MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080586008 · doi:10.1177/0734242x08092023

Aurum: a case study in the politics of NIMBY

2008· article· en· W2080586008 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tee L. Guidotti, Sheila Abercrombie

Bibliographic record

VenueWaste Management & Research The Journal for a Sustainable Circular Economy · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPlace Attachment and Urban Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNIMBYPoliticsResentmentResistance (ecology)Environmental planningGovernment (linguistics)PhenomenonPolitical scienceGeographyLawCivil engineeringEngineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The literature on the phenomenon of community resistance to local siting of undesirable facilities, the so-called ;not in my backyard' syndrome (NIMBY), emphasizes community civic characteristics and motivation. We describe a case study in which prior political history played an important but not obvious role. The Aurum project was a proposed landfill for the city of Edmonton, Alberta (Canada) proposed in 1989 and 1990 for an isolated and mostly vacant site within city limits but across a river from the developed area. The siting was bitterly but successfully opposed by the government and residents of the adjacent area. Investigation determined residual, unspoken resentment among county residents against an attempt by the city to annex it decades before. It was concluded that in this instance, and probably many others, the political history of the community plays a major role in conditioning their response to ;locally undesirable land use' (LULUs) and the NIMBY phenomenon.

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)0.003
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0270.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations21
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaste Management & Research The Journal for a Sustainable Circular EconomySame topicPlace Attachment and Urban StudiesFrench-language works237,207