Institutional Barriers to Incorporating Climate Responsive Design in Commercial Redevelopment
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 decades the literature on the winter cities and on urban design has explored the implications of poorly designed urban spaces on pedestrian mobility during various seasons. In Canada, however, practice in using climate responsive design principles tends to be the exception. Using a case study methodology, this paper explores the application of climate responsive design principles in the commercial redevelopment process in Prince George, British Columbia. Findings indicate that, despite expressed interest in winter city development, professionals and decision makers involved in the development permit process do not possess sufficient knowledge about climate responsive design to apply these principles to everyday practice. More importantly, knowledge about climate responsive design did not appear to be a major consideration in creating or evaluating commercial redevelopment projects. A range of educational, attitudinal, regulatory, structural, and political barriers impede the development of an institutional framework to support the implementation of climate responsive design.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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