MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2242727239

The Unconventional Boomtown: Updating the impact model to fit new spatial and temporal scales.

2014· article· en· W2242727239 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of rural and community development · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBustBoomVolatility (finance)Context (archaeology)EconomicsNatural resource economicsEconomic geographyEconomyEconometricsEnvironmental scienceGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The boomtown impact model developed by researchers in the 1970s implicitly assumes a spatially concentrated, finite resource will be extracted during a near-singular event (i.e. the boom), followed by a one-time bust. This model has been criticized for its lack of a realistic longitudinal or macro-level perspective beyond the boom-and-bust, and seems unlikely to transfer successfully to the context of modern hydrocarbon exploitation. Technological innovations have unlocked massive reservoirs of natural gas in many parts of the world that challenge the notion of a geographically concentrated supply that can be quickly exploited. While as prices have plunged and natural gas is poised as an attractive fuel source for some time to come, energy prices are likely to retain their characteristic volatility. Hydrocarbon rich regions and the communities in them are likely to experience repeated waves of mini-booms and mini-busts over the course of decades, a scenario for which the classic one-time boom/bust model may not be well equipped. This development pattern holds profound implications for the types of impacts experienced by residents and the ways in which communities can prepare for them. In this article, we seek to both better define the sets of assumptions that predicate the boomtown impact model and suggest updates to incorporate more macro-level economic concerns. We review the boomtown impact model for assumptions of rurality and isolation, land ownership and wealth retention, spatial and temporal concentration, and economic drivers and industry behavior. We compare these assumptions against the new reality of unconventional natural gas development, drawing from impacted communities in the Marcellus Shale of Pennsylvania that have experienced some of the new types of impacts. We further describe ways in which the boomtown model may be updated to include a more complex energy industry and implications for research and rural community development.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.270 · 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