MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3133202541

Climate Gating: A Case Study of Emerging Responses to Anthropocene Risks

2019· article· en· W3133202541 on OpenAlexaff
Nicholas P. Simpson, Clifford Shearing, Benoît Dupont

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater-Energy-Food Nexus Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceWater scarcityUnintended consequencesClimate changeNatural resource economicsEnvironmental planningAnthropoceneEnvironmental resource managementBusinessDiversity (politics)ScarcityGeographyEconomicsPolitical scienceWater resourcesEcologyBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores responses to one type of climate risk, severe water scarcity, during Cape Town’s drought from 2016 to mid-2018. Advancing our understanding of how societies can cope and develop despite disruptions, it considers how selected pathways shaped noteworthy response diversity to mitigate the impact and potential harms associated with the unprecedented drought. Enhancing capacity through off-grid alternatives, private responses led to the emergence of innovative arrangements, at extraordinary scales, to adaptively secure variants of household level water access and reserves while expanding general reserve margins. Unintended consequences of nascent off-grid capacity arrangements precipitated transformations and accommodation challenges to public governance systems. We relate these observations to emerging trends in ‘off-grid’ provision of goods by non-state actors, seen in other fields, a phenomenon we call ‘climate gating’. These observations highlight what is and what is not potentially safeguarded by such decentralised and polycentric responses.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.007
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicWater-Energy-Food Nexus StudiesFrench-language works237,207