MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332594707 · doi:10.14288/1.0086622

Toward sustainable communities : a planning framework for municipal and local governments

2008· article· en· W2332594707 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.

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainable Development and Environmental Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental planningBusinessLocal governmentEnvironmental resource managementPolitical sciencePublic administrationGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some municipal and local governments are expanding their role in sustainable development, but little is known about the nature and extent of these initiatives. This study develops an urban-relevant understanding of sustainable development, then explores the role of North American human settlements in achieving sustainable development and the community-level planning implications of that role. It proposes a framework for sustainable community development, then identifies and evaluates the current range of relevant municipal and local government initiatives. The study data consist of case studies and examples of specific municipal and local government initiatives. Data sources were libraries, computerized databases, and networking. Hundreds of references and initiatives were identified, documented and reviewed. The focus of the data search was on the range of initiatives being practiced or proposed by municipal and local governments. The study develops the argument that sustainable communities require unprecedented and simultaneous emphasis on the efficient use of urban space (e.g., intensifying urban land use, increasing infrastructural efficiency); on reducing consumption of material and energy resources (e.g., generally minimizing the consumption of essential natural capital, encouraging regional self-reliance); on improving community livability (e.g., community development, healthy communities); and on organizing administrative and planning processes which can deal effectively, sensitively and comprehensively with the attendant socioeconomic complexities. The initiatives are categorized according to these criteria. Efficient Use of Urban Space includes transportation planning and traffic management, and land use and growth management. Reducing Resource Consumption encompasses atmospheric change and air quality, energy conservation and efficiency, waste reduction and recycling, and water and sewage. Improving Community Livability includes initiatives to green the city, develop a sustainable economy, and enhance both local community livability and global community responsibility. Administration for Sustainability encompasses investment and purchasing, leadership by example, environmental administration, and extending beyond municipal and local government. The study concludes that the elements for moving toward sustainable communities are being put in place but not, as yet, the necessary synthesis. The criteria of efficient use of urban space, reducing resource consumption, improving community livability, and administration for sustainability are necessary conditions for sustainable 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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score0.861

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.177 · 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