MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3196515681 · doi:10.1002/rhc3.12235

Wildfire governance in a changing world: Insights for policy learning and policy transfer

2021· article· en· W3196515681 on OpenAlexafffundabout
William Nikolakis, Emma Roberts

Bibliographic record

VenueRisk Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsVancouver Native Health SocietyPositive Living Society of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersVancouver Foundation
KeywordsCorporate governancePolicy transferContext (archaeology)IndigenousPolicy learningPolitical scienceEnvironmental planningPublic administrationEnvironmental resource managementBusinessGeographyEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Societies must learn to live with, and adapt to wildfire risk. Here we examine wildfire governance and policy in British Columbia (BC), Canada over the last two decades, to examine how policy lessons are drawn from wildfire events. We focus on independent reviews and their recommendations provided, lessons learned from abroad, and whether policy and governance has changed (or not). Jurisdictional and intercultural issues in BC's wildfire response are outlined in this paper, and opportunities for innovative solutions are examined. We then present a case study of the Tsilhqot'in Fire Management program to demonstrate how Indigenous Fire Management is being revitalized as a proactive solution to wildfire. Our intent is to reveal why policy learning and transfer from Indigenous peoples is increasing in this context, and we identify how this is occurring. Barriers to implementation are outlined, and implications for wildfire governance in BC and globally are discussed.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.739
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations50
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRisk Hazards & Crisis in Public PolicySame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207