Assessment of the capacity for watershed cumulative effects assessment and management in the South Saskatchewan Watershed, Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The cumulative effects of watershed development and large water withdrawals are placing the sustainability of freshwater resources at risk due to alteration of watershed hydrology, stream geomorphology, groundwater recharge, and adverse effects to the aquatic ecology of water resources. The consideration of cumulative environmental effects in development decisions under current project-specific assessment does not fully encompass the interacting effects of multiple stressors over space and time. As a result, the cumulative effects of land uses and development on watershed processes are not properly assessed and managed. There is a recognized need to shift from local, project-scale cumulative effects assessments to broader, landscape, or regional scale assessments to accurately assess cumulative effects to watershed processes and river system condition. The problem is that there is little understanding of the current capacity to do so. This research: i) developed a set of indicators for evaluation of regional capacity to support watershed cumulative effects assessment and management (CEAM) requisites, ii) applied those indicators to the South Saskatchewan Watershed (SSW), iii) identified capacity needs and constraints to watershed CEAM in SSW, and iv) identified lessons learned and opportunities for capacity building to support watershed CEAM principles and practice. Capacity indicator questions were developed for a set of eight institutional requirements for watershed CEAM, identified from a previous study of watershed CEAM in the SSW. Research methods included a web-based survey of academics, regulators, industry and environmental organizations, which consisted of both closed ended and open-ended questions based on the capacity indicators. Survey results were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences and qualitative methods. Results indicate that the primary threats to water quality and quantity in the SSW, as identified by study participants, are broad-scale stressors that are not subject to project-specific environmental assessment regulations. To address these broad-scale stresses, cumulative effects assessment at the regional level needs to be done; however, it was identified that there is currently a lack of mechanisms to support watershed CEAM. The need for a lead agency, multi-stakeholder collaboration, and financial and human resources were identified as the most important requisites from the research results for implementing and sustaining watershed CEAM programs. Research results revealed that watershed CEAM cannot be driven solely ‘bottom-up’ and government must lead watershed CEAM activities. Participants noted that there is collaboration ongoing in the SSW to meet CEAM objectives, but it is limited. There is a lack of clarity around common goals for watershed and sub-watershed management, and a lack of transparency in sharing data. Many participants commented that expertise is available for watershed CEAM, but there is a lack of organizational and financial resources to develop successful plans and actions.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».