MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Public participation programme: The Akkar watershed study

2005· article· en· W2069250784 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Youssef Abdel‐Massih

Bibliographic record

VenueLakes & Reservoirs Science Policy and Management for Sustainable Use · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransboundary Water Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWatershedWatershed managementPublic participationEnvironmental planningSustainabilityEnvironmental resource managementLegislationBusinessGeographyPolitical sciencePublic administrationEnvironmental scienceEcologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A social and environmental study of the Akkar watershed, on the northern boundary of Lebanon and Syria, was initiated in January 2001 and completed in January 2003. The study was a cooperative Lebanese–Syrian–Canadian research project funded by the Canadian International Development and Research Council. The aim of the project was to utilize scientific information and data derived from the watershed study to define issues and possible solutions to be included in a bilateral watershed management plan. The project consisted of four components: watershed maps from remote sensing and geographical information systems, sampling and analysis of water samples, analysis of applicable legislation and institutional arrangements, and a programme of public participation. The direct impact on the watershed by the daily activities of its communities implies that these communities should be involved in both evaluation and management of the watershed. It is very important that environmental management and conservation relate to land use and policies to assure sustainability. A successful conservation approach integrates institutional, geomatics and public participation aspects, leading to the communities themselves being self‐regulating. This will strengthen the sustainability within the watershed to enhance the quality of living of its inhabitants. This paper deals strictly with the aspects of the public participation programme on the Lebanese side of the watershed. This programme was designed to ensure wide public involvement and wide dissemination of information derived from the technical study of the watershed.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLakes & Reservoirs Science Policy and Management for Sustainable UseSame topicTransboundary Water Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207