La cogestion des parcs du nord du Québec en contexte d’incertitude : une occasion à saisir pour la recherche d’innovations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La conservation des espaces naturels dans le nord du Québec implique inévitablement la mise en place d’une approche impliquant le gouvernement du Québec et les Premières Nations, pour lesquelles la conservation signifie une nouvelle utilisation de leur territoire. Pour ce faire, des approches de cogestion répartissant les rôles et responsabilités parmi les partenaires sont de plus en plus favorisées. En se basant sur une expérience riche du contexte nord québécois et par l’utilisation d’une approche analytique institutionnelle, nous proposons ici une lecture des principales caractéristiques du contexte de cogestion propre à la conservation de la nature dans le nord du Québec et, par le fait même, des défis majeurs que devront relever le gouvernement et les peuples autochtones en vue d’une utilisation durable d’un territoire de plus en plus sous pression.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".