Sustainable livelihoods following an extreme event: Post‐earthquake practices of the Tibetan community in Jiuzhaigou World Heritage site, China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Under the guidance of a sustainable livelihoods framework and using qualitative research methods, members of Tibetan communities in Jiuzhaigou World Heritage site were interviewed following an earthquake. Based on grounded theory and methods, the core elements, connotation and impact relationships concerning the sustainable livelihoods of Tibetan residents after an extreme event were extracted. A framework comprised of livelihood capital, livelihood vulnerability, institutions and systems, livelihood intentions, livelihood strategies, and livelihood outcomes, was developed to examine the effects of an earthquake on livelihoods at a World Heritage site in western China. The elements of this framework better reflect China's conditions and regional characteristics, which leads to different meanings and logical relationships in the composition of sustainable livelihood elements. It was found that the institutions and organizational systems of the heritage site and the livelihood intentions of the community members shaped the use of livelihood capital, thereby influencing livelihood strategies and livelihood outcomes. Cultural capital is important in the reconstruction of livelihoods and for the diversification of tourism.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".