What are the roles of regional and local climate governance discourse and actors? Mediated climate change policy networks in Atlantic Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract As a global problem with diverse local and regional impacts, climate change is an inherently multilevel issue. Focusing on Atlantic Canada, we examine regional‐local dimensions of Canadian climate politics, drawing on data from six legacy newspapers (two national outlets, four regional outlets). Claims about the importance of provincial governments and municipalities have low levels of media visibility and are more salient in regional news outlets. However, federal, provincial, local government and political party sources articulate the ideas that regional and local actors have important roles to play in climate action. While these ideas are not highly visible, they are diffuse and high consensus across multilevel political, civil society, and other actors. Articulations of the importance of regional and local climate governance tend to connect this with issues of carbon pricing and other economic dimensions of climate governance. While a few municipal actors are highly visible in the mediated policy network, local policy actors tend to receive little visibility in either national or regional media spheres. By contrast, regional actors from provincial governments and political parties are among the top tier of actors in both national and provincial media. Our analysis highlights the significance of regional political arenas and actors that have received less attention than national governments or municipalities as sites of climate governance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".