Understanding the role of information in marine policy development: establishing a coastal marine protected area in Nova Scotia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada has expanded its marine protected area (MPA) coverage in line with the Aichi Biodiversity Target of protecting 10% of its marine territory by 2020. In 2018, a consultation process was launched to designate an Area of Interest surrounding the Eastern Shore Islands area off the coast of Nova Scotia, as the potential 15th Oceans Act MPA in Canada ( DFO 2021a ). This region has a fraught history with external conservation interventions and, consequently, there was a significant level of local mistrust in the process. This study explored the role of information in the consultation process and how it interplayed with the historical context, political pressures, trust, and mistrust among stakeholders and rightsholders. Drawing on interviews, a detailed desktop analysis, and participant observation at consultation meetings, this paper describes what worked well and what could be improved with respect to the sources of information used and the channels through which stakeholders and rightsholders accessed it. This case study demonstrates that while preferences for information sources and channels are context specific and varied, they are inherently personal and influenced by shared histories, trust, and individual beliefs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".