Navigating the tides of change: community futures planning in Scots Bay, Nova Scotia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As rural coastal communities in Nova Scotia, Canada experience a downturn in resource-based industries, community-led development initiatives may lead to revitalization. Scots Bay, Nova Scotia is a small community located at the end of a provincial highway on the Bay of Fundy and home to approximately 200 full time residents and two busy Provincial Parks. The research uncovered that tensions have recently arisen in the community for a variety of reasons and by embarking on a participatory action research project with the residents of this close-knit coastal community, sources of this unease were uncovered. Tens of thousands of tourists bring more garbage and speeding traffic but very little economic benefits. Private development proposals demand time and energy from community members but provide no tangible, enforceable positive impacts. Skyrocketing real estate prices may benefit individuals but threaten the community’s long-held social cohesion with new residents and/or absentee owners. These tensions, combined with an aging population, a lack of rural services, and a sense of political disempowerment, make resident unease palpable. However, by uniquely using the two systems-based community development frameworks of Community Capitals and Three Horizons in conjunction, the project was able to identify how connections to this place and each other ground this community’s residents and find the strengths and assets to build future plans upon. Project participants were able to share concerns and preferences about the future and brainstorm potential solutions. With this information a futures-based Community Action Plan can be created which can help this rural coastal community chart a course on the tides of change. The futures-based process may also prove useful to other rural coastal communities that would like to create their own community-led development initiatives.KEYWORDS<br>Rural Community Development, Coastal Communities, Futures Planning, Community Capitals, Three Horizons, Community Action Planning, Rural Resiliency, Community-Led Development
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".