MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6888849859 · doi:10.23744/3245

Ricerca del profitto e protezione dell’ambiente. Un binomio possibile? Il settore della pesca in Quebec

2020· article· en· W6888849859 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArchivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Environmental Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFishingSustainabilityWitnessVulnerability (computing)Fishing industryResource (disambiguation)Artisanal fishing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In public opinion, fishing as an industry has very often been associated with various environmental issues. In this article, we focus on the environ mental discourse of fishers, as well as their behaviour and professional practices. Our reflection is based on a qualitative research project, which took place between 2016 and 2018 in the Gaspésie region of Québec, Canada. The professional «ethos» of fishers is strongly linked to nature and the environment. Their proximity to nature makes them witness to many environmental issues, thus developing an environmental awareness. The captain-owner’s discourse on the environment revolves mainly around their vulnerability to changes in the ecosystem. Our analysis focused on two main categories of environmental behaviours: voluntary and imposed actions. Voluntary environmental actions are mainly motivated by the desire to protect the marine resource in order to ensure the sustainability of fishing sector. Environmental behaviour imposed by fisheries regulatory bodies mainly concerns fishing quotas, fisheries management zones, fishing gear and bycatches. The degree of acceptability of these imposed actions may greatly vary.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.202 · 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
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna)Same topicHistorical and Environmental StudiesFrench-language works237,207