Flood-resilient governance in Okanagan valley of British Columbia: current practices and future directives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The governance of flood resilience comprises an array of policy instruments that can be applied to reduce damages and risks to the communities. Policy instruments available at the local level tend to have the greatest impact on communities’ ability to absorb shock and resume normal operation. This study is the first attempt to analyze policy instruments and regulations guiding the progression of flood resilience measures in the Okanagan Valley, British Columbia. It aims to offer recommendations specific to the local context and identify the best practices to improve flood resilience of the communities. Therefore, the study adopted a multistage methodology including literature review, stakeholder consultations with the organizations (consisting of municipalities, regional districts, and First Nations), and quantitative analysis using present/absent criteria to measure prevalence of given indicators and five flood resilience classes. The results suggest that the flood resilience policies and strategies of 22 organizations in the Okanagan valley are predominantly focused on flood preparation and mitigation, whereas policies related to during and post-flood management are still in infancy and do not offer satisfactory support. Notably, some organizations are proactive in recognizing looming flood risks, thus enacting essential policy measures to strengthen resilience. These results further highlight that these organizations have focused on a variety of measures to improve resilience, such as spatial planning, building construction setbacks, enhancing natural environment, protecting riparian areas, and stormwater management. As well, current flood-resilient practices by the Prairies (Calgary) paved the way for how both regions can learn from each other. The study sheds light on broader takeaways of what the findings of this study mean for other world regions. The study results are of great importance to the organizations across the Okanagan Valley as they lay the groundwork for resource mobilization to achieve flood resilience and sustainability.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".