MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2289806813 · doi:10.14288/1.0097831

An evaluation framework for citizen participation in urban transportation planning

2010· article· en· W2289806813 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert George Innes

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitizen sciencePublic participationUrban planningCommunity participationEnvironmental planningTransportation planningBusinessPublic relationsPolitical scienceGeographyTransport engineeringSociologyEngineeringSocioeconomicsCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the planning and implementation of recent transportation projects have attempted to involve the public at critical stages, the persistence of conflicts between an efficient metropolitan transportation system and the needs of residents of the quiet enjoyment of their communities suggests the need to study and evaluate the effectiveness of participatory planning. This thesis explores the role of citizen participation in urban transportation planning and proposes an evaluation framework which is tested through its application to two recent transportation projects. This framework includes nine requisites for effective citizen participation which were drawn from the literature and the review of other related transportation case studies. These requisites relate to: •Objectives Defined •Good Timing •Effective Communications •Accessibility to the Process •Government Responsiveness •Community Representation •Commitment •Credibility •Flexibility By drawing on the experiences and perceptions of key participants of each case, the thesis assessed the effectiveness of each program. An evaluation matrix which is also based on these requisites is also proposed as a planning tool. The framework is tested through its application to the Cassiar Street Connector case in Vancouver and the Kensington Avenue Overpass project in Burnaby. Selected participants covering the local community, and appointed and elected municipal and provincial officials who were involved in each case were interviewed. Through their perceptions and insights, the framework was used to assess the effectiveness of the citizen participation component of the case. Results suggest that the framework can be considered a positive step towards a more general framework and towards a general improvement in the field of evaluation. While not a conclusive or exhaustive list of requisites, the framework does offer the advantage of including those requisites which, according to both the literature and the interviewees, are fundamental to participatory planning. The proposed matrix should be considered as an effective planning tool which allows for evaluation and monitoring complete participation programs as well as focussing on a specific requisite. Furthermore, it can be used as both an interim and final report card on a citizen participation program. The matrix also lends itself to a spreadsheet application. The thesis suggests the importance of a well defined organizational structure for citizen participation such as an advisory body or supervisory committee. These structures appear to offer advantages in providing a forum for the major participants, including the affected communities, to participate effectively in the planning process. Furthermore, the thesis recommends that the Provincial Ministry of Transportation and Highways' transportation planning efforts would benefit from a strong public consultation function, to complement its engineering and technical mandates.

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)0.255
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.130
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score0.919

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2550.130
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0130.008
Science and technology studies0.0090.029
Scholarly communication0.0180.020
Open science0.0050.010
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.261 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicTransportation Planning and Optimization→French-language works237,207→