MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Economic Instruments, Innovation, and Efficient Water Use

2013· article· fr· W1995470490 on OpenAlexaffvenue
J Bruneau, Diane Dupont, Steven Renzetti

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Policy · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsBrock UniversityUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesForestryGeographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les gouvernements sont de plus en plus préoccupés par le fait que les niveaux actuels de consommation d’eau ne sont pas viables à long terme, d’un point de vue écologique, particulièrement devant les dangers que posent les changements climatiques. Dans cet article, nous examinons des recherches récentes portant sur l’innovation en matière de consommation d’eau dans trois secteurs (résidentiel, industriel, agricole) pour montrer que l’utilisation d’instruments économiques doit faire partie des mesures à mettre en place pour promouvoir l’innovation dans le but de gérer plus efficacement la consommation et la conservation de l’eau. Nos résultats indiquent que deux facteurs influencent l’innovation: la compréhension du rôle que joue l’eau dans la production (industrielle, agricole et des ménages) et les changements dans le coût unitaire des autres intrants (particulièrement l’énergie et le capital). De plus, les recherches actuelles montrent qu’il faudrait concevoir des politiques qui s’appuient sur des instruments économiques pour chaque secteur, sur la base de leur contexte et de leurs caractéristiques spécifiques.

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 score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations10
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Public PolicySame topicWater resources management and optimizationFrench-language works237,207