MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7010059149

How Can Societies Create Common Access to Nature? The Roots and Development Process of the Bruce Trail, a Canadian Case Study

2011· article· en· W7010059149 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Library Of The Commons Repository (Indiana University) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmerican Environmental and Regional History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommonsTheme (computing)Process (computing)Natural (archaeology)Natural resourceRelation (database)Urban sprawl
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"The relationship between nature and human beings is a fundamental theme of commons studies. Every economic activity takes place because of ecological support. However, the relation between human beings and nature has become invisible and indirect for us. Generally, it is supposed that the more invisible and indirect the relation, the less attention we pay to the natural environment. One reason of the variety of current environmental problems is in the division between human and nature. It is necessary for us to rebuild sound relationship between human and nature. In this sense, it is very important that society allow the common access to nature so that people can appreciate and enjoy the blessings of nature. From ancient times, access to nature was open to the public or local communities in many countries. However, industrialization, urbanization, and urban sprawl have threatened the right of common access to nature. Some regions -- for example, Scandinavian countries -- have sustained this right throughout industrialization and globalization. On the other hand, in Japan, a district court denied the right of common access to the shore in 1978. Why do some regions succeed in maintaining the right of common access to nature, while some regions fail? How can we keep, reintroduce, create or transplant this right? This paper explores these questions by clarifying the roots and development process of the Bruce Trail -- 885km of main trail and 400km of associated side trails from Niagara to Tobermory along the Niagara Escarpment -- which has been built and maintained by the volunteer-based organization, the Bruce Trail Conservancy. It is interesting how they have succeeded in creating such a long trail in a country that has a strong private land ownership tradition. My conclusion is that they have transplanted ideas from other countries while at the same time adjusting these ideas to the Canadian situation, as they have built a unique open-access trail system."

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.

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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.167
Teacher spread0.156 · 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