MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403126084 · doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2024.101670

Flood prevention benefits provided by Canadian natural ecosystems

2024· article· en· W4403126084 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEcosystem Services · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil erosion and sediment transport
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill UniversityMemorial University of NewfoundlandCarleton UniversityNature Conservancy of Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFlood mythEcosystemNatural (archaeology)Ecosystem servicesBusinessNatural resource economicsEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental planningGeographyEcologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Assessment of Canadian natural ecosystems reveals key flood prevention benefits. • Key ecosystems safeguard 54% of built-up areas and 74% of cropland in floodplains. • Identified areas directly benefit 3.7 million and indirectly benefit 20.1 million Canadians. • Found 10% of flood-preventing ecosystems whose loss would significantly increase runoff. • Integration of nature-based solutions into national strategies is essential for flood prevention. The escalating impacts of climate change have heightened concerns about the frequency and severity of natural disasters, particularly extreme flooding events. Future projections underscore the necessity for innovative flood prevention strategies, including broad-scale nature-based solutions. Here, we present the first comprehensive assessment of the flood prevention benefits provided by Canadian natural ecosystems and identify key areas crucial for human well-being. Using spatially explicit modeling, we (1) evaluated the potential runoff retention by natural ecosystems and (2) identified downstream urban and agricultural areas critically dependent on these natural benefits, particularly those in floodplains and close proximity to upstream natural ecosystems. The natural ecosystems within the top 5 % of sub-basins, representing regions with a high priority for conservation practices aimed at flood prevention, play a crucial role in safeguarding approximately 54 % (∼6,000 km 2 ) of the total built-up area and 74 % (∼16,900 km2) of the total cropland situated within floodplains. Additionally, they are positioned upstream of floodplain-based urban zones belonging to 358 population centers, directly benefiting 3.7 million people (∼10 % of the Canadian population) and indirectly benefiting almost 20.1 million people (∼56 % of the Canadian population). Moreover, among Canada’s 5.2 million km 2 of flood-preventing natural ecosystems, we identified a small fraction (10 %) whose loss or degradation would result in a significant (>50 %) increase in runoff. Several of these crucial ecosystems are situated in less populated northern regions, where local governments might want to incentivize conservation initiatives to support flood prevention. Our research underscores the imperative to integrate nature-based solutions into national strategies that consider the results of spatial planning analyses. Establishing other effective area-based conservation measures in the priority regions highlighted in this study can contribute towards reaching current ambitious environmental goals and provide critical flood prevention benefits. Additionally, our methods are transferable to other regions worldwide, leveraging globally available datasets and ensuring computational feasibility.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.891
Threshold uncertainty score0.950

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.185 · 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