Prospecting regenerative design and development: an emerging sustainability paradigm for the Canada Lands Company? [CFB Calgary projects - Garrison Woods and Currie Barracks]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ecological and social challenges have tested the ability of conventional land development as a route to a sustainable future. Early sustainability paradigms have been part of the response towards better development practices, but many critics have argued that more needs to be done – to move beyond essentially degenerative sustainability paradigms towards more explicitly regenerative sustainability paradigms. This practicum examines the Canada Lands Company (CLC) development of its CFB Calgary properties (Garrison Woods and Currie Barracks) to explore the progress around sustainability paradigms and to prospect the case for Regenerative Design and Development (RD+D) as a new operative worldview governing CLC’s planning and land development practices. A literature review and a series of focused interviews with key informants were the main research methods, within the context of the case study set, to pursue a series of research questions, culminating with: How – and in what ways, with what rationale – could RD+D be considered an appropriate new worldview for CLC’s next generation of leading-edge-seeking projects? What are its prospects? It was generally concluded that RD+D is a viable, emerging sustainability approach for CLC. More specifically, on the basis of this research, CFB Calgary was assessed as having been developed with what may now be defined as a green approach – implicitly sustainable, in aspiration at least; the next progression on this would involve a more explicit sustainable approach, then restorative, all laying the ground for a potentially regenerative approach. If RD+D had been the operative worldview during inception and execution of CFB Calgary, there would almost certainly have been a very different process and outcome. However, it would probably require a dedicated champion of RD+D, within CLC, for this post-conventional sustainability approach to be seriously considered. The Company’s track record – as an innovative land developer – encourages the view that RD+D could well be a good fit – as a potential next-generation planning and development approach.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".