Potential Socioeconomic Outcomes of a Proposed Diversion from the Great Lakes Basin to the Midwest \nand Central Plains of the USA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A diversion of freshwater from the USA and Canadian governed Great Lakes Basin (GLB) to the Midwest and Central Plains (MCP) of the USA has long been a proposed ecological intervention in addressing continuing water scarcity. Previous research has been conducted on the potential environmental effects of such a diversion leading to the enactment of regulations in an attempt to prohibit new or increasing existing diversions. However, a gap remains in literature regarding potential socioeconomic outcomes. Despite limited regulations, the importance of freshwater supply particularly in the MCP area suggests that a diversion remains a potential option. This study examined potential socioeconomic outcomes of a diversion from the GLB to the MCP through a literature review with reference to eco-socialism theory and political ecology perspectives and uncovered a central theme of valuation. Furthermore it evaluated current, official documents on diversions from the GLB to determine if they adequately protect against adverse socioeconomic impacts with a specific focus on compliance. \nFindings identified that socioeconomic outcomes will differ between classes, with the most negative effects felt by those economically disadvantaged. An evaluation of current official documents governing diversions from the GLB indicated inadequate protection against adverse socioeconomic outcomes, specifically pertaining to issues around the transboundary nature of the basin system and insufficient enforcement measures. Conclusions and recommendations from this study should be used by policy makers in future decision making processes regarding diversions from the GLB.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".