Sustainability, Citizen Participation, and City Governance: Multidisciplinary Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The inaction of nation states and international bodies has posed significant risks to the environment. By contrast, cities are sites of action and innovation. In Sustainability, Citizen Participation, and City Governance, contributors researching in the areas of law, urban planning, geography, and philosophy identify approaches for tackling many of the most challenging environmental problems facing cities today. Sustainability, Citizen Participation, and City Governance facilitates two strands of dialogue about climate change. First, it integrates legal perspectives into policy debates about urban sustainability and governance, from which law has typically stood apart. Second, it brings case studies from Quebec into a rare conversation with examples drawn from elsewhere in Canada. The collection proposes humane and inclusive processes for arriving at effective policy outcomes. Some chapters examine governance mechanisms that reconcile clashes of incommensurable values and resolve conflicts about collective interests. Other chapters provide platforms for social movements that have faced obstacles to communicating to a broad public. The collection’s proposals respond to drastic changes in urban environments. Some changes are imminent. Others are upon us already. All threaten the present and future well-being of urban communities. Sustainability, Citizen Participation, and City Governance examines sustainable development challenges in law, planning, and policy, and offers municipal actors strategies for overcoming them. [From Sustainability, Citizen Participation, and City Governance - University of Toronto Press]
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.069 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.026 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".