In Search of "Compass and Gyroscope": Where Were Adaptive Management and Principled Negotiation in Nova Scotia's Forest-Strategy Process?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In his landmark 1993 book entitled Compass and Gyroscope: Integrating Science and Politics for the Environment, Kai Lee outlined the need for stronger processes in support of sustainable development. The science of adaptive management and the politics of principled negotiation were offered as the most promising approaches. The author uses these concepts to evaluate the process used to develop Nova Scotia's natural resources strategies of August 2011, specifically the forest strategy following the Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act. The findings show that, by comparison with similar policy-development processes used elsewhere in Canada, the Nova Scotia process lacked both foresight (drawing on adaptive management) and stakeholder consensus (drawing on principled negotiation). The author advocates for stronger analytical and political strategic processes in future policy development in the province.Dans son important ouvrage de 1993 intitule « Compass and Gyroscope: Integrating Science and Politics for the Environment » (Boussole et gyroscope : integrer la science et la politique pour l'environnement), Kai Lee affirme qu'il est necessaire de mettre en place un processus solide a l'appui du developpement durable. Il avance que la science de la gestion adaptative et la politique des negociations axees sur la collaboration sont les methodes les plus prometteuses. L'auteur se fonde sur ces concepts pour evaluer le processus utilise dans l'elaboration des strategies de la Nouvelle-Ecosse en matiere de ressources naturelles adoptees en aout 2011, plus precisement la strategie concernant les forets en vertu de la Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act (loi sur les objectifs environnementaux et la prosperite durable). Les conclusions montrent que, comparativement a divers processus d'elaboration de politiques utilises ailleurs au Canada, le processus suivi en Nouvelle-Ecosse pechait contre le principe de precaution (gestion adaptative) et sur le plan du consensus entre les parties prenantes (negociations axees sur la collaboration). L'auteur preconise qu'a l'avenir, la province utilise des processus strategiques analytiques et politiques plus forts pour elaborer ses politiques.IntroductionI. The Nova Scotia natural resources strategy of 2011: process, participants, productsII. Framework for evaluating policy-development processes1. Technical elements: New Brunswick's Task Force on Forest Diversity and Wood Supplya. Adaptive managementb. Example: New Brunswick2. Political elements: Ontario 's Forest Policy Panela. Principled negotiationb. Example: Ontario3. Process examples combining incisive technical analysis with principled negotiationIII. Evaluation of the Nova Scotia process to develop the natural resources strategy of 20111. Technical elements2. Political elementsConclusionIntroductionContemporary resource and environmental policy development by democratic governments is usually characterized by a participatory process for citizens and organizational stakeholders.1 Design and scope of such processes depends on a host of factors such as the nature of the policy to be developed, urgency of the policy need, orientation and style of the government convening the process, and expectations and customs of those to be consulted. Levels of participation, ranging from no participation at all, through tokenistic input, to stakeholder partnerships and full citizen control, have been described in the literature since the 1960s.2 Much guidance is available to help policy-developers design and implement strong processes, especially in relation to natural resources and the environment.3In Nova Scotia, the Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act was enacted in 2007.4 Among its twenty-one goals was the following commitment: (u) the Province will adopt strategies to ensure the sustainability of the Province's natural capital in the areas of forestry, mining, parks and biodiversity by the year 2010. …
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".