Gouvernance forestière et changement d’échelle : le rôle ambigu de l’État dans la mise en place d’instances régionales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au Canada, la politique forestière est le plus souvent conçue comme une politique avant tout sectorielle. Le rôle de l’État et des industriels titulaires de permis d’exploitation de la forêt publique est central, offrant peu de place aux acteurs territoriaux. Or, au Québec comme au Nouveau-Brunswick, on a assisté à l’émergence d’institutions régionales visant à participer à la gouvernance forestière. Ce changement d’échelle correspond-il à une désectorialisation du pouvoir en matière forestière, et donc à une transformation du rôle de l’État en forêt publique ? En nous appuyant sur les travaux du rescaling et du néo-régionalisme, nous présentons ces institutions, issues de logiques dudownscalingau Québec ou de l’upscalingau Nouveau-Brunswick, et nous interrogeons le rôle ambigu de l’État. Au gré de ses politiques sectorielles, ce dernier se révèle tour à tour promoteur et frein à l’émergence d’une gouvernance territoriale de la forêt.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".