MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2234294374 · doi:10.1515/9781894725217-006

4 Rural Development and the Regional Construct: A Comparative Analysis of the Newfoundland and Labrador and Ireland Contexts

2015· book-chapter· en· W2234294374 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David J. A. Douglas, Brendan O’Keeffe

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRural development and sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstruct (python library)GeographyRegional scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given their historical and cultural linkages as well as their shared status, until the last 15 years, as underdeveloped islands contiguous to larger industrial regions and societies, Ireland and Newfoundland and Labrador have become a topic of considerable interest among academics and the media, as well as among governments, for comparative purposes in understanding their recent development trajectories.As the authors of this chapter make clear in their analysis of planning and development policies in the two jurisdictions, despite many similarities, there are important historical, political, and economic differences as well.If lessons are to be learned for either jurisdiction, but particularly for Newfoundland and Labrador, understanding and appreciation of the different paths and contexts and their implications for comparative lessons are critical.northwest Connemara and Duhallow in northwest Cork and East Kerry, Kiltimagh, County Mayo), extensive experimentation and innovations in area-based partnerships (e.g., Meldon et al., 2002;Fitzpatrick Associates, 2003;O'Keeffe, 2006), and a variety of other initiatives.However, outside of the rich record of collaborative development and development planning evident in a variety of partnership arrangements (e.g., Sabel, 1996;Cavazzani and Moseley, 1999; Moseley, 2003a; Walsh and Meldon, 2004), a modest volume of analytical work has been completed on a comparative basis.The province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Canada has seen a varied array of rural development initiatives over the last four decades (Fuchs, 1995;Greenwood, 1997;House, 2003).The rural deprivation associated with long periods of relative disadvantage (e.g., in per capita incomes, unemployment rates), high levels of dependency on primary resources (e.g., forestry, mining, fishing), endemic out-migration, and slow economic growth was exacerbated by the cathartic and wholesale collapse of the northern cod fishery in the early 1990s.In the more recent past Newfoundland and Labrador has seen substantial macroeconomic revitalization through alternative fishery activities and offshore oil development (e.g., the Hibernia field).The province looks to further development opportunities through the massive Voisey's Bay nickel mine development, more oil and gas development, continuing diversification of its small manufacturing sector, and new developments in the telecommunications-based services sector.Rural development initiatives over these four decades have been varied, involving a considerable amount of innovation, learning, and cumulative refinement of policy, process, and organizational design.The latest is a significant initiative, in the Canadian context, involving multi-community and multi-interest Regional Economic Development Boards, organized on a territorial or zonal basis, entering into formal performance-based contractual relations with the provincial and the federal government for long-term rural development.This process has now been refined after an initial period of operation and assessment. RESEARCH PURPOSE AND APPROACHThe purpose of this research is to initiate a selective and exploratory comparative analysis of the rural development planning process in Ireland and Newfoundland and Labrador.The comparative analysis will be divided into two overlapping perspectives.The first will address development policy, its content, the underlying values and priorities that inform it, and the espoused rationale.These will be noted and a preliminary interpretation of each will be attempted.Second, the paper will initiate a comparative analysis of the process of development design, using the regional perspective as a case in point, and will examine this design in terms of its intent, rationale, direction, participants, and other characteristics, as well as its implementation as a revealed process of rural development planning.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.669
Threshold uncertainty score0.739

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRural development and sustainabilityFrench-language works237,207