MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7072212490

Walking Toward Respect: Historical Geographies of Nature and Possibility in UNESCO MAB’S Frontenac Arch Biosphere Reserve

2018· dissertation· en· W7072212490 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology, Conservation, and Geographical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiosphereContext (archaeology)PoliticsWork (physics)SustainabilitySustainable developmentPolitical ecology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis employs an innovative methodological approach to provide a historical geography of the Frontenac Arch Biosphere Reserve (FABR), an area designated by the United Nations’ Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s Man and the Biosphere (MAB) program. Through a walking research method conducted in five hiking locations within the FABR, I identified important themes and current issues related to the key concepts used to define and understand biosphere reserves; ecology, ecosystem, conservation, and sustainable development and followed them back through the institutional history of MAB. By attending to the complexity of meanings held by each of the key concepts, the research seeks to identify moments of possibility within MAB’s past for promoting the FABR's purpose as a site of socio-ecological learning. These moments are at risk of being forgotten as social issues are generally overshadowed by a focus on economic development within the World Network of Biosphere Reserves. The research presented here provides important historical and political context to help situate the current approach to sustainable development at the FABR by attending to three other overlapping institutional temporal scales centered around the following key events: the creation of UNESCO and its conservation organizations from 1929-1969; the planning and implementation of the MAB program from 1968-2000; and finally, the implementation of Canada’s national MAB program from 1972-2000. The key contributions of this work include a historical geographical methodology that blends embodied walking research with archival inquiry, a summary of resources from MAB’s history for biosphere reserve practitioners in Canada who are working towards building positive cross-cultural relationships with Indigenous individuals and organizations, and the documentation of key insights from MAB’s history related to ongoing efforts in the discipline of geography to a meaningful integration of the human and physical sciences.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.734
Threshold uncertainty score0.529

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0110.014
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.191 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)Same topicEcology, Conservation, and Geographical StudiesFrench-language works237,207