Restoring legitimacy to environmental governance in Manitoba: the need for meaningful public participation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis uses the concept of legitimacy, a measure of the public’s support of government operations, as a lens through which to approach environmental legal reform in Canada. An analysis of the legitimacy of Manitoba’s environmental regulatory regime as it pertains to the hydroelectric industry is undertaken, with an emphasis on opportunities for public participation. As a result, it is suggested that environmental governance in Manitoba has suffered a significant loss of legitimacy. This indicates that environmental reforms are needed to support meaningful public participation. Based on the components of meaningful public participation recognized by Canadian legal scholars, legal reforms are identified that could be enacted in Manitoba to restore lost legitimacy. It is suggested that the most effective means of restoring legitimacy would be to focus on reforms that clarify the environmental obligations of government and allow citizens to more meaningfully participate in the enforcement and review of environmental protection measures.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it