MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054259627 · doi:10.3152/147154603781766400

Social impact assessment, impact management and follow-up: a case study of the construction of the Hibernia offshore platform

2003· article· en· W2054259627 on OpenAlexaffabout
Keith Storey, Pam Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueImpact Assessment and Project Appraisal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments
Canadian institutionsGovernment of Nova Scotia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial impact assessmentContext (archaeology)Social impactEnvironmental planningImpact assessmentEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental impact assessmentSubmarine pipelineProcess (computing)Local communityBusinessEngineeringEnvironmental sciencePolitical scienceComputer scienceGeographySociologyPublic administration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The construction of the Hibernia offshore oil platform at a greenfield site in rural Newfoundland from 1990 to 1997 had the potential to have significant negative social impacts on local communities. This paper discusses the assessment process and the outcomes of the project. Contrary to experience elsewhere, quality of life in the local communities increased during the life of the project. Understanding the local context, early and ongoing public involvement, scoping of issues, addressing uncertainties, the design of adaptable management strategies and impact follow-up were key elements in achieving the social objective of minimizing community disruption.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.368 · 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

Citations22
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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