MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7130308651 · doi:10.5593/sgem2025v/3.2/s11.34

INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE IN AGRICULTURAL LAND PROTECTION THROUGH SPATIAL PLANNING METHODS (REVIEW PAPER)

2025· article· W7130308651 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Desislava Parashkevova-Simeonova, Milena Moteva

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference SGEM ... · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLand-use planningAgricultural landLand managementSpatial planningLand useAgricultural productivityAgricultureLand developmentRegional planning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While urban land use planning receives much attention in land management in Bulgaria, agricultural land use planning has been significantly neglected. Today, more than ever, effective and efficient land use planning is needed to address the global and local challenges, such as protecting prime agricultural lands for food production, achieving sustainable productivity gains, improving water use efficiency, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, etc. The objective of the paper is to review the international experience in rural and agricultural land use planning and its theoretical foundations, to identify and analyze the gaps in Bulgarian legislation in this area, and to develop some scientific ideas for including agricultural land planning into Bulgarian Regulatory Framework and its further implementation in practice. The need for agricultural territory planning in Bulgaria is emphasized. Intra-zoning of agricultural land on a holistic basis is proposed as a useful planning method for balancing agricultural development with the environmental protection, while maintaining both land productivity and the quality of natural resources. Information from strategic planning documents and literature resources from the USA, Canada, Australia, European and other countries is presented and analyzed. Issues of building permits, land categorization systems and assessment of land suitability for growing agricultural crops are studied.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.017
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference SGEM ...Same topicSustainable Agricultural Systems AnalysisFrench-language works237,207