Dilemmas of Development: The Social and Economic Impact of the Porgera Gold Mine, 1989-1994
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main purpose of this volume is to publish, and thus to publicise,\nthe factual material contained in a series of consultancy reports\ncommissioned by the Porgera Joint Venture (PJV) between 1992 and\n1994 (Banks 1993, 1994a, 1994b, 1994c; Bonnell 1994). These reports\ndealt with the social and economic impact of the Porgera gold mine on\nthe population of the Porgera Valley during the period which had\nelapsed since the Government of Papua New Guinea (PNG) signed a\nMining Development Contract with the PJV in April 1989. They were\ncommissioned as part of what became known as the Porgera Social\nMonitoring Programme, which was itself intended to satisfy some of\nthe conditions which the PNG Department of Environment and\nConservation (DEC) had attached to its approval of the company's\nEnvironmental Plan (NSR 1988) and Environmental Management and\nMonitoring Programme(PJV 1991). The substance of these reports has\nbeen revised and edited to form Chapters 2-7 of the present volume.\nThe last two chapters have been specially commissioned from two\nother social scientists who have studied the social impact of the\nmining project, and who were asked to provide their own comments\non the design, management and output of the Porgera Social\nMonitoring Programme.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it