Veerkracht in de relatie mens-natuur : de cursus omgaan met teleurstellingen gaat morgenavond wederom niet door (Herman Finkers)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This technical report examines the characteristics and mechanisms of resilience in the human–nature relationship. It investigates social resilience and ecological resilience and the interactions between them. A systems theory approach is used to combine ecological and sociological theories of resilience. Resilience mechanisms in forty mini cases and three extensive cases were analysed to create a conceptual framework. On the social side, emotion, shifts in perspective and knowledge are important factors in the emergence of a resilience movement. On the nature side, resilience concerns the establishment of animals and plants in urban environments and the influence of climate change and changing management practices. The research clearly shows that policy must also be adaptive and resilient if it is to harness the energy in society for nature and biodiversity conservation. It also throws more light what the resilient society called for in the EU Biodiversity Strategy can involve, with an initial indication of the opportunities and risks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.125 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".