Source water protection in a landscape of ‘New Era’ deregulation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The concept of source water protection (SWP) has gained prominence in the water resource literature. SWP consists of watershed and groundwater management for the protection of drinking water supplies. The logic behind SWP is that it is easier, cheaper and safer to protect a drinking water source from contamination than it is to remediate after contamination. SWP is largely a regulatory activity, requiring provincial government policy commitments. This research investigates the degree to which recent provincial deregulation plays a role in constraining SWP implementation at the local water utility level. The research was undertaken in British Columbia (BC) where, after 2001, the provincial government advanced widespread ‘New Era’ deregulation of social and environmental legislation. The apparent contradiction between government deregulation and government commitment to safe drinking water is interrogated. Data were collected using semi‐structured interviews and document review in the Okanagan Basin. This article reveals that New Era deregulation initiatives have constrained local efforts to implement SWP on the ground. This article recommends that a single provincial agency should oversee drinking water in BC and that greater attention be given to regional governance for drinking water management in the Okanagan Basin.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it