MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403176986 · doi:10.1139/er-2024-0028

Holistic management approach for social-ecological systems in Iran

2024· article· en· W4403176986 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mahdi Kolahi, Amirhossein Abdollahzadeh, Roohollah Noori

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Reviews · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEcologyEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningEcological systems theoryGeographyEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social-ecological systems (SESs) in Iran face escalating challenges and pressures due to a multitude of environmental and social factors, such as global warming, population growth, and unsustainable resources management practices. This paper presents a comprehensive review of the historical context and evolution of SESs in Iran and examines the current challenges and pressures confronting these systems. The methods utilized include literature review, case studies, framework development, analysis and synthesis, comparative analysis, integration of feedback, and Driver–Pressure–State–Impact–Response (DPSIR) framework analysis. We also discuss opportunities for enhancing resilience and sustainability in the country’s SESs, including case studies of successful management approaches. This analysis highlights the urgent need for integrated and interdisciplinary approaches to manage SES in Iran, including with community engagement and inclusive participation. Our findings develop and recommend a holistic management approach that can effectively respond to changing social and ecological conditions over time. The suggested holistic management approach involves various processes and aspects, such as stakeholder engagement, baseline data collection and monitoring, scenario planning, adaptive management strategies, and evaluation. Overall, this paper provides a valuable resource for different stakeholders, especially researchers and policymakers interested in the management of SESs in Iran and offers insights to other neighboring nations encountering similar challenges in their SESs.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.401
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.040 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ReviewsSame topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207