Environmental Management System (EMS) for Military Activities – Strategies and Policies for American, Canadian, Brazilian and NATO Armies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increasing of demand from environmental legislation and public opinion have transformed militaries activities, employees and facilities of Armed Forces all over the world. It became necessary to implement an Environmental Management System (EMS) to guide people how to participate on those activities even during peace or war times. It’s a common threat among all the armies that military planning documents nowadays have to consider the risks of damaging the environment which can be caused by military operations. This has led to a progressive updated of environmental military legislation in order to be in according to Federal Environmental Laws in each country. Military operations and training activities can have negative impacts on ecosystems due to the nature of the land use often result from damage to vegetation, digging activities, and soil disturbance from heavy troop traffic. Soil disturbance and associated erosion and sedimentation problems can further aggravate the ecological impacts of military land use on the ecosystems. The military’s essential mission is to win the war through the application of combat power warfare, which is destructive to the environment. This damage is a consequence of combat. However, it is necessary to restrict the application of force. The actions must conform to the law of land warfare, those established or not conventions and agreements that protect ecosystems against dispensable suffering and facilitate the restoration of peace. Although operational requirements are priority, the integration of environmental considerations into all aspects of military activities is fundamental for maintaining the health and well-being of the troops and the local population, for preventing irreparable damage to sites with natural, cultural, historic and archeological importance which discredit or complicate the mission objectives. The purpose of this work is to analyze the Environmental Management Systems adopted by American, Canadian, Brazilian armies and NATO’s, considering only topics related to strategic and politic levels. In spite of the differences that exist among those military institutions, there are some common aspects which can be cited. Those armies represent countries or organization (NATO) that have a very important role to play in the modern world. Their troops have been spread out around the whole world, operating in Iraq and Afghanistan, participating in peacekeeping missions in other countries as Haiti, for example. A key element of this transformation in the armies is the implementation of an Environmental Management System (EMS) as a mission enabler.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".