MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4353070342 · doi:10.5558/tfc2023-012

Routledge Handbook of Community Forestry

2023· article· en· W4353070342 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForestryGeographyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This handbook provides a comprehensive overview and cutting-edge assessment of community forestry. Containing contributions from academics, practitioners, and professionals, the Routledge Handbook of Community Forestry presents a truly global overview with case studies drawn from across Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas. The Handbook begins with an overview of the chapters and a discussion of the concept of community forestry and the key issues. Topics as wide-ranging as Indigenous forestry, conservation and ecosystem management, relationships with industrial forestry, trade and supply systems, land tenure and land grabbing, and climate change are addressed. The Handbook also focuses on governance, looking at the range of approaches employed, including multi-level governance and rights-based approaches, and the principal actors involved from local communities and Indigenous Peoples to governments and national and international non-governmental organisations. The Handbook reveals the importance of the historical context to community forestry and the effects of power and politics. Importantly, the Handbook not only focuses on successful examples of community forestry, but also addresses failures in order to highlight the key challenges we are still facing and potential solutions. The Routledge Handbook of Community Forestry is essential reading for academics, professionals, and practitioners interested in forestry, natural resource management, conservation, and sustainable development.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.199
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.009
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.009
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1990.103

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207