MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7034823858

“We're not just about building subdivisions. We can also do good things for the world”: Private Developers and Active Transportation Implementation in the Region of Waterloo

2022· dissertation· en· W7034823858 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2022
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAI and HR Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransportation planningUrban planningPublic transportPrivate transportPrivate sectorPopulationAction (physics)Public policyQualitative research
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the mid-19th century, Canada’s population has become more urbanized as Canadians choose to live in one of its major urban centres, such as the Region of Waterloo. As this trend continues into the 21st century, increased demands have been placed on urban transportation infrastructure and services. Development patterns in Canadian cities have been predominately car-oriented creating negative health impacts for citizens and hindering climate action goals. Active transportation, such as walking and bicycling, has been promoted as a way to improve public health and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Support for active transportation planning exists in current provincial, regional, and local planning policies. Private developers are an important part of transforming these policies into the built environment. However, previous research has shown that translating policies to practice has encountered barriers including processes that have not evolved to meet demands. Additionally, the role of private developers in implementing active transportation policies and collaboration methods between the public and private sectors remains a gap in current research. The purpose of this study was to explore the role private developers play in achieving the goals of the Region of Waterloo’s active transportation plans. An explanatory qualitative study design was chosen to explore the current planning framework and gather information through the use of document analysis and 17 key informant interviews from both the public and private sectors. The results show that there are four main barriers for private developers in achieving active transportation goals: excessive vehicle parking requirements, the lack of measures of success, the integration of active transportation initiatives into policy, and the limited methods of collaboration between the public and private sectors. This study presents recommendations to reduce or remove these barriers that can be applied by the Region of Waterloo and/or private developers to facilitate improved implementation of active transportation plans. Although focused on the Region of Waterloo, this research can be applied by planners in other Ontario municipalities to improve active transportation networks and contributes to the body of knowledge on the relationship between the public and private sectors in planning.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.609
Threshold uncertainty score0.777

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicAI and HR TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207