MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319981894 · doi:10.18174/582855

Duurzame landbouw in gebiedsprocessen : barrieres en oplossingsrichtingen in Engbertsdijksvenen, Ronde Hoep en Schiermonnikoog

2022· report· nl· W4319981894 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wiebren Kuindersma, D.A. Kamphorst, Charlotte Walther, Esther de Wit-de Vries, Tineke de Boer, Maarten Visscher

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languagenl
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Conservation and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtCartographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Overheidsbeleid voor het landelijk gebied wordt veelal uitgevoerd in (integrale) gebiedsprocessen. In deze studie hebben we aan de hand van drie verschillende (typen) gebiedsprocessen de verschillende barrières voor extensivering/verbreding van de landbouw geanalyseerd alsmede de manier(en) waarmee men tracht deze barrières te overwinnen. Centraal in deze studie staan de ervaringen in drie recente gebiedsprocessen(Engbertsdijksvenen, Schiermonnikoog en Ronde Hoep). Belangrijke barrières zijn het ontbreken van een gemeenschappelijke probleemperceptie tussen overheden en gebiedspartijen, het ontbreken van duidelijke overheidsdoelen, het tussentijds aanpassen van overheidsdoelen en -regels en het ontbreken van een concreet uitgewerkt instrumentarium voor extensivering/verbreding van de landbouw. Oplossingsrichtingen voor deze barrières variëren sterk per (type) gebiedsproces. Zo kan het ontbreken van instrumenten voor extensivering/verbreding in het ene gebiedsproces leiden tot het vormen van een pilot/experiment, terwijl in een ander gebiedsproces de betrokken boeren worden uitgekocht en extensivering/verbreding hierdoor (voorlopig) niet van de grond komt. De ervaringen uit de bestudeerde gebiedsprocessen leveren concrete lessen op voor toekomstige gebiedsprocessen in het kader van het Nationaal Programma Landelijk Gebied (NPLG).---Government policies for rural areas are often implemented in area processes. In this study we analysed the barriers to agricultural extensification/diversification and the approaches taken to overcoming them in three different types of area processes. Central to this study are the experiences in three recent area processes (Engbertsdijksvenen,Schiermonnikoog and Ronde Hoep). Important barriers are the lack of a common perception of the problem among government authorities and stakeholders in the area, the lack of clear government objectives, the changing of government objectives and regulations during the course of the process, and the lack of a set of concrete policy instruments for agricultural extensification/diversification. Possible solutions for overcoming these barriers vary considerably, depending on the type of area process. For example, in one area process the lack of instruments for extensification/diversification may be circumvented by setting up a pilot project/experiment, while in another area process the farmers concerned may be bought out and no progress at all is made with extensification/diversification, at least for the time being. The experiences in the area processes investigated provide concrete lessons for future area processes under the National Rural Areas Programme (NPLG).

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.509
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0760.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.234 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnvironmental Conservation and ManagementFrench-language works237,207