Rethinking Responses to Coastal Problems: An Analysis of the Opportunities and Constraints for Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research challenged popular assumptions that Canadian coastal environments remain relatively un-impacted by human activities, and that current practices in coastal management are sufficient to ensure sustainability of coastal resources and communities. Using a systematic analysis of the literature, the performance of integrated coastal management, as reported for other nations, was examined, and shared impediments to progress were identified. Drawing from these insights, it was determined that past and current efforts to implement integrated management of the coasts in Canada have encountered similar constraints. \n\nAn intensive review of state of the coast information in Canada was conducted, including an assessment of the indicators used to monitor change in coastal environments and coastal communities. The research concluded that there was insufficient information to support expectations that Canada’s coastal environments remain un-impacted. \n\nInformation on actual conditions on the Atlantic coastal of Nova Scotia was supplemented with new research on the potential linkages between changing land cover and pressures on coastal receiving environments. Using geospatial technology and field investigations in local water quality, land cover ratios in primary watersheds were compared to nutrient concentrations in coastal waters. Working at a coarse landscape scale of data, in some embayments potential linkages were identified between reduced forest cover and increased nitrogen levels in rivers and bays. The research findings were also applied to the development of two practical tools for use in negotiated land use planning. To avoid adverse effects to coastal receiving waters, the GreenField Ratio proposes maximum and minimum thresholds for land cover types within primary watersheds. The Coastal Sensitivity Rating facilitates an improved understanding of the cumulative factors affecting the vulnerability of coastal ecosystems to impact. \n\nResponding to the challenges faced by current initiatives in coastal management, the research proposes an alternative approach for Canada that does not require integration of coastal authorities. As outlined, the CoastWORKS framework relies on collaborative efforts within existing institutional and community organizations to achieve needed change in policy and practice. CoastWORKS defines coastal landscapes, sets principles to guide action, establishes a list of priority goals, and can be accomplished through individual local actions and collaborative governance.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".