MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413841177 · doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2025.105783

Host community logistics and advanced preparation: Insights from wildfire evacuations in Alberta

2025· article· en· W4413841177 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Douglas Yearwood, Tara K. McGee, Stephen D. Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsHost (biology)EngineeringTransport engineeringBusinessEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the experiences of three host communities in Alberta involved in supporting and accommodating evacuees during the record 2023 wildfire season in Canada. Exploring host community service provision is a small but important part of a growing body of research that attempts to understand challenges faced by hosts when evacuations take place. Wildfire displacements can have long-lasting and deep social impacts, and the ability of host communities’ to implement socially aware and holistic emergency management plans and coordinate with key stakeholders is an important area of inquiry. When accommodating evacuees, hosts may face social services strains, uncertainties regarding cost recovery, and traffic and hospitality congestion. As such, this paper deploys case study methods seeking answers to three research questions stemming from the 2023 Alberta Wildfires: 1) How well prepared were communities to host evacuees?; 2) What challenges did they encounter?; and 3) What lessons can be learned from their experiences? Semi-structured interviews (n=27) across the three cases of High Level, Whitecourt, and Hinton revealed important insights regarding community preparedness, community-specific challenges, and cross-cutting lessons learned. Major findings demonstrate the importance of intercommunity coordination, rapid needs assessments of incoming evacuees, planning efforts to provide adequate accommodations, and increased awareness around disaster relief programs and incident command training.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.251

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0220.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Disaster Risk ReductionSame topicDisaster Management and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207