Adaptation to climate change in Quebec’s coastal zone: a difficult transformation of public action
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose In recent years, the manifestation of the effects of climate change in coastal zones has prompted governments to mobilize and propose adaptation measures to reduce the vulnerability of their populations. For the governments responsible for the implementation of climate policies, adaptation still represents a novel field of action. The purpose of this paper is to show, via the example of Quebec’s coastal zone, how the transformation of public action relating to adaptation remains difficult. Design/methodology/approach For this case study, a qualitative method which combines documentary analysis and semi-directed interviews was selected. Findings The study shows how adaptation becomes a new issue in public action for the different authorities dealing with the effects of climate change in Quebec’s coastal zone. However, the results show that, as with other public policies, path dependence and incrementalism can be observed and limit the scope of public action and of the transformational processes in the field of adaptation. The technical–scientific approach to risk management is dominant, and the adaptation is not approached in a transversal way, despite its importance. Finally, concrete adaptation initiatives appear to be mostly relegated to the local scale, in an informal decentralization process. Originality/value This study contributes to improve climate action by favouring a reflection on the consideration of the conceptual and theoretical framework in the climate change adaptation literature and offers decision-makers and practitioners keys to the understanding of mechanisms underlying public action in the field of adaptation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".