Effectiveness of annexation explored through land use conflict within the rural-urban fringe in Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Municipal annexation is a complex process. It has significant social, legal and political implications to all of those involved in the restructuring of municipal borders. Driven by the desire to enhance an economic base, allow for the orderly growth of a region, prevent fragmentation of an existing metropolitan area or for political motivations, annexation is employed by one municipality to assume control over lands and residents of another. The focus of this research paper is to analyze the current social, legal and political processes behind urban expansion through annexation in an Albertan context. The decision-makers and stakeholders involved in the process are identified and the strengths and weaknesses of annexation as a tool for growth, planning and controlling land use are explored. Analyzing annexation through the lens of an existing proposal, the City of Edmonton's intent to annex 16,000 hectares from neighbouring Leduc County, the annexation process is explored in the context of urban conflict with its surrounding rural-urban fringe. This is achieved by framing the origins of the rural-urban fringe conflicts from a historical and legislative perspective, identifying how the existing decision making process can impact current proposals and providing an in depth analysis of the current annexation proposal as well as exploring examples from other municipalities across the province. Alternative frameworks to annexation are also explored to provide some thought into the effectiveness of other models for dealing with growth and boundary changes within a region. Annexation, much like the long slow build towards a geologic processes like an earthquake, the forthcoming change builds slowly, gains momentum, meets with resistance, and, suddenly, change occurs. Changing the geopolitical landscape forever. This paper explores not only the issues surrounding the urban annexation into rural-urban fringe lands, but also highlights how this process of changing jurisdictions affects land use and how this transition from rural to urban can affect the use, enjoyment or value of areas in the rural-urban fringe, an area already under significant and competing land use pressures due to their proximity to urban centres.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".