MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027809080 · doi:10.1162/glep_a_00082

Global Governance from the Amazon: Leaving Oil Underground in Yasuní National Park, Ecuador

2011· article· en· W2027809080 on OpenAlexaff
Pamela L. Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Environmental Politics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmazon rainforestCorporate governanceIndigenousGlobal governanceNational parkEnvironmental governanceHarmony (color)Political scienceLatin AmericansEconomyEnvironmental protectionGeographyPoliticsBusinessLawEconomicsEcologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores the saga of the campaign to save the Ishpingo-Tambococha-Tiputini (ITT) block of the Yasuní National Park in Ecuador's Western Amazon, a story of the complex transnational networks and global governance mechanisms that have emerged to create post-Kyoto solutions for the planet. Ecuador's Yasuní-ITT Initiative to keep nearly 900 million barrels of oil underground in exchange for global contributions for avoided emissions presents an alternative norm for global environmental governance in line with the indigenous concept of buen vivir, or the good life. This means living in harmony with nature, and is embodied in the Ecuadorian Constitution of 2008. These changes, however, are not without pressures and inconsistencies at the domestic and international levels. Ultimately, the Yasuní-ITT Initiative and subsequent UNDP Yasuní Trust Fund offer replicable models for other fossil fuel dependent and megadiverse countries in the developing world.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Citations59
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Environmental PoliticsSame topicMining and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207