MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168491261 · doi:10.1108/ijdrbe-05-2012-0012

Building community disaster resilience through a virtual community of practice (VCOP)

2014· article· en· W2168491261 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicService-Learning and Community Engagement
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommunity resilienceResilience (materials science)Futures studiesKnowledge sharingCommunity engagementKnowledge managementEngineeringComputer sciencePublic relationsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose – This paper aims to discuss a pilot in-progress project to promote community-based research (CBR) as a tool for disaster resilience planning in rural, remote and coastal communities. Using trans-disciplinary approaches, this project demonstrates how emergency and foresight planning in five rural Canadian pilot communities can be enhanced through the co-design of a pilot Web 2.0 “virtual community of practice” (VCOP). Design/methodology/approach – The VCOP initiative was designed with pilot and field site communities to facilitate knowledge generation and exchange and to enhance community resilience. Building a culturally appropriate disaster resilience process is an iterative “process of discovery” and community engagement. Through CBR the project supports practitioners and volunteers to share promising practices and lessons-learned for disaster resilience planning. Findings – The VCOP is being developed in five rural, remote, coastal pilot sites across Canada. Additional field site work is also underway in three urban centres sponsored by a project partner. This paper provides an overview of the initial concept, design and “proof of concept” work currently underway. The pilot project will end in the Fall 2012. Research limitations/implications – Inspired by the work of American adult educator Etienne Wenger, the VCOP entails co-design and co-ownership of a knowledge engagement process; one which enables local “thought leaders” to participate in emergency planning, preparedness, response and recovery. The VCOP provides a communication platform and fosters “foresight” planning and “education for critical awareness”. Through the sharing of theory and practice, i.e. praxis, communities are mobilized and empowered to anticipate future risks and threats and plan for resilient recovery. Practical implications – The VCOP foresight planning paradigm challenges the status quo design and delivery of emergency management protocols from traditional “centres of knowledge and power”, e.g. governments and universities and fosters “bottom-up” community-driven planning to anticipate risks and threats and help enhance local capacity for resilient disaster recovery. Originality/value – The novel application of a VCOP to disaster emergency planning is in keeping with the spirit and principles of UNISDR's Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015. VCOP has potential to demonstrate disaster resilience “foresight” planning as evidenced in the adoption of promising ideas and practices developed by communities, for communities. As Louis Pasteur once said “Chance favours the prepared mind”.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.318 · 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