MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Towards a Systematic Review of Environmental Injustice in Canada: National Patterns of Environmental Risks and Benefits

2018· review· en· W2990086724 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amanda Giang, Kaitlin Castellani, David R. Boyd

Bibliographic record

VenueISEE Conference Abstracts · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEnvironmental Justice and Health Disparities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental justiceInjusticeGeographySocioeconomic statusResidenceCensusIndigenousScale (ratio)PopulationEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementRegional sciencePolitical scienceSociologyDemographyEcologyCartographyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The environmental justice paradigm, now more than three decades old, is gaining new momentum by expanding to include a wider range of issues, broader geographic scope, and greater focus on potential solutions. However, to date, most research on environmental injustice in Canada has focused on specific case studies (e.g., large urban centres, Indigenous communities), with only a small number of studies focusing on national or regional-scale patterns. As part of a larger interdisciplinary effort, combining quantitative, qualitative, and legal analysis, this research will provide a deeper understanding of uniquely Canadian environmental injustice patterns and identify potential case studies for future work on the processes that create and perpetuate these injustices.In this preliminary analysis, we describe how exposure to selected environmental hazards (e.g., ground-level ozone, water advisories) and access to environmental benefits (e.g., green space) varies across demographic and socioeconomic characteristics in Canada, at a national-scale. We apply methodologies (described below) from recent national-scale analyses of NO2 and fine particulate matter in the US and Canada to data from the 2016 census and existing environmental data sets from the Canadian Urban Environmental Health (CANUE) Research Consortium, and from federal and provincial governments. Population variables considered include Aboriginal and racialization status, immigrant status, socio-economic status, age, stratified by urban and rural residence. We compute descriptive statistics (Student’s t-test and Cohen’s d) to evaluate the significance and magnitude of differences between selected groupings. Finally, we situate these results within our larger framework for a systematic analysis of environmental injustice in Canada by discussing linkages to law, policy, and social movements that may contribute to, or remedy, these observed patterns.

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)0.064
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.226
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.611

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0640.226
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.005
Bibliometrics0.0690.087
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISEE Conference AbstractsSame topicEnvironmental Justice and Health DisparitiesFrench-language works237,207