Water and development in the Okanagan Valley of British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe the history of water governance in the Okanagan Valley of British Columbia and the challenges now facing the region as a consequence of rapid growth and global warming. The paper seeks to examine the possible benefits that might accrue from applying a distributed, multilevel approach to water governance in this and other settings. Design/methodology/approach Interviews with over 100 fruit growers and ranchers and with ten water managers in the Okanagan Valley between 2005 and 2009 are conducted. Archival materials documenting the history of agriculture and irrigation in the valley are examined to provide historical depth to the study. An interdisciplinary review of theoretical literature on multilevel governance is conducted and also a comparative review of water governance systems in Canada and elsewhere. Findings The evidence supports the conclusion that distributed, multilevel governance systems offer an effective means of managing water in diverse settings, and that they are preferable, for a variety of reasons, to top‐down approaches that concentrate regulatory authority in state‐level institutions. Practical implications On a global scale, current water governance practices are proving inadequate to meet the challenges of increasing scarcity and competition. This paper describes a governance model that can be applied in many settings and which can help resolve conflict while facilitating sustainable management. Originality/value This paper integrates empirical and theoretical material from a variety of disciplines and diverse physical settings to construct a model of water governance designed to facilitate the combined goals of ecological sustainability, affordability, and equitable access to water resources.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".