MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4250296968 · doi:10.4324/9781315246482

Politics of Forests

2017· book· en· W4250296968 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jakob Donner‐Amnell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsForestryPolitical scienceGeographyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bringing together case studies from Canada, the Nordic countries and Russia, this book is the first to provide a comparative examination of the current transformations in the forest industry regimes and the challenges they make for the communities dependent on this industry. Questioning how globalization has influenced forest regimes, the book focuses on individual forest companies and argues that they are the main motors of the industry's internationalization, often without taking due consideration of the complex interrelations between society, the environment and forest trade. During the current phase of globalization, the sphere of material production within the forest industry has increasingly been modified by more speculative signals from the market. Both the growing role of investor interests, as well as the broader societal demands for 'greening' the production chain, have forced managers to be more sensitive to the performance profile and image of their companies. In conclusion, the book highlights instances of processes working towards homogenization and diversity, and suggests that while Anglo-American management practice is increasingly important across the northern forest regions, it is also meeting with resistance due to historical and political conditions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.904

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.195 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207