MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035160981 · doi:10.3152/146155107x217299

Achieving meaningful public participation in the environmental assessment of hydro development: case studies from Chamoli District, Uttarakhand, India

2007· article· en· W2035160981 on OpenAlexaff
Alan P. Diduck, A. John Sinclair, Dinesh Pratap, Glen Hostetler

Bibliographic record

VenueImpact Assessment and Project Appraisal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic participationEnvironmental planningGovernment (linguistics)Community participationLocal governmentState (computer science)Scale (ratio)State governmentPolitical scienceBusinessEnvironmental resource managementEconomic growthPublic administrationGeographySocioeconomicsSociologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Uttarakhand, India has great potential for hydro development because of its mountainous environment and fast flowing rivers. While growth in the hydro sector could facilitate industrial development and improve social well-being in the state, it could also have severe negative impacts on social-ecological systems. Using a qualitative methodology involving a review of documents, field observations, and over 100 interviews with government, industry officials and community members, the research investigated two large hydro projects in the Chamoli District. The results show that public participation in project planning and implementation did not exemplify characteristics of meaningful involvement. The participation processes would have been improved with greater opportunities for advanced, decentralised, and more active local involvement. The conclusion is that the central and state governments should play a more assertive role in regulating large-scale hydro development in Uttarakhand, to facilitate meaningful public participation and to protect local environmental, economic and social interests.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.381 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations57
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueImpact Assessment and Project AppraisalSame topicEnvironmental and Social Impact AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207