Climate change, biodiversity conservation and protected area planning in Canada
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
For more than a decade, climate change has been identified as an important emerging issue for protected areas. Utilising outputs from two equilibrium global vegetation models (GVMs) forced with six climate‐change scenarios, this study assessed potential terrestrial biome‐type change in Canada's protected area network (2,979 national parks, national wildlife areas, migratory bird sanctuaries, Ramsar sites, ecological reserves, wilderness wildlife areas and provincial parks). Vegetation‐modelling results project that 37–48 percent of Canada's protected areas could experience a change in terrestrial biome type under doubled atmospheric carbon‐dioxide conditions. Park and protected area planning in Canada have traditionally been founded upon enduring‐feature analysis and ecoregion representation frameworks. These conservation‐planning frameworks are based on climatic and biogeographic stability; assumptions that what these modelling results for Canada's protected areas and other vegetation‐modelling studies indicate are untenable in an era of global climate change. Implications for protected area policy and planning in Canada are also discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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