MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391994346 · doi:10.3390/conservation4010006

What Is the Role of Public History and Environmental Oral History in Supporting Conservation through Agroecology?

2024· article· en· W4391994346 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
FundersEmbrapa FlorestasSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaEmpresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária
KeywordsAgroecologyTraditional knowledgeAgricultural biodiversityIndigenousPolitical scienceGeographyEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementAgricultureEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indigenous peoples and local communities are key actors in the preservation of important biodiversity resources around the world. However, the ever-encroaching agricultural frontier and expansion of conventional agricultural practices threaten these communities, their autonomy over the land, and the traditional knowledge and practices associated with biodiverse ecosystems. Agroecology emerges as an important solution to support the continuation of agrobiodiversity, food security, and environmental conservation, but top-down solutions often do not resonate with the lived realities of traditional, Indigenous, and small-scale farming communities. This paper examines a collaborative research and narrative network developed over the past several years around traditional erva-mate agroforestry production in Southern Paraná, Brazil. It offers an example of how oral environmental history and public history can support conservation practices through agroecology. The key outcomes of this interdisciplinary, multi-dimensional research and engagement were the development of a candidacy for the system to be recognized as a Globally Important Agricultural Heritage System (GIAHS) from the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the implementation of a Dynamic Conservation Action Plan to address the threats and challenges farmers and communities are facing. The discussion explores two concepts that were integral to these processes, the creation of narrative networks and a focus on plurivocity. Both approaches ensured that the actions, knowledge, and narratives developed through the GIAHS candidacy were not imposed but agreed upon and generative through narrative and dialogue, remaining true to the realities and lived experiences of community members.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.377
Threshold uncertainty score0.488

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.179 · 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