MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412637003 · doi:10.3390/cli13080157

Differences in Perceived Future Impacts of Climate Change on the Workforce Among Residents of British Columbia

2025· article· en· W4412637003 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

VenueClimate · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsAIDS VancouverUniversity of TorontoSimon Fraser UniversityAthabasca UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsWorkforceClimate changeGeographyBusinessEnvironmental planningPsychologyEnvironmental scienceSocioeconomicsEnvironmental resource managementEconomic growthSociologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Certain industries will bear a disproportionate share of the burden of climate change. Climate change risk perceptions can impact workers’ mental health and well-being; increased climate change risk perceptions are also associated with more favourable adaptive attitudes. It is, therefore, important to understand whether climate risk perceptions differ across workers between industries. We conducted an online survey of British Columbians (16+) in 2021 using social media advertisements. Participants rated how likely they believed their industry (Natural Resources, Science, Art and Recreation, Education/Law/Government, Health, Management/Business, Manufacturing, Sales, Trades) would be affected by climate change (on a scale from “Very Unlikely” to “Very Likely”). Ordinal logistic regression examined the association between occupational category and perceived industry vulnerability, adjusting for socio-demographic factors. Among 877 participants, 66.1% of Natural Resources workers perceived it was very/somewhat likely that climate change would impact their industry; only those in Science (78.3%) and Art and Recreation (71.4%) occupations had higher percentages. In the adjusted model, compared to Natural Resources workers, respondents in other occupations, including those in Art and Recreation, Education/Law/Government, Management/Business, Manufacturing, Sales, and Trades, perceived significantly lower risk of climate change-related industry impacts. Industry-specific interventions are needed to increase awareness of and readiness for climate adaptation. Policymakers and industry leaders should prioritize sectoral differences when designing interventions to support climate resilience in the workforce.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.290
Teacher spread0.250 · 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