MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405894658 · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103984

“Are you prepared or not?”: An intersectional analysis of a community-engaged climate change vulnerability assessment and adaptation planning process with Tsáá? Ché Ne Dane

2024· article· en· W4405894658 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

VenueEnvironmental Science & Policy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClimate Change, Adaptation, Migration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)Adaptation (eye)Vulnerability assessmentClimate change adaptationClimate changeProcess (computing)Environmental resource managementEnvironmental planningProcess managementComputer scienceBusinessEnvironmental sciencePsychologySocial psychologyPsychological resilienceComputer securityOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intersectional analyses of climate hazards have demonstrated that social dimensions play important roles in how people experience and respond to climate change and extreme weather events. Despite these insights, intersectional scholarship has faced criticism around its theoretical orientation and the resulting challenges of doing applied intersectional research to understand social dimensions of climate change. This article demonstrates the value of an intersectional feminist lens to community-level planning for climate change. Working with an Indigenous community in northern British Columbia, Canada, the research revealed that social dimensions including culture, age, gender, and spirituality combined in distinct and various ways to influence how the community framed the problem of climate change, expressed agency, understood impacts and vulnerability, and proposed responses. Attending to these dimensions throughout a community-engaged climate change vulnerability assessment and adaptation planning process illuminated differences among groups, while also exposing shared goals and areas of overlap among diverse perspectives and worldviews. Beyond exposing commonalities, consistent consideration of social dimensions also enhanced local adaptive capacity and shaped the planning and decision-making process by informing project framing and design, methods selection and participant recruitment, and developing meaningful outputs. We use this evidence to demonstrate the practical application of an intersectional lens and to explain how embedding consideration of social dimensions within climate change vulnerability assessment and adaptation planning processes can produce better contextualization, greater buy-in, and more meaningful outcomes for communities across Canada and beyond. • We apply an intersectional feminist lens to community-level climate change planning. • Key relevant social dimensions included culture, age, gender, and spirituality. • Attention to social dimensions helps build local adaptive capacity. • We offer an example of how intersectionality theory can be applied in practice.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.549
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.204
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.217 · 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