required subjective, non-positivistic approach to the processes, to achieve our objective: the recovery of the character of a productive cultural landscape to encourage the entrepreneurship of its inhabitants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicUrbanism, Landscape, and Tourism StudiesFrench-language works237,207