MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1870780642 · doi:10.15353/joci.v11i3.2768

Design for Sustainability: Countering the Drivers of Unsustainability in Development Projects

2015· article· en· W1870780642 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Isabel Meyer, Mario Marais

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Community Informatics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development
Canadian institutionsCanadian Society of Intestinal ResearchImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityOrder (exchange)Sustainable developmentIntervention (counseling)BusinessProcess managementEngineeringEnvironmental resource managementPolitical scienceEnvironmental planningEconomicsGeographyPsychologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Development projects aim to make a difference in communities. Funders often require that the intervention needs to last, or that it needs to effect change that will last, over an extended period of time. In short, a sustainable difference needs to be made and this is an important measure of success. However, there are inherent drivers in the combined system of donors and beneficiaries that counter sustainability. This article explores these drivers, and identifies project design elements that need to be in place in order to promote sustainability by countering the drivers. This approach is applied to an education project, and implications for ICT4D projects are developed.

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)0.096
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.114
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.506

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0960.114
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.018
Scholarly communication0.0130.011
Open science0.0030.017
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Community InformaticsSame topicInnovative Approaches in Technology and Social DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207