MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Strategic Environmental Assessment as a Tool to Develop Power in Transboundary Water Basin Settings

2013· book-chapter· en· W4237909867 on OpenAlexaff
Jakob Granit, R. Michael King, Raymond Noël

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2013
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransboundary Water Resource Management
Canadian institutionsSNC-Lavalin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydropowerStrategic environmental assessmentContext (archaeology)Environmental planningPrivate sectorProcess (computing)Environmental resource managementRiparian zoneInvestment (military)BusinessStructural basinEnvironmental impact assessmentEngineeringPolitical scienceGeographyEnvironmental scienceComputer sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a generic consultative process for undertaking Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEA) in a transboundary river basin context to bring up front environmental and social issues of major development programs into the transboundary planning, project development and investment finance processes. The paper demonstrates through an analysis of two case studies from the Nile Basin in East and North Africa how an SEA approach with a focus on hydropower development is a transparent pre-investment tool that allows for consensus building in support of transboundary and regional strategic decision making and integration. Further, it demonstrates how an SEA can guide public and private sector investors seeking to develop the power sector in general and hydropower options in particular by allowing for a first level understanding of challenges and opportunities of power development and the development scenarios preferred by riparian governments.

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)0.009
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.010
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.241 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicTransboundary Water Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207