MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2474417411

The Environmental, Democratic, and Rule-of-Law Implications of Harper's Environmental Assessment Legacy

2016· article· en· W2474417411 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jocelyn Stacey

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicRegulation and Compliance Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental lawDemocracyEnvironmental impact assessmentPolitical scienceRule of lawLawEnvironmental ethicsLaw and economicsSociologyPhilosophyPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article argues that Harper’s dramatic changes to federal environmental assessment give rise to a two-dimensional legacy in environmental law: first, a legacy of impoverished environmental decision-making that reflects a narrow, resource-oriented vision of the environment, and second, a legacy of undermining democratic and rule-of-law values in environmental law. The crux of this latter legacy is the argument that environmental assessment law provides an essential framework for publicly-justified decision-making in the Canadian environmental context. Indeed, as I suggest in this article, environmental assessment presently performs a quasi-constitutional role in Canadian environmental decision-making in the sense that it provides the means by which the federal government fulfills its constitutional obligation to govern the environment in accordance with the rule of law.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.619
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0170.073
Scholarly communication0.0130.008
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0080.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)→Same topicRegulation and Compliance Studies→French-language works237,207→