MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mitigating natural disasters: The role of eco-ethics

2004· article· en· W4206743446 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Etkin, Ingrid Leman Stefanovic

Bibliographic record

VenueEkistics and the new habitat · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSafeguardingExecutive directorNatural disasterLibrary scienceNatural hazardPolitical scienceEnvironmental studiesManagementEngineeringSociologyGeographyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

David Etkin currently serves as Coordinator of the Program on Emergency Management at York University, Toronto, Canada. He worked for Environment Canada from 1977 to 2005, collaborating on teaching and research projects over the last ten years with members of the Institute for Environmental Studies at the University of Toronto. His area of expertise is natural hazards and disasters. He has 55 publications to his credit, 23 of which are in peer-reviewed journals. He has participated in several international projects dealing with disaster studies, and was Principal Investigator on the Canadian Natural Hazards Project.
 Ingrid Leman Stefanovic is Director, Centre for Environment, at the University of Toronto and a former member of the Executive Council of the World Society for Ekistics. Her area of teaching and research is environmental philosophy, with a special interest in how values and perceptions affect environmental decision making. Her most recent book is entitled Safeguarding Our Common Future: Rethinking Sustainable Development (SUNY, 2000). Contact Professor Stefanovic at Centre for Environment, University of Toronto, 33 Willcocks Street, Toronto, Ontario.M5S 3E8 or email ingrid.stefanovic@utoronto.ca. The text that followsis a slightly edited version of a paper published in Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, vol. 10, pp. 467-490 (Springer, 2005).

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.509
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.264 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEkistics and the new habitatSame topicDisaster Management and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207