Implementing visions for sustainable development in regional land use planning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large scale natural resource policies, which focus on environmental objectives from a global perspective and cut across sectors and disciplines, are often motivated by a desire to find general models for resource use. These large scale policies, in this thesis refered to as Grand Visions, focus on sustainable development which is now a priority issue of governments. However, visionary policies often fall short of providing workable "how-to" solutions for practitioners. This interdisciplinary thesis bridges the gap between visionary policies and regional planning by developing a "road map" for practitioners which addresses the priorities of global concerns while maintaining practicality. Planned management of land resources is an essential part of implementing sustainable development concepts. The challenge was to find a means of implementing sustainable development in a regional land use planning context. The link between large scale policy and regional implementation was forged through translating broad qualitative guidelines into actions for regional and local planning. The schema was developed through literature, interviews, and case study analyses, and was tested through application in regional jurisdictions. An evaluation framework to compare the case studies was developed from the literature. It consists of twenty parallel principles: ten for Grand Visions and ten for regional planning. The research was focused on natural resource policy and planning in Sweden and Canada. Regional planning examples from Anuner An and Kluane were analysed. Analysis revealed overlaps and inconsistencies between Grand Vision and planning principles. Despite the gaps, bridging was found to be possible. To counteract the inherent imbalance between visionary policies and practical planning approaches, a reversed emphasis is proposed. Resource policy objectives, structures and implementation processes need go beyond reflecting Grand Vision principles by emphasizing planning objectives more explicitly as well as institutional and process factors. On the other hand, planning approaches need to reflect Grand Vision principles, emphasizing substantive objectives. In summary, this thesis addresses the problem of implementing large scale visionary resource policies through developing and utilizing analytical frameworks from both theory and field situations in two countries. Its major contribution is the identification of gaps between visionary policies and planning and specification of means of bridging these gaps.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.027 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".