MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1525815730

Public Engagement, Planning, and Politics in the Forest Sector in New Brunswick, 1997-2014

2014· article· en· W1525815730 on OpenAlexaffabout
Thomas M. Beckley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of New Brunswick Studies / Revue d’études sur le Nouveau-Brunswick · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsGovernment (linguistics)Public administrationNatural resourcePolitical sciencePublic landNatural resource managementPublic policyPublic sectorPublic engagementPublic opinionPublic managementPublic relationsLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article documents developments and debates in policy formation for Crown land in New Brunswick from the period 1997 to 2014. Particular focus is given to how the public was engaged in those policy deliberations. The Department of Natural Resources experimented with several public engagement exercises from 1997 to 2007. From 2005– 2007 the government sponsored, but then backed away from, a public opinion study that demonstrated the public’s preference for a conservation-first timber-second strategy for Crown land management. Since 2008, successive governments of both major parties have adopted a more closed and less consultative approach to natural resource policy development.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0080.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of New Brunswick Studies / Revue d’études sur le Nouveau-BrunswickSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207