Environmentalism and land-use planning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation considers the research question: Can land-use planning attain the goals of environmentalism? The research question instigates the development of models for environmentalism and land-use planning, test of their congruence, analysis of institutional means to join them, case study of the specific method of lifestyle zoning for Nature conservation, international comparisons, and suggestions for the implementation of the ideology of environmentalism by the techniques of land-use planning. An applied planning orientation guides methods from political science, sociology, anthropology and geography to structure the theoretical and empirical studies. Comparison among the industrially advanced anglophone countries of Australia, Canada, Great Britain and the United States of America enable cross-cultural insight into environmentalism, land-use planning, and measures for the protection of dedicated areas. The evaluation of the fit between the environmentalism and land-use planning, considers their origins, values, operating principals, programs and problems. This social-policy analysis reveals substantial concurrence, particularly regarding concern for the unintended consequences of technical and social policies, human interaction with the physical environment, care in resource use, urban and Nature conservation, the importance of open space, rational forethought, the long-term, regional view, environmental diversity, government intervention, need for co-ordination in government, use of experts, citizen participation, self-actualization, equity, and generic as well as substantive definition of the fields by their supporters. The ideological outline of contemporary environmental planning provides a framework for detailed analysis of the case study of an "Environmental Living Zone" on the fringe of urban Melbourne, Australia. Historical research, interpretation of planning schemes, maps and aerial photographs, interviews, and observation provided insight into the social and environmental factors in residential conservation. From the empirical and theoretical analyses, the work suggests implications for practitioners- and directions for further research.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".