MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386996521 · doi:10.3390/su151914105

Partnering for Climate Resilience: Exploring the Maturity of Private-Sector Efforts in the Great Lakes Region

2023· article· en· W4386996521 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lisa Greenwood, Vicki Lin, Yewande S. Abraham, Jennifer Schneider

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)Private sectorClimate changePsychological resilienceResilience (materials science)Maturity (psychological)BusinessEnvironmental resource managementPublic sectorEnvironmental planningExtreme weatherNatural resource economicsGeographyEconomic growthPolitical scienceEconomyEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Communities and businesses continue to experience the effects of climate change as global temperatures rise and extreme weather events become more frequent. In the United States (US), the public sector has traditionally been responsible for mitigating these risks; however, engaging the private sector is crucial, given industrial impacts on and vulnerability to climate change. Private-sector mitigation and adaptation efforts are critical in the Great Lakes Region due to aging infrastructure as well as its economic, environmental, and political importance in the US and Canada. This study explores private-sector resilience efforts in three Great Lakes cities to identify opportunities and trends that could inform climate resilience strategies in the region. Climate-related commitments and actions of nine major firms in Toronto, Chicago, and Cleveland are evaluated in relation to seven climate resilience criteria on a five-level maturity scale from January to May 2022. The results indicate a moderate level of maturity, with efforts mainly at facility and community levels of engagement. Overall, this study suggests that major firms participate in climate resilience efforts, but to a limited extent, and may have varying priorities that affect the initiatives they pursue. This study could contribute to advancing climate resilience efforts in the public and private sectors from regional to global levels.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207