MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415699064 · doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2025.108245

Integrating participatory GIS, remote sensing, and explainable machine learning to assess forest provisioning services

2025· article· en· W4415699064 on OpenAlexafffund
Kamaldeen Mohammed, Daniel Kpienbaareh, Rachel Bezner Kerr, Jinfei Wang, Isaac Luginaah, Esther Lupafya, Laifolo Dakishoni, Mwapi Mkandawire

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Impact Assessment Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research CouncilCornell Atkinson Center for Sustainability, Cornell UniversityDavid R. Atkinson Center for a Sustainable Future , Cornell UniversitySocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaInternational Development Research CentreMcKnight Foundation
KeywordsProvisioningLivelihoodRandom forestGeospatial analysisVegetation (pathology)Participatory sensingForest inventoryCitizen journalismIndex (typography)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forests play a vital role in supporting rural livelihoods by providing essential resources such as food, fuelwood, and medicine. Ensuring the sustainable utilization of these resources while balancing environmental protection requires a data-driven approach that integrates advanced technologies and local knowledge to inform forest management. This study synthesizes data from Participatory Geographic Information System (PGIS) of 66 forest plots and 1864 trees, multisource remote sensing (i.e., radar and optical) and explainable machine learning to assess forest provisioning supply for community forests management. Key findings from the inventory include the multifunctional roles of trees for medicinal, food and culinary uses. Vegetation Indices such as Transformed Soil Adjusted Vegetation Index (TSAVI) and Normalized Difference Index 45 (NDI45) were identified as useful predictors of forest provisioning supply, capturing essential attributes of vegetation dynamics using random forest (R 2 = 0.76, RMSE = 4.51). Radar-derived texture metrics were equally relevant and can be especially useful under challenging climatic conditions, such as persistent cloud covers. The Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) and Partial Dependence Plots (PDP) revealed threshold relationships between Sentinel-2 indices and forest provisioning, with notable thresholds observed at NDI45 = 0.3 and TSAVI = 0.59. These thresholds signal possible ecological tipping points associated with forest health and productivity. Also, Independent Conditional Expectations (ICE) and Locally Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations (LIME) provided site-specific explanations on the association between remote sensing indices and forests provisioning capacity, underscoring the spatial heterogeneity of forest ecosystems. The study fills an important research gap by providing a framework that integrates interpretable and explainable modelling with participatory geospatial methods, aiming to inform community-based forests management and support data-driven landscape and site-specific forest ecosystem management in the Miombo woodlands. • A participatory geospatial and explainable machine learning framework for assessing forest services. • Participatory GIS is used to identify the multifunctional role of forests/trees in agrarian communities. • Radar and optical remote sensing metrics play complementary roles in predicting forest provisioning services. • Global and local model interpretations can inform both landscape-scale and site-specific forest management.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Impact Assessment ReviewSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207