Northern lights against POPs : combatting toxic threats in the Arctic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In addition to co-editing, David Downie is a contributing author, “Global POPs Policy: The 2001 Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants" and (with Terry Fenge), "“Introduction". Book description: Representatives of 111 nations gathered in Stockholm in May 2001 to sign a legally binding convention to eliminate or reduce emissions of pesticides, insecticides, and other industrial combustion by-products. Long-range transport by air and water carries many of these pollutants to the circumpolar north, where they threaten the health and cultural survival of Inuit and other northern Indigenous peoples. Northern Lights against POPs tells the many-faceted scientific, policy, legal, and advocacy story that led to the Stockholm convention. Unique in its perspective, scope, and breadth, it reveals the key links among environmental and health science, international politics, advocacy, law, and global negotiations. Never before have public health concerns articulated by northern Indigenous peoples in Canada and throughout the circumpolar Arctic had such a direct impact on global policy-making. Authors show how research on POPs (persistent organic pollutants) in the Arctic from the mid-1980s influenced international negotiations and analyze the potential for the convention to be effective. Contributors include elected representatives, researchers, civil servants, Indigenous people who participated in the negotiations, and scientists who provided the compelling Arctic data that prompted the United Nations Environment Programme to sponsor negotiations.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".