Historical trends of ecosystem services in Canada, 1911-2011
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ecosystem services (ES) refer to the flow of ecosystem benefits to people, and are classified as either provisioning, cultural, or regulating services.Canadian landscapes have been transformed by a land-use history that often prioritized provisioning services, at the expense of regulating and cultural services.Although the latest scholarship acknowledges the importance of assessing historical legacies to understand current ecosystem functioning, most studies are time and space static.This thesis considers a century of Canadian ecological history (15 time steps from 1911-2011) at a national scale and county-level resolution (n=293 in 2011).Data were obtained from a variety of archival sources including the Canadian Census of Agriculture, The Atlas of Canada Protected Areas data, and Parks Canada visitation records, and were used to quantify 16 ES.Historical county boundary maps were used to standardize the data relative to the changes of boundaries though time, and to produce a series of maps of ES bundles.A Kmeans analysis and mapping were used to assess changes in the composition and distribution of ES bundles.Finally, these long-term dynamics were evaluated qualitatively, through the lens of an historian.The political climate and social attitudes towards management and conservation were narrated in order to interpret quantitative trends, and to provide a more complete picture of ecological development during the twentieth century.Overall, there was an increase in the number and complexity of ES bundles over time, and a trend towards regional specialization.Bundles generally transitioned according to three trends: (1) relatively unproductive bundles transitioning into service provisioning, (2) bundles transitioning to include a new dominant service, and (3) bundles that were replaced by different functional compositions entirely.Ninety-six percent of counties (n=273) experienced a transition in bundles at least once over the one hundred-year period.Eastern Canada was shown to be more dynamic in terms of the number of bundle transitions than other parts of Canada.Ultimately, the perspective provided by such a long history demonstrates the dynamism of ES in response to management decisions and the interactions between multiple ES and socio-political variables.Thank-you for your guidance, encouragement, and inspiration over the last two years, for your willingness to explore history, and for believing in me as a scientist.I could not have asked for a more compassionate supervisor.You made my Master's experience a true joy.Thank-you to my co-supervisor, Dr. Benjamin Forest for his insights during committee meetings, thoughtful
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".