MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415841602 · doi:10.1177/0739456x251372895

Resilience planning in Canada: An Analysis of Resilience in Local Governments’ Strategic Land Use Planning Documents

2025· article· en· W4415841602 on OpenAlexaffabout
Laura Beattie, Andréanne Doyon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Planning Education and Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainability and Climate Change Governance
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperationalizationResilience (materials science)PopularityLand-use planningLand useStrategic planningVulnerability (computing)Local planning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resilience planning has grown in popularity as it offers opportunities to address complex challenges faced by cities; however, operationalizing resilience proves to be difficult. Through a comprehensive policy analysis of 171 Canadian local governments’ strategic planning documents, this research aims to understand how resilience is incorporated into plans. Results indicate that there are many approaches to meaningfully incorporate resilience. Within the Canadian context, local governments also have the opportunity to customize inclusions of resilience to be place-based and use opportunities to be creative.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.804

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 teacher head, 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 venueJournal of Planning Education and ResearchSame topicSustainability and Climate Change GovernanceFrench-language works237,207