MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296330540 · doi:10.1007/s11625-022-01190-3

Co-producing theory of change to operationalize integrated landscape approaches

2022· article· en· W4296330540 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersConsortium of International Agricultural Research CentersBundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz, Bau und Reaktorsicherheit
KeywordsOperationalizationEnvironmental resource managementStakeholderLandscape ecologyCorporate governanceSustainable developmentEnvironmental planningPolitical scienceBusinessGeographyEcologyPublic relationsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrated landscape approaches that engage diverse stakeholder groups in landscape governance are increasingly promoted to address linked social-ecological challenges in tropical landscapes. Recent research suggests that a transdisciplinary approach to landscape management can help identify common research needs, enhance knowledge co-production, guide evidence-based policy development, and harmonize cross-sectorial integration. Meanwhile, guiding principles for landscape approaches suggest that identifying common concerns and negotiating a process of change are fundamental to implementation and evaluation efforts. As such, the use of decision support tools such as theory of change models that build ordered sequences of actions towards a desired, and agreed, future state are increasingly advocated. However, the application of the theory of change concept to integrated landscape approaches is limited thus far, particularly within the scientific literature. Here, we address this gap by applying the principles of landscape approaches and knowledge co-production to co-produce a theory of change to address current unsustainable landscape management and associated conflicts in the Kalomo Hills Local Forest Reserve No. P.13 (KFR13) of Zambia. The participatory process engaged a diverse range of stakeholders including village head people, local and international researchers, district councillors, and civil society representatives amongst others. Several pathways, actions, and interventions were developed around the themes of deforestation, biodiversity and wildlife conservation, socio-economic development, access rights, and law enforcement. To make the theory of change actionable, participants identified a need for enhanced cross-sector and multi-level communication, capacity development, and improved governance, while a lack of commitment towards coordinated knowledge exchange and access to information along with poor policy formulation and weak enforcement of rules were among potential impediments to action. Use of theory of change can both inform evidence-based policy design (by revealing place-based challenges and proposing solutions) and support policy mechanisms that promote integration between state and non-state actors (by clarifying actor rights, roles and responsibilities). Co-developing a theory of change for integrated landscape management is inherently context specific, but the process and outcomes of this study should hold relevance across a range of contexts faced with sustainability challenges related to reconciling both conservation and development objectives.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.190 · 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