MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7071862578

Turning The Soil: Urban Redevelopment And Soil Movement In Toronto

2018· other· en· W7071862578 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2018
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEnvironmental Justice and Health Disparities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRedevelopmentBrownfieldContaminated landUrban planningLand useSustainable developmentSubdivisionOrder (exchange)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this major paper is to determine whether Toronto's soil remediation, transport and redevelopment regime is sustainable - or whether unforeseen and dispersed factors will someday combine to form a disaster for the city's urban environment. In order to address this question, the paper first examines a history of the city's brownfields: In Toronto, brownfields are broadly known as vacant or underused properties that may have been contaminated by past land use, but which show potential for redevelopment. They are also major producers of both contaminated and clean fill, and the paper examines the policies which have shaped their definition, usage, and disposal. Following an examination of the state of the art in brownfield sciences in Ontario, Canada, and globally, the focus turns to the study of disasters. Taking cues from Barry Turner's seminal book in disaster studies Man-Made Disasters, a disaster is "an event, concentrated in time and space, which threatens a society or a relatively self-sufficient subdivision of a society with major unwanted consequences as a result of the collapse of precautions that had hitherto been culturally accepted as adequate." A situation in which construction-related soil stockpiles are depleted to the point that cost-effectiveness of importation comes into question, or in which rising prices cause an exodus of Toronto's building potential, can therefore be rightly termed disasters. The MP describes a generalized framework to identify disasters and the period of incubation that takes place beforehand. The heart of the MP is a collation of Records of Site Condition taken from the Ministry Of The Environment And Climate Change database over the thirteen years of its existence. RSCs provides protection for the land owner from regulatory orders and liability, but also include data on soil imported and exported from the property, and are currently one of the only accessible means by which to track soil movement in Toronto. Gathering hundreds of records, the MP proceeds to extract trends from the data over time. To wit, soil exportation has risen dramatically, soil importation and in-situ remediation has fallen, and site risk assessment (a technique allowing buried contaminants to be written off and remain onsite) has risen to compensate. Interviews of industry professionals from a variety of backgrounds were performed to glean their response to the information gathered above. The overall consensus from these interviews was a lack of surprise in the results displayed and a lack of concern regarding Toronto's so-called incubation period. When the results of the above sections and the interviews were slotted into the framework, that too confirmed that Toronto's soil regime is sustainable for the foreseeable future. However, it also brought to light other weaknesses in the regime, such as a lack of a soil tracking system for soils in Toronto save for a limited provision in the RSC program. The paper concludes by describing upcoming policy instruments due to be employed in the near future by the provincial government and not-for-profit actors, which will serve to further strengthen the system.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.394

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.182 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYork University Digital Library (York University)Same topicEnvironmental Justice and Health DisparitiesFrench-language works237,207