Public participation in the conservation and management of canal cultural heritage worldwide: a case study of the Rideau Canal and Erie Canal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To shed light on the conservation and management of canal cultural heritage worldwide, this paper examines the relevant experience and implications acquired from the US Erie Canal and Canadian Rideau Canal from the perspective of public participation in terms of four dimensions: subject, concept, content, and horizon. The study findings are fourfold: first, the factors such as residents of the Heritage Corridor, non-governmental organizations, non-profit enterprises, private forces, tourists, and individual volunteers constitute the subject of public participation. Second, both sides concur that extensive public involvement is the driving force behind the success of cultural heritage conservation and management. This wide involvement is conducive to promoting education and shaping national identity. Third, for both sides, public participation is integral to the Heritage Corridor project management plan, spanning the entire process of drafting, revising, implementing, and evaluating. Finally, both sides have been leveraging modern information technology and social media, such as web home pages, databases, virtual discussions, Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, to promote public participation, and achieving double the results with half the effort. The implications of the findings lie in four aspects: first, the canal community committees assume leadership responsibilities with relevant laws and regulations in place as legal backup; second, both the US and Canadian sides take effective measures to organize, recognize, and appreciate participants; third, they demonstrate the spirit of democratic participation and exemplary deliberation throughout the cultural heritage canal conservation and management process; and finally, both sides maximize the use of modern information technologies for efficient conservation and management of their respective Canal Cultural Heritage Corridors.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".