Water Policy Reform in Southern Alberta: An Advocacy Coalition Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
"Between 1995 and 2005, the government of Alberta undertook major reforms to the way water is governed in the arid southern part of the province. Among the most significant reforms was the imposition of moratoria on new water licenses, the introduction of a market for buying and selling existing water licenses, and the adoption of a "conservation holdback" mechanism for returning some licensed water to the environment. In Water Policy Reform in Southern Alberta, B. Timothy Heinmiller looks at how and why these (and other) reforms were adopted after nearly a century of stasis on water policy. The study analyses over three decades of policy decisions, beginning with the Progressive Conservative victory in 1972 to the last major policy reform in 2007. Applying the Advocacy Coalition Framework, process tracing methodologies, and content analysis, the author isolates, identifies and reconstructs the actors and processes that shaped over thirty years of water policy in Alberta. Water Policy Reform in Southern Alberta offers important insights on the management of natural resources and the factors influencing meaningful policy change."--
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 | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| 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".