MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3170299025 · doi:10.5751/es-12440-260238

Governance in social-ecological agent-based models: a review

2021· review· en· W3170299025 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Society · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsCorporate governanceEnvironmental resource managementAgent-based modelBusinessEcologyEnvironmental planningGeographyComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceBiologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analyzing governance is particularly important for understanding and managing social-ecological systems (SES).Governance systems influence interactions between actors and the ecological system and are in turn influenced by the changes that occur in the actors' and ecological systems.Agent-based models (ABM) are well adapted for studying SES, for exploring interactions and the resulting collective behavior and for predicting the results of management processes.Considering the potential of ABM to analyze SES, we performed a literature review of the modeling of governance in ABM of SES and highlight the perspectives and challenges surrounding this issue.Our results show in particular that a significant share of the literature is not explicitly based on theories supporting the modeling of governance and actors' decision making.Regarding the conceptualization of governance, formal and informal institutions are rarely represented compared with diverse modes of governance.The governance modes that are mostly modeled are state interventions whereas the community-based and market-based modes of governance are scarcely represented.Finally, the overview of how interactions between governance and SES are operationalized in ABM highlights two main forms of implementation of governance: variable-based and agent-based implementations.The corresponding sets of models differ in terms of main theoretical background, types of governance modes represented or presence of interactions.Therefore, we recommend moving toward a greater diversity in the representation of governance and toward a better implementation of the dynamics of models, which can be facilitated by the explicit use of theories supporting the modeling of governance and the decision making of actors and by the representation of governance as an agent.

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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.639
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.335
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.129 · 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