MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124042643

Assessing the Effectiveness of Tradable Landuse Rights for Biodiversity Conservation: An Application to Canada's Boreal Mixedwood Forest

2004· preprint· en· W3124042643 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marian Weber

Bibliographic record

VenueEconstor (Econstor) · 2004
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversità di CagliariAbdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical PhysicsUniversity College London
KeywordsBiodiversityNature reserveBorealEnvironmental resource managementLand useGeographyNatural resource economicsEnvironmental scienceEcologyEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ecological reserve networks are an important strategy for conserving biodiversity. One approach to selecting reserves is to use optimization algorithms that maximize an ecological objective function subject to a total reserve area constraint. Under this approach, economic factors such as potential land values and tenure arrangements are often ignored. Tradable landuse rights are proposed as an alternative economic mechanism for selecting reserves. Under this approach economic considerations determine the spatial distribution of development and reserves are allocated to sites with the lowest development value, minimizing the cost of the reserve network. The configuration of the reserve network as well as the biodiversity outcome is determined as a residual. However cost savings can be used to increase the total amount of area in reserve and improve biodiversity outcomes. The appropriateness of this approach for regional planning is discussed in light of key uncertainties associated with biodiversity protection. A comparison of biodiversity outcomes and costs under ecological versus economic approaches is undertaken for the Boreal Forest Natural Region of Alberta, Canada. We find a significant increase in total area protected and an increase in species representation under the TLR approach.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconstor (Econstor)Same topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207