MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W609087817

Resistance to Conservation in the Land of Zapata

2009· article· en· W609087817 on OpenAlexaff
Gisela Frias, Thomas C. Meredith

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Library Of The Commons Repository (Indiana University) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResistance (ecology)GeographyEcologyBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"As a response to global environmental concerns, a widely adopted strategy has been nature protection through the creation of natural protected areas. While there has been increasing awareness of the importance of local participation in both the design and management of protected areas, changes on the ground have been slow to materialize and little is known about the impact of conservation strategies on communal land holding and resource management. This paper provides findings from academic-community collaborative research with Mexican comuneros from the comunidad of Huitzilac, in the Corredor Biologico Chichinautzin (CBCH), Mexico. The establishment of the CBCH, within the context of conservation and local participation in Mexico, is analyzed. The paper provides insights on local perceptions and responses to conservation efforts and the impact of conservation on communal resource management. This case illustrates how conservation without meaningful local participation can lead to the emergence of local resistance, the establishment of a climate of violence, the degradation of local forest management practices, the emergence of an underground economy, the reduction of the sphere of communal decision making, the replacement of local knowledge by technical knowledge in forest management and the weakening of the local social fabric, all contributing to deteriorating conditions for communal resource 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 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 score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.149
Teacher spread0.142 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Library Of The Commons Repository (Indiana University)Same topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207