MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380991631 · doi:10.1057/s41599-023-01756-1

Co-management for sustainable development and conservation in Sanjiangyuan National Park and the surrounding Tibetan nomadic pastoralist areas

2023· article· en· W4380991631 on OpenAlexaff
Ting Ma, Brent Swallow, J. Marc Foggin, Linsheng Zhong, Weiguo Sang

Bibliographic record

VenueHumanities and Social Sciences Communications · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland Management and Livestock Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Alberta
FundersChinese Academy of Sciences
KeywordsLivelihoodNational parkGeographySustainable developmentPastoralismEnvironmental resource managementChinaEnvironmental planningNatural resource managementSustainable managementCommunity-based conservationNatural resourcePolitical scienceSustainabilityLivestockEcologyAgricultureForestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Qinghai-Tibet Plateau plays an essential role in national to regional ecological security, biodiversity conservation, and sustaining livelihood. An array of natural resource management, environmental conservation, and ecological restoration projects have been trialed and implemented in recent years in the vast Sanjiangyuan region of the central Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, aiming especially to ensure socio-ecologically appropriate and sustainable development of animal husbandry in the alpine grasslands. Novel approaches in China have included the introduction of more collaborative approaches in protected area management and the development and formal establishment of a new multi-purpose national park system. Many milestones have been achieved. However, such developments are driven largely by national and global goals and very little has been heard to date directly from the people most affected: those residing within the protected landscapes, i.e. the community stakeholders themselves. This empirical, perceptions-based study aims to partially fill this gap, drawing on the results of focus group discussions with community representatives supplemented by key informant interviews and a targeted review of the literature, to provide synthesized feedback and priority recommendations for improving “community co-management” collaborations for the joint benefit of Tibetan herders and protected areas. The mixed-method approach employed in this study was based on a conceptual model derived from Elinor Ostrom’s social–ecological systems framework, calibrated to local residents’ self-assessments of their household well-being. Results highlight how the most recent configuration of China’s national park model (i.e., its form and the approaches it utilizes) is generally deemed successful by community stakeholders, albeit with some notable perceived limitations mainly relating to a sense of lack of fairness and inclusiveness in the “one household, one post” co-management mechanism. The paper closes with discussion and recommendations around fundamental issues of equity, empowerment, and gender, finally pointing to the significance and, ultimately, the need to move even beyond co-management per se and to adopt a model of inclusive governance for conservation wherein joint deliberations and decision-making amongst diverse stakeholders are prioritized over the simple implementation of externally developed programs and management plans.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations23
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHumanities and Social Sciences CommunicationsSame topicRangeland Management and Livestock EcologyFrench-language works237,207