MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289341690 · doi:10.1177/25148486221116737

What limits Muslim communities’ access to nature? Barriers and opportunities in the United Kingdom

2022· article· en· W4289341690 on OpenAlexafffund
Rachael C. Edwards, Brendon M. H. Larson, Daniel Burdsey

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning E Nature and Space · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersFaculty of Environment, University of Waterloo
KeywordsRecreationEthnic groupContext (archaeology)Variety (cybernetics)Protected areaGeographyPolitical scienceEconomic growthSocioeconomicsSociologyGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recreation in protected areas can greatly contribute to health and wellbeing, but there exist significant demographic disparities in protected area use across Europe and North America. Minority ethnic groups, in particular, are often underrepresented in protected areas due to a variety of cultural, economic, and discriminatory barriers. Muslims are one of the fastest growing minority ethnic communities in Western countries but have received little study in the context of protected areas. More research is therefore needed to understand protected area exclusion as experienced by Muslim communities. Through 14 in-depth interviews with Muslim community leaders in the United Kingdom, we explored the socio-cultural barriers and opportunities that contribute to the accessibility of protected areas for Muslims. As the majority of our participants were women, this study addresses the underrepresentation of diverse female voices in research on Muslims and leisure and foregrounds Muslim women as agents in their recreational lives. We found that a wide variety of factors can inhibit access, cumulatively resulting in several layers of exclusion. Primary barriers included a lack of inclusive imagery, insufficient facilities for social gathering, prior instances of discrimination, the perceived whiteness of protected areas, and unfamiliarity with these spaces. Several barriers related to the wilderness ideology that is embedded across many aspects of protected area marketing, design, and management as it does not embrace collectivist aspects of Muslim cultures. The level of “naturalness” associated with protected areas, however, did not emerge as a barrier. We also identified many opportunities, including the stewardship role of humans depicted within Islam. Lastly, we discuss the management implications for protected areas that emerge from our results. This research demonstrates that to foster a sense of belonging for Muslim communities, protected area managers must consider many socio-cultural dimensions of accessibility, holistically engage with Muslim communities, and embrace diverse worldviews relating to the human–nature relationship.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.542
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Planning E Nature and SpaceSame topicUrban Green Space and HealthFrench-language works237,207