MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117117194 · doi:10.3390/su18010069

Implementation of a Participatory Design Approach to the Development of a Sustainability Decision Support Tool for Canadian Egg Farmers

2025· article· en· W7117117194 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Vivek Arulnathan, Eric Li, Nathan Pelletier

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSustainabilityDecision support systemCarbon footprintIncentiveProcess (computing)Participatory designCitizen journalismFocus group

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The National Environmental Sustainability and Technology Tool (NESTT) is an online sustainability assessment and decision support tool developed for Canadian egg farmers in two phases—Lite NESTT and Full NESTT. To ensure that users (egg farmers) have a say in its design and development, and to foster a sense of ownership of the tool, a participatory design process was implemented in the development of NESTT. Specifically, a four-step participatory design process was adopted for this study with two discovery phases. The pre-launch discovery survey diagnosing use situations resulted in Lite NESTT being focused primarily on resource use efficiency and productivity, prioritization of benchmarking, and defining the focus areas for the prototyping phase. In the prototyping phase, farmers were interviewed with renderings and mock-ups, and improvements related to user-centeredness, data security, aesthetic appeal, accessibility, and simplicity were achieved. Finally, the post-launch discovery phase helped in defining the new features for Full NESTT such as the implementation of carbon footprint assessments, information on funding opportunities, and fixing data input issues. This last phase also helped in identifying several long-term strategic options to consider for NESTT such as integration with other on-farm programs, integrating economic assessments and financial incentives into NESTT, and adding more customized, farm-level decision support features.

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)0.051
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.704
Threshold uncertainty score0.589

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0510.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicSustainable Agricultural Systems AnalysisFrench-language works237,207