MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2788056761

Re-conceptualizing the Redevelopment of Rural Communities through the Lens of an Ecological Framework

2012· article· en· W2788056761 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Penelope Slight

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRural development and sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRedevelopmentLens (geology)Environmental planningGeographyEcologyEnvironmental resource managementSociologyPolitical scienceEnvironmental scienceEngineeringBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Today, Canada’s population is over 80 percent urban as exemplified by our growing cities. As a result of outmigration to urban centres, many rural economies in Atlantic Canada are struggling socially and economically. This research examines the redevelopment of rural communities through a lens of continuous cycles of adaptive change - based on Holling’s ecological concept of panarchy. By drawing on the characteristics of ecological communities, this panarchy-based theoretical framework uses a novel approach to reflect on a community’s position along its own adaptive change cycle and identifies leverage points where policy intervention may be most advantageous. This research also examines the practical application of this framework via interviews with economic development officials. Overall, the results of this research suggest that the panarchy-based framework offers constructive guidance to policy makers seeking to push or pull rural communities into positions of higher resiliency and to expedite times of economic uncertainty.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.464
Threshold uncertainty score0.934

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.053
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicRural development and sustainabilityFrench-language works237,207