MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7027610672

Critical capacity development towards inclusive and participatory governance of coastal resources in Paraty, Brazil

2016· dissertation· en· W7027610672 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2016
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal and Marine Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersMassey UniversityUniversity of Bath
KeywordsParticipatory action researchFocus groupIndigenousSituatedCapacity buildingCorporate governanceCitizen journalismAction researchParticipant observationNatural resource
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research took place in Paraty, Brazil, situated in the Atlantic Forest region on the south-east coast of the state of Rio de Janeiro, with a focus on the coastal community of Trindade. A protected area, Serra da Bocaina National Park (PNSB), was established by the Federal Government in 1971, but not enforced until 2008. The study area is perhaps representative of conservation-development issues in Brazil: how to implement conservation in an area where the local people depend on natural resources for their livelihood. The project investigated the development trajectory of the community of Trindade in relation to environmental governance, and implemented a capacity development initiative in conjunction with community members. Participation in governance, conservation and development, the capability approach, and capacity development, are the theoretical areas explored in this thesis. The research was conducted as interdisciplinary action research, designed to be responsive to changes happening in the community, around issues that were important to people. The research brought together action and reflection, to help find solutions and improve the wellbeing of people and their communities. The study design was flexible and iterative and was adapted to the local context, with the participants largely determining the capacity development topics and methods. The qualitative research approach used mixed methods: narratives, interviews, focus groups, group interviews, participant observation and workshops, involving a total of 75 participants. Four cross-cutting themes were identified, representing the contributions of the thesis to the literature: (1) Decolonizing conservation and development approaches, (2) Moving from co-management to co-jurisdiction with Indigenous peoples, (3) The nature and context of "meaningful" participation", and (4) Marine protected areas as a form of "coastal grabbing". The findings have policy implications as Brazil has been shifting to a focus on local participation in decision-making, with a commitment to speed-up establishment of marine protected areas. These policy developments in Brazil have been positive, but the analysis shows that changes are still necessary, and major challenges exist when considering broader aspects of the social-environmental policies. Thesis findings have relevance to important issues far beyond Brazil; the four cross-cutting themes emerging from the study connect to international conservation-development dilemmas.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.016
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)→Same topicCoastal and Marine Management→French-language works237,207→