MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6931546870 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.6615394

CONSTRUCTION WITH BAMBOO AS A TOOL FOR RESEARCH-BASED SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT: A SUSTAINABLE LIVELIHOODS ANALYSIS

2022· article· en· W6931546870 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBanana Cultivation and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLivelihoodBambooSustainable developmentParticipatory action researchCitizen journalismSustainabilitySustainable community

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bamboo is a natural building material that grows widely across the tropics and subtropics. It has been used in traditional construction for millennia and is now used in a growing range of innovative bio-based building solutions. Citing bamboo’s potential for carbon capture, promising physical properties and relative underdevelopment of the global bamboo industry, many projects and initiatives have been launched that aim to develop bamboo industries to support livelihood development. These projects use a wide range of implementation strategies. Using theory-based program evaluation based on the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework, this paper focuses on three case studies from Costa Rica, Nigeria, and Indonesia. Each case study employs different strategies for research for social development and utilized the harvest, processing and manufacture of bamboo construction materials and products. First, a low-cost self-help construction project in Costa Rica is described. Next, a bamboo architecture community development project in Indonesia using participatory action research is analyzed. The final strategy uses community-based action research to develop bamboo-based prototypes of vertical greening systems in Nigeria. In each case study, bamboo is selected as an affordable and locally available material. The projects are evaluated using logic models and the core principles of the Framework. This paper demonstrates applications of the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework and other theory-based evaluation frameworks to analyze research-for-development and social projects.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.866
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0130.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.215 · 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.

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicBanana Cultivation and ResearchFrench-language works237,207