MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408541235 · doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2025.107912

A flexible framework for species-based regional cumulative effects assessments to support offshore wind energy planning and management

2025· article· en· W4408541235 on OpenAlex
Megan C. Ferguson, Kathryn A. Williams, M. Wing Goodale, Evan M. Adams, Paul Knaga, Katrien A. Kingdon, Stephanie Avery‐Gomm

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Impact Assessment Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Acceptance of Renewable Energy
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersFisheries and Oceans CanadaEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsOffshore wind powerSubmarine pipelineEnvironmental resource managementCumulative effectsEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental planningMarine engineeringWind powerEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Offshore wind energy development (OWED) is pivotal for renewable energy transition and climate resiliency. However, OWED activities may negatively affect wildlife, contributing to cumulative effects (CE) from human activities and natural processes. Cumulative effects assessments (CEAs) are vital for informed planning and management of OWED activities during regional assessment, site selection, and site evaluation phases. To reduce impacts on wildlife, OWEDs should be sited in areas that avoid or minimize CE. We present a flexible, species-based framework to assess CE from OWED activities and other pressures, supporting decision-making in early planning phases. The framework uses a species-based approach, applicable to various wildlife receptors (i.e., species or populations), and adapts to available information on ecology, socioeconomics, and pressures. The analytical strategy uses a CE metric to indicate the presence or magnitude of effects from all pressures on receptors. Spatially explicit optimization methods identify OWED site configurations that minimize a CE metric. The framework accommodates alternative pressure scenarios that include foreseeable future human activities and natural processes and can explore the sensitivity of the results to uncertain parameters. Given sufficient spatial information on receptor density, pressure magnitude, and cause-effect pathways, the spatial optimization algorithm can find solutions that minimize species- or population-level impacts from CE. If this ideal standard cannot be achieved due to information gaps, alternative metrics may be used to inform the immediate decision-making process. This framework offers a practical approach for balancing renewable energy goals with wildlife conservation, even when information is incomplete. • Step-by-step framework for cumulative effects assessment on any wildlife species or population. • Regional approach adaptable to diverse species and pressure data types. • Spatial optimization identifies offshore wind site configurations minimizing impacts. • Accommodates alternative scenarios, exploring sensitivity to uncertain parameters. • Standardized metrics enable consistent and comparable cumulative effects assessments.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.772
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.395 · 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