Managing natural resources together: The role of social capital in the co-management process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The limitations of traditional institutional arrangements and innovative approaches regarding natural resource management are queried within this paper. Focus rests upon organizational capacity, efficiency, and effectiveness of institutions for sustainable resource management (Mitchell, 1989; 1997; Maser, 1997). Theoretical and practical perspectives encompass this search. Concomitant are changes in government systems and a prevailing interest in governance at various levels. The thematic concept of co-management resonates in new institutional discussions. A host of contemporary issues enhance the complexity of managing river corridors in Southern Ontario. The associated property rights linked with river corridors results in a mixed common-property ownership regime. Increased privatization often limits or precludes access and other uses of these resources. This research specifically investigates development, form(s), and functioning of social capital in co-management from an emergent inter-organizational perspective. River corridors in Southern Ontario, as modified common property resources, provide the context for the research. An action research approach is employed in three case studies. Data is collected primarily through field research techniques including interviews, direct observations, and participant observations. Qualitative analysis and interpretation proceeds through iterative cycles of coding and explanation building. Results include an overview detailing timelines in which elements of the case study protocol were followed, a narrative conveying the meaning of information collected through field research procedures, and discussion of the results pertaining to the research questions. Analysis and synthesis across the cases focuses on determining variability. Explanation building proposes a model of social capital in the co-management process. Within the initial inchoate stage of the model each actor has some amount of social capital. The formulation stage involves face-to-face interactions among the actors which influences their social capital. Once sufficient social capital is developed, the actors cross to the conjoint stage, characterized by shared implementation and learning. Research investigating the emergence of co-management makes important contributions to theory and practice. These contributions are summarized and final reflections are offered in the form of recommendations to theory, methods, practice, and, policy. This compendium highlights the need to continue research in the realm of co-management with emphasis upon social relationships.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".