Public policy and water regulation : some examples from the Americas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Water supply and sanitation are essential for socioeconomic and environmental sustainability. The adequate provision of these services is full of complexities and involves a great many challenges. Growing population and economic activities, plus soaring energy generation, environmental concerns, and climate change will exert great pressures on water security. It is not surprising that water has climbed to the top of the political agenda. The requirement of appropriate public policies to deal with these challenges is self-evident. Sound water regulation is a major component of this design. The unfolding of water regulation, however, reveals a wide and complex kaleidoscope of affairs, which involve different actors, dimensions and spatial scales. Surface and groundwater provides another set of challenges in discussing water regulation. More particularly, transboundary waters – within and between countries – impose, in addition to technical challenges, the need for diplomatic skills in the handling of their issues and the proposal of solutions. This issue of Network Industries Quarterly (NIQ) is linked to the Public Policy and Water Regulation International Forum, which was organized by Tecnologico de Monterrey, the Water Center for Latin America and the Caribbean, and Cervecería Cuauhtémoc Moctezuma – Heineken México in May 2017. The Forum had an academic framework plus perspectives from practitioners working in the field of water regulation in Latin America. Other selected contributors were invited to complete this issue with its focus on the Americas. The papers on Canada and Texas are a reflection of this inclusion. The following are the themes included in this issue of NIQ: • Science, policy and management of groundwater in Canada; •Groundwater regulation in Texas; •Regulation of water and sanitation services in Latin America; •Incorporation of natural infrastructure in water management in Latin America; •The water guarantee fee in Mexico.
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 | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".