A network perspective on multi-scale water governance in the Lake Champlain Basin, Vermont
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prevalence and persistence of harmful cyanobacterial blooms demonstrate the importance of governance systems that effectively engage with many actors to address nonpoint pollution from a variety of sources across multiple spatial domains. Although the importance of social-ecological alignment on effective governance is increasingly clear, governance systems often evolve incrementally and in a manner that fails to adequately align resources and governance networks with biophysical structures, processes, and legacies. Through a survey of water governance actors in the Lake Champlain Basin, we map the structure of the water governance network and identify the key information brokers, flows of resources, and ongoing collaborative partnerships. We measure cross-scale and within-scale linkages to characterize the degree of coordination across space and scale using exponential random graph models, finding distinct differences in governance activities by mode of coordination. We also show that coordination in the system is largely a function of geographic proximity and shared issues of concern, demonstrating the importance of multidimensional, social-ecological perspectives in the collaborative governance of freshwater systems. Specific to the Lake Champlain Basin, our findings suggest that as the transformation of the governance system proceeds, cross-scale and inter-watershed coordination must be regularized to maintain learning and innovation across the system as it pursues its clean water goals.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".