MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790007676 · doi:10.1002/wat2.1276

The Water‐Sensitive City: Implications of an urban water management paradigm and its globalization

2018· article· en· W2790007676 on OpenAlexaff
Françoise Bichai, Andrés Cabrera Flamini

Bibliographic record

VenueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Water · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Stormwater Management Solutions
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSanitationEnvironmental planningParadigm shiftUrban planningBusinessInternational trade and waterPopulationEnvironmental resource managementPolitical scienceEconomic growthGeographyEngineeringEnvironmental engineeringCivil engineeringEnvironmental scienceSociologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The urban water management (UWM) community is embracing a paradigm shift to tackle the escalating water stress experienced in several cities globally, as existing challenges are predicted to be exacerbated by climate change and population growth. The term “Water Sensitive City” (WSC) is widely used in literature to describe this new ideal to aim for, where cities will successfully deliver safe and reliable water services to all, now and in the future, in an eco‐friendly manner. This green, long‐term vision implies a large amount of stakeholder coordination and institutional support, as well as participatory community engagement. Examining the foundations and principles of the WSC as well as the experiences in its application, impacts and limitations, particularly in the Global South, provides a space to further contribute to the dynamic field of UWM and governance. This article provides a condensed overview of the WSC approach and related emerging conversations in the urban water sector across a range of disciplines: the objective is to nurture reflection from young professionals entering the field of UWM, but also to offer an opportunity for more experienced scholars and practitioners to take a step back in considering this rising approach from different perspectives. This article is categorized under: Engineering Water > Sustainable Engineering of Water Engineering Water > Water, Health, and Sanitation Engineering Water > Planning Water

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0090.073
Scholarly communication0.0140.016
Open science0.0010.016
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations43
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews WaterSame topicUrban Stormwater Management SolutionsFrench-language works237,207