MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4251370798 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14645337.v1

Policy options for addressing climate change, with a focus on ecosystem based adaptation: a case study of Guyana

2021· preprint· en· W4251370798 on OpenAlexaff
Ramesh Lilwah

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental resource managementClimate changeAdaptation (eye)Climate change adaptationFlooding (psychology)Government (linguistics)GeographyExtreme weatherEnvironmental planningCoastal floodEcosystemPopulationSea level riseEnvironmental scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Close to ninety percent of Guyana‟s population live along a low lying coastal plain, which is below sea level and very vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. While the national government has not yet developed a comprehensive climate policy, the potential impacts of climate change is considered in several sectoral policies, much of which emphasize mitigation, with little focus on adaptation. This research examined the current priorities for adaptation by a review of the policies within the natural resource sector to identify opportunities for adaptation, especially ecosystem based adaptation. A Diagnostic Adaptation Framework (DAF) was used to help identify approaches to address a given adaptation challenge with regards to needs, measures and options. A survey questionnaire was used to support the policy reviews and identified four key vulnerabilities: coastal floods; sea level rise; drought and extreme weather events. The application of the DAF in selecting an adaptation method suggests the need for more data on drought and extreme weather events. Coastal flooding is addressed, with recognized need for more data and public awareness for ecosystem based adaptation

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207