MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3090915613 · doi:10.11575/prism/38294

The Pathway to Clean Energy: A Review of the Implementation of British Columbia Climate Change Policy and Strategies for Indigenous Communities

2020· review· en· W3090915613 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Susanna Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeIndigenousPolitical scienceClean energyEnergy (signal processing)Clean technologyEnergy policyEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningEnvironmental protectionGeographyRenewable energyEnvironmental scienceEngineeringLawEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change policies and strategies that frames the British Columbia (BC) approach to transitioning to a more sustainable future have been widely adopted in the Province of BC since the passing of the Clean Energy Act (CEA). This includes the CleanBC plan that aims to provide a pathway in achieving climate targets, including assisting Indigenous communities in the transition. This research study looks at the Indigenous components of the BC provincial policy and strategies resulting from the CEA. The first part of the project includes a BC policy and strategies literature review to gain an in-depth understanding of existing research and reports. The second and third parts include a data analysis that resulted from a survey completed with Indigenous participants to gather feedback on the CEA and Indigenous targeted initiatives. Based on results gathered, recommendations are multi-layered and encompass further collaboration in policy development, consultation, and improvement in intergovernmental relations.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score0.788

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.017
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.168
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→Same topicIndigenous Studies and Ecology→French-language works237,207→