AN APPRAISAL OF A-ROCHA KENYA’S CHRISTIAN EFFORTS AND APPROACHES TOWARDS THE CONSERVATION OF NATURE IN KILIFI COUNTY, KENYA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Church is an institution for social change and has an obligation towards environmental conservation. This is because land and creation at large are precious resources for both the present and future generations. The church’s appreciation and thankfulness to the Maker for nature is seen by the way its adherents care for the environment. The study, ‘an Appraisal of A-Rocha Kenya’s Christian Efforts and Approaches towards the conservation of nature in Kilifi County’, uses ARK as a case study. ARK is an arm of A-Rocha International, (ARI), a Christian environmental conservation organization working in many countries of the world, notably the UK, USA, Czech Republic, Lebanon, Canada, India, Portugal, Nigeria, Ghana, Uganda and Kenya included. In Kilifi County, ARK is based in Watamu ward and Marafa ward in Kilifi-north and Magarini sub-counties respectively. Despite the efforts ARK has put in place with regard to environmental conservation, Kilifi County still faces a lot of environmental degradation caused by stone cutting and sand harvesting which renders several hectares of land with pits and devoid of vegetation cover. The study focused on the contribution of Christian faith on the conservation of the natural habitat in Kilifi County with reference to ARK. It was guided by Boff Leonardo’s Liberation theology and Paul Santmire’s Ambiguity theory. The Ambiguity that Santmire proposes is expressed in two motifs: the spiritual motif and the ecological motif. In the Liberation theory, Boff considers the merging of ecological and theological concerns because the elements that threaten the poor are the same elements that threaten the earth; thus a theology that protects both the poor and the earth- which he called Christian pantheism (everything in God; and God in everything). The study employed qualitative methodology to acquire primary data. Purposive, convenience, homogenous and vi snowballing sampling techniques were used to identify respondents for interviews and focus group discussions. The study also utilized documentary analysis which was done by analyzing ARK’s publications like brochures, newsletters, magazines and minutes from environmental education seminars to establish the organization’s environmental conservation in depth. Guided by the objectives, the raw data was collated and arranged thematically. ARK’s programs have picked up, but there is a challenge as the people have not totally embraced the importance of conservation of nature. Thus, as a strategy towards environmental conservation, ARK should involve more people to embrace their strategies of FGW, indigenous tree planting and introduce the Faidherbia albida tree so as to train them on bee keeping, hence diversifying their income. ARK could reskill the people with alternative vocational skills to widen their career scope as the case of A-Rocha Ghana.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".