Resources, people and places: resource and environmental geography in Canada 1996–2000
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The years 1996–1999 were productive ones for Canadian geographers working in resource and environmental planning and management. This review highlights and partly summarizes a hopefully representative sample of that work under three main headings: Science, Surveys and Climate Change; Assessment, Planning and Management; and Social, Cultural and Economic Dimensions. The concluding section addresses Themes, Trends, and Prospects. Canadian strengths in the past could have been said to include at least land and resource analysis and mapping, institutional and procedural analyses, watershed management and water resources, sustainable development, protected areas and ecosystem approaches, field and case study‐based approaches addressing questions of how can we do things better both in Canada, and application of our expertise to resource and environmental management abroad. Research has continued in these areas, but many are evolving and transforming. Some trends include study of multiple aspects of climate change, the processes and results of comprehensive regional planning, sustainability at local and regional scales, resource cycles and restructuring, the experience of historically neglected social and economic groups, and some progress on adding more, critical, social and political economic theory to the methods and analysis of Canadian resource and environmental geographers. Les années 1996–1999 ont été productives pour les géographes travaillant dans le domaine de la gestion et de la planification des ressources et de l'environnement. Ce compte‐rendu fait le point sur un échantillon aussi représentatif que possible de ces travaux en les regroupant sous trois rubriques principales: Science, recherche et changement climatique; Évaluation, planification et gestion; ainsi que Dimensions sociales et culturelles. L'article conclut en abordant les thèmes, les tendances, et les perspectives. On pourrait dire, que dans le passé, la recherche canadienne s'affirmait dans les domaines suivants: l'analyse et la cartographic des ressources naturelles et des terres; l'analyse des procédures et des institutions; la gestion des bassins hydrographiques et des ressources en eau; le developpement durable; l‘étude des écosystèmes et des zones protégées; et enfin, les approches qui, par l'entremise d’études de cas, examinent les façons d'améliorer, au Canada et à l‘étranger, la mise en application de notre expertise dans la gestion des ressources et de l'environnement. La recherche s'est poursuivie dans ces domaines, mais d'autres perspectives émergent et se transformet. Nous discutons ici des thèmes suivants: les divers aspects des change‐ments climatiques, les processus et les résultats de la planification régionale, la “durabilité” aux échelles locale et régionale, la restructuration et le cycle des ressources, l'expérience de groupes économiques et sociaux historiquement négligés, et les progrès obtenus grâce l'addition de considérations critiques, sociales et théoriques aux méthodes et analyses des géographes canadiens s'intéressant à l'environnement et aux ressources.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".