“It’s like a church”: Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) hatchery and stocking programs as producers of capital in conservation-based social networks in Nova Scotia, Canada.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Atlantic Canada, limited information exists on the social and human dimensions of captive rearing and stocking of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and the contested use of these tools for conservation purposes. The study uses social network analysis to identify and characterize social networks and their outputs (i.e., capital) related to salmon rearing and stocking. 20 interviews were conducted across two case studies centered around the Province of Nova Scotia’s Atlantic Salmon Enhancement Program. Results show that hatchery and stocking activities are supported by, and likely support, complex social networks and are perceived as important, if not well-defined, components of local Atlantic salmon conservation. Those networks produce a variety of social capitals at the individual and network level that have positive impacts on people and salmon conservation efforts, but may also act as barriers to change. We embed these findings in the growing human dimensions literature on salmonid conservation rearing and stocking, and offer insights in accounting for and valuing the social outcomes of hatchery and stocking activities in this region.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".