MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415586690 · doi:10.21083/crrf.v29i1.7748

Regional Approachesto Drinking Water Management: Implications for Rural NewfoundlandandLabrador

2025· article· W4415586690 on OpenAlexaffabout
Vincent Kuuteryiri Chireh

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Rural Revitalization Foundation · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Policies and Emissions
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityWater securityCorporate governanceWater supplyWater qualityGovernment (linguistics)Regionalism (politics)Rural area

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Though water appears abundantly available the world over, its access, availability, quality and sustainability cannot be assured when its management is deficient. There are serious challenges with drinking water management in rural Canada in aspects such as high cost of building and operating treatment plants, maintenance of distribution infrastructure, inadequate sourcecwater protection, and the need for greater capacity building, water conservation, and governance improvements These challenges are potential threats to the future sustainable supply of good quality drinking water to these rural communities and their residents. Weak governance structures and weak capacity in complying with drinking water regulations in many rural areas have implications for drinking water security across Canada. Many solutions have been suggested, with a move towards regionalism gaining grounds in recent years. Building on previous work, this research seeks to unearth areas of potential regionalist solutions in drinking water management and governance. The research therefore seeks to ascertain aspects of the drinking water systems that can be delivered regionally; scale of regionalism that can be applied; how unique needs, geographical proximity or other criteria can influence regionalism among others and the benefits that can be derived from adopting regionalist approaches. Secondary sources such as journal articles, books, government papers, media publications, case studies and internet search will be used to provide data to be analyzed through NVivo. The review is useful in providing important inputs to interested actors in rural drinking water to inform policy decisions on water governance.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.567

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designObservational
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Rural Revitalization FoundationSame topicEnvironmental Policies and EmissionsFrench-language works237,207