MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7113025946

Flood prevention benefits provided by Canadian natural ecosystems

2024· other· W7113025946 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) · 2024
Typeother
Language
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlood mythEcosystemSafeguardingNatural (archaeology)PopulationFlooding (psychology)Natural disasterFloodplainEcosystem servicesSituated
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Repository accompanying the article: Flood prevention benefits provided by Canadian natural ecosystems. The escalating impacts of climate change have heightened concerns about the frequency and severity of natural disasters, particularly extreme flooding events. Future projections underscore the necessity for innovative flood prevention strategies, including broad-scale nature-based solutions. Here, we present the first comprehensive assessment of the flood prevention benefits provided by Canadian natural ecosystems and identify key areas crucial for human well-being. Using spatially explicit modeling, we (1) evaluated the potential runoff retention by natural ecosystems and (2) identified downstream urban and agricultural areas critically dependent on these natural benefits, particularly those in floodplains and close proximity to upstream natural ecosystems. The natural ecosystems within the top 5 % of sub-basins, representing regions with a high priority for conservation practices aimed at flood prevention, play a crucial role in safeguarding approximately 54 % (~6,000 km2) of the total built-up area and 74 % (~16,900 km2) of the total cropland situated within floodplains. Additionally, they are positioned upstream of floodplain-based urban zones belonging to 358 population centers, directly benefiting 3.7 million people (~10 % of the Canadian population) and indirectly benefiting almost 20.1 million people (~56 % of the Canadian population). Moreover, among Canada’s 5.2 million km2 of flood-preventing natural ecosystems, we identified a small fraction (10 %) whose loss or degradation would result in a significant (more than 50 %) increase in runoff. Several of these crucial ecosystems are situated in less populated northern regions, where local governments might want to incentivize conservation initiatives to support flood prevention. Our research underscores the imperative to integrate nature-based solutions into national strategies that consider the results of spatial planning analyses. Establishing other effective area-based conservation measures in the priority regions highlighted in this study can contribute towards reaching current ambitious environmental goals and provide critical flood prevention benefits. Additionally, our methods are transferable to other regions worldwide, leveraging globally available datasets and ensuring computational feasibility.

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)0.002
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 score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.195

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0580.003

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOSF Preprints (OSF Preprints)→French-language works237,207→