MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084242573 · doi:10.1080/03003930.2020.1816545

The sources of municipalities’ innovation in the management of weather disaster risks, their relationships, and their antecedents

2020· article· en· W3084242573 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Kaddour Mehiriz

Bibliographic record

VenueLocal Government Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBusinessIncentiveComplementarity (molecular biology)Vulnerability (computing)Emergency managementSurvey data collectionEnvironmental planningPublic relationsPolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents the results of a study on the use of internal and external sources of innovation by municipalities to deal with weather hazards. Using data collected by an online survey of municipal emergency management coordinators in Quebec – Canada, this study shows that municipalities rely primarily on their expertise and, to a lesser extent, on peer organisations and upper levels of governments to develop new solutions to weather hazards. In addition, this study finds weak support for the complementarity hypothesis between internal and external sources of innovation and suggests strongly that these sources of innovation are not substitutable. The capacity and vulnerability of municipalities, as well as political support for initiatives to improve the management of weather disasters, seem to be significant drivers of innovation. Finally, efforts aimed at strengthening public organisations’ internal capacities and creating incentives to facilitate collaborations between public organisations are important levers to stimulate innovation.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLocal Government StudiesSame topicDisaster Management and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207