MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3170196945 · doi:10.3390/su13116400

Maximizing Benefits to Nature and Society in Techno-Ecological Innovation for Water

2021· article· en· W3170196945 on OpenAlexafffund
Isaac Dekker, Shabnam Sharifyazd, Evans Batung, Kristian L. Dubrawski

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConstructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of Victoria
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsEcosystem servicesNaturalnessEnvironmental resource managementBusinessWork (physics)EcosystemEnvironmental economicsEcologyEnvironmental scienceEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nature-based solutions (NbS) build upon the proven contribution of well-managed and diverse ecosystems to enhance resilience of human societies. They include alternatives to techno-industrial solutions that aim to enhance social-ecological integration by providing simultaneous benefits to nature (such as biodiversity protection and green/blue space) and society (such as ecosystem services and climate resiliency). Yet, many NbS exhibit aspects of a technological or engineered ecosystem integrated into nature; this techno-ecological coupling has not been widely considered. In this work, our aim is to investigate this coupling through a high-level and cross-disciplinary analysis of NbS for water security (quantity, quality, and/or water-related risk) across the spectrums of naturalness, biota scale, and benefits to nature and society. Within the limitations of our conceptual analysis, we highlight the clear gap between “nature” and “nature-based” for most NbS. We present a preliminary framework for advancing innovation efforts in NbS towards maximizing benefits to both nature and society, and offer examples in biophysical innovation and innovation to maximize techno-ecological synergies (TES).

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicConstructed Wetlands for Wastewater TreatmentFrench-language works237,207