MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2476756007 · doi:10.1002/9781118451694.ch4

Adaptation to climate change and participatory action research (PAR): lessons from municipalities in Quebec, Canada

2016· preprint· en· W2476756007 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Steve Plante, Liette Vasseur, Charlotte da Cunha

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainability and Climate Change Governance
Canadian institutionsBrock UniversityUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCorporate governanceAdaptation (eye)Climate changePsychological resilienceClimate change adaptationParticipatory action researchCitizen journalismEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningResilience (materials science)Climate resiliencePolitical scienceProcess (computing)Action (physics)GeographyBusinessSociologyEcologyEnvironmental scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada, coastal communities such as many other communities in the world are facing the impacts of climate change. This chapter examines the role of participatory action research (PAR) as a tool for enhancing governance capacity of communities that are trying to develop and implement adaptation strategies to climate change. It first introduces coastal communities facing climate change, and the concepts of governance and social ecological system (SES). The chapter then discusses the idea of community-based activities such as PAR to identify adaptation solutions, and the aspects of governance that should be integrated into the concept of coastal SES. Moreover, it describes through a case study the potential of PAR in achieving this goal by improving resilience through governance in coastal SESs. Finally, the chapter discusses the conditions, the barriers, and the lessons learned from the case study to ensure a successful process.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.479
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.328
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.059 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSustainability and Climate Change GovernanceFrench-language works237,207