MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Using contingent valuation for a conservation and restoration program: The case of the national system of protected areas of the Dominican Republic

2022· article· en· W4280621655 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Víctor Gómez-Valenzuela, Solhanlle Bonilla-Duarte, Francisco Alpízar, Carol Franco-Billini

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes caribéennes · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContingent valuationWillingness to payProtected areaGeographyEnvironmental protectionQuarter (Canadian coin)Nature ConservationValuation (finance)SocioeconomicsEnvironmental resource managementBusinessEconomicsEcologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Dominican Republic has a national system of protected areas integrated for 128 conservation units, covering a land area of 1.2 million hectares, representing around one-quarter of the country's surface. This study aims to understand the willingness to pay (WTP) of the Dominican society for a Special Ecosystem Conservation and Restoration Program for the National System of Protected Areas. It was selected the contingent valuation method to estimate the WTP at the national level. The aggregate WTP of the Dominican society is approximately US 126.2 million at the present value. It concluded that Dominican society positively values its protected areas. The WTP is higher in urban areas and among people familiar with protected areas, presenting opportunities for environmental education, emphasizing Dominican-protected ecosystems' values.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.206
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.069 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes caribéennesSame topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207