Cultivating Green Space Together: Exploring the Collaborative Planning and Public Engagement of Green Space in Edmonton, Alberta
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Edmonton, the fifth-largest municipality in Canada, is attracting more and more people to study, work, and live. Expected to nearly double in population by 2050, the City of Edmonton put forward a series of plans to enable a sustainable and climate-resilient city to accommodate new residents. Green spaces, including natural areas and urban open spaces (such as public parks and squares, corridors, linkages, and main streets), are increasingly regarded as dominant elements in promoting environmental sustainability and quality of life in cities. Therefore, how to plan and manage the green space while welcoming more people has become a key question for the City of Edmonton to consider. This research aims to critically explore the formulation of green space strategy from different perspectives under the collaborative planning and public engagement context. The objectives are to 1) elucidate the engagement process between the government and various stakeholders/public; 2) explore the engagement experience from different perspectives; 3) make recommendations for the collaborative green space planning as the plan is rolled out and acted upon. A social constructivist worldview adopted, and mixed qualitative research methods, including semi-structured interview, case study, and document review are applied to explore the topic. Each interview is approximately 40 to 60 minutes, and the potential interview participants may come from the municipal government, stakeholder organizations, or the local community. A case of the public engagement system in Edmonton was formed during this study. The research concludes by offering some salient lessons for those interested in advancing socially robust green space planning methods which integrate community engagement within planning and municipal government. Key findings suggest a shared view amongst city officials and community members as to the benefit of engagement. These variously were seen to include, for example, benefits to promoting public understandings of greenspace planning and municipal governance; values in connecting citizen experience of greenspace with ecological and sustainability planning; and supporting perceptions of belonging, ownership and responsibility for Edmonton’s green spaces. The research also identifies two key challenges to be addressed. The significantly included the difficulty of maintaining long-term relationships between City officials and wider public networks; challenges in protecting, or upholding, public voices within the bureaucratic policy process once an engagement or plan is complete. The thesis concludes by proposing the potential of simplifying planning and policy hierarchies as a means of addressing the above challenges, puts forward the value of moving from consultative to collaborative models of engagement and the need for publics to be better integrated within actual decision-making.
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 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,030 | 0,012 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,007 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 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 ».