MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073594613 · doi:10.2166/wst.2013.146

Towards adaptive and integrated management paradigms to meet the challenges of water governance

2013· article· en· W2073594613 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceBusinessProcess managementAdaptive managementEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementEngineeringEnvironmental scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) aims at finding practical and sustainable solutions to water resource issues. Research and practice have shown that innovative methods and tools are not sufficient to implement IWRM - the concept needs to also be integrated in prevailing management paradigms and institutions. Water governance science addresses this human dimension by focusing on the analysis of regulatory processes that influence the behavior of actors in water management systems. This paper proposes a new methodology for the integrated analysis of water resources management and governance systems in order to elicit and analyze case-specific management paradigms. It builds on the Management and Transition Framework (MTF) that allows for the examination of structures and processes underlying water management and governance. The new methodology presented in this paper combines participatory modeling and analysis of the governance system by using the MTF to investigate case-specific management paradigms. The linking of participatory modeling and research on complex management and governance systems allows for the transfer of knowledge between scientific, policy, engineering and local communities. In this way, the proposed methodology facilitates assessment and implementation of transformation processes towards IWRM that require also the adoption of adaptive management principles. A case study on flood management in the Tisza River Basin in Hungary is provided to illustrate the application of the proposed methodology.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.172 · 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