MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133698620 · doi:10.1139/l05-031

Water resources management in Beijing using economic input–output modeling

2005· article· en· W2133698620 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Li Wang, Heather L. MacLean, Barry J. Adams

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Impact and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChinese Academy of Sciences
KeywordsBeijingWater resourcesWater useSustainable developmentGoods and servicesAgricultureInput–output modelChinaBusinessNatural resource economicsConsumption (sociology)Water pricingWater conservationIntegrated water resources managementResource (disambiguation)Production (economics)EconomicsEconomyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To support more sustainable development of a region, decision support tools must consider local and global systems level impacts on the economy, environment, and society. Through the development and application of "economic input–output water resources" models for Beijing, China for the years 1985, 1990, and 1992, historical trends related to the economy structure and its water use are investigated. The study finds that the economy of Beijing and water use are highly concentrated in agriculture and heavy industry, but this intensive water use is indirectly reflected in the production of most other goods and services throughout the economy because of the interrelationships among various sectors of the economy. In spite of progress during the time period observed (e.g., between 1985 and 1990 the output of the economy doubled, but water consumption increased only 12% partly because of a significant increase in the price of water in 1988) and given the seriousness of water resources issues in the region, it is critical that future regional development make progress toward a more water-efficient economic system.Key words: water resources planning, urban water management, input–output modeling.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.178 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations16
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207