MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7073801545

Integrated management councils A conceptual model for ocean policy conflict management in Australia

2003· article· en· W7073801545 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUTAS Research Repository · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic Crystal and Fiber Optics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecentralizationCoastal managementProcess (computing)Integrated coastal zone managementConceptual modelConflict managementIntegrated business planningGovernment (linguistics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrated management is a central theme of Australia's Oceans Policy (AOP). Improving integration across sectors and jurisdictions has been identified in a number of Australian initiatives in coastal and marine policy developed in the past decade. These initiatives include the Regional Marine Planning process under AOP undertaken in 2000-02 and commitments to a National Coastal Policy made in 2002. These initiatives have highlighted the need for institutional arrangements that address these two key dimensions of integration in the Australian marine environment. This paper reviews Australian initiatives in ocean and coastal policy and draws on lessons from Canadian experience to propose Integrated Management Councils as a 'way forward' for integrated and adaptive management focusing on the decentralization of power and community participation in the decision-making process. © 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score0.777

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.231 · 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