Sociale en culturele waarde van visserij voor de visserijgemeenschap en gevolgen van beleidswijzigingen
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study describes the socio-cultural value of fishing in the Netherlands in terms of: identity, social well-being, cultural heritage and social cohesion. It looked at the effects of policy changes for the fishing community or communities. The Netherlands has 44 fishing communities with an active fleet and 84 historical fishing communities. The fisheries ‘community of practice’ has a shared identity in which in the Netherlands the family business plays an important role. For their (subjective) social well-being, fishing is very important. These (historical) family businesses are anchored in fishing communities, often have locals on board and contribute to social cohesion, (im)material cultural heritage and the social well-being of fishing communities. At the same time, social structures seem to be changing due to consolidation, fishers with a non-Dutch nationality and continuous fishing. The fishing community is unanimously very concerned about the future of fisheries as a result of all policy changes. In particular, they see the redesign of the North Sea with less space for fisheries as a threat. The policy process has led to much distrust. This study describes how the reduction of the fleet has social implications and pleads for monitoring social factors, developing a shared vision for future fisheries and restoring trust
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.010 |
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 it