MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7095696117

1 Environmental Impact Assessment Made in the North

2014· article· en· W7095696117 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmacological Effects and Toxicity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental impact assessmentResource (disambiguation)Impact assessmentEnvironmental impact statementWildlifeVariety (cybernetics)Key (lock)Strategic environmental assessment
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The adaptation of EIA process to suit regional interests and cultures has led to a variety of approaches to EIA worldwide. A particularly interesting example of this is the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act (MVRMA), which provides a unique regulatory and impact assessment regime in the Mackenzie Valley in Canada’s North. Based on land claim agreements between Aboriginal groups and the Canadian government, it creates an integrated system for resource management. Key features include Aboriginal co-management and decision making by administrative tribunals. EIA under the MVRMA has an unusually broad definition of impact on the environment, to include biophysical impacts and direct impacts on social, cultural, and heritage resources as well as on wildlife harvesting. The Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board – the main instrument for Environmental Assessment and Environmental Impact Review – has now had four years of experience with this ‘made in the north ’ EIA process. Key elements of the MVRMA are described using a case study to show how the Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board is implementing these key elements in EIA practice. The presentation will also highlight some of the more interesting differences between the MVRMA approach to EIA and the approach of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, which applies to the rest of Canada.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.484
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.323 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPharmacological Effects and Toxicity StudiesFrench-language works237,207