Are we on the right track? A panel discussion on the future direction of groundwater management in Ontario
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This panel discussion will focus on whether, as a Province, Ontario is adequately planning for the future of our water resources. Recent developments related to the Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Plan, the Greenbelt Plan, the Niagara Escarpment Plan and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, as well as the expected impacts of climate change, will all figure into the conversation. Although the dialogue among panelists is expected to look broadly at water management and the current state of efforts to prepare for the future, there will be an emphasis on groundwater resources. Decisions affecting water resources are made by policy makers, technical staff, and those responsible for issuing approvals on a daily basis. These decisions range from land use planning to water allocation targets to wastewater treatment requirements. It has been almost 20 years since the tragic events of Walkerton highlighted additional needs for improved management of Ontario's water resources and in particular its groundwater. With the passing of the Clean Water Act in 2006, the past decade has seen considerable investment, primarily through the Drinking Water Source Protection program. This investment has ranged from the collection of water related data, the technical synthesis of these data, in many cases into sophisticated numerical groundwater models, and an overall improvement in our understanding of how water moves through Ontario's watersheds. In the current transition to a new government with a focus on curtailing public expenditures, what is the most appropriate way forward to capitalize on this investment and to ensure that future practitioners do not lose the knowledge gained from these activities? Is it even in danger of being lost? Panel members bring a diverse range of views and expertise to the discussion and will be prepared to offer their insights into some of Ontario's key ongoing and upcoming water related challenges and opportunities. Are Ontario's water related policies and programs being effectively implemented to support long-term sustainability of the resource? How are we monitoring the impact of our decisions? Are our actions pro-active or reactive? Is the acquisition of water related data sufficient to inform decision-making? Are the data adequately managed and readily accessible to those making planning and technical decisions? Is research headed in the right direction? Are agencies at the Federal, Provincial and Municipal levels sufficiently engaged and coordinated? Being blessed with a seemingly abundance of water, has Ontario been too complacent in how we currently make decisions with respect to our water resources? Following introductory comments from panel members, there will be an engaging and insightful discussion surrounding the future of water management in Ontario.
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 | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,025 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,009 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,011 | 0,001 |
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 ».