Fuelling regional development or exporting value? The role of the gas industry on the Limestone Coast, South Australia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The degree to which host regions benefit from resource extraction is a major issue for research and policy. In Australia and Canada, the dominant narrative of resource extraction is that most of the benefits flow away from host regions. This paper draws on evolutionary economic geography, presenting a case study of the Limestone Coast in South Australia, which previously extracted and distributed gas locally to food and fibre manufacturing industries. New policies seeking to renew the gas industry in the region, provide subsidies for exploration. Scenarios were developed to help inform decisions about the role of gas within this region. Qualitative analysis of the scenarios emphasised that gas needs to be affordable and locally accessible. Quantitative modelling showed that using the gas locally by manufacturing industries as part of broader industrial expansion would lead to greater benefits compared with exporting all gas outside the region. We conclude that policy settings have gone some way towards realising increased benefits for the region. Regional stakeholders clearly favoured the local use scenario but saw it as unlikely in the context of current infrastructure limitations. Stakeholders sought policy support for infrastructure to enable the preferred scenario to be realised.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".