MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4399163374 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2023-0486

Strategies to alleviate Canada’s impending construction labour shortage: a critical review

2024· review· en· W4399163374 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Nipun Kumarage, Haroon R. Mian, Piyaruwan Perera, Lahiru Silva, Janaka Y. Ruwanpura, Rehan Sadiq, Kasun Hewage

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsKelowna General HospitalUniversity of CalgarySAIT PolytechnicOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsEconomic shortageGovernment (linguistics)IndigenousBusinessConstruction industryEconomic growthEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada’s construction industry is on the brink of a significant labour shortage crisis. This paper critically reviews this impending challenge by analyzing various literature and statistical reports. It identifies the provinces most at risk for labour shortages. Furthermore, the study highlights the construction trades with the highest risk of labour shortages. Notably, this paper underscores the underrepresentation of certain groups within the construction industry, particularly women and indigenous youth. Building upon these findings, the paper proposes a comprehensive labour shortage mitigation strategy at three levels: labour and managerial, organizational, and provincial and state levels. This strategy offers a roadmap for implementing initiatives addressing the impending labour shortage. This research provides valuable insights for policymakers and government entities seeking to tackle the impending labour shortage in Canada’s construction sector. The proposed strategy can also serve as a model for other countries facing similar challenges on construction labour shortage.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.012
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering→Same topicOccupational Health and Safety Research→French-language works237,207→