Emphasising enhancement in all forms of impact assessment: introduction to a special issue
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
In the context of impact assessment (IA), ‘enhancement’ refers to deliberate attempts taken in the design and subsequent phases of projects, programmes, plans and policies to ensure the success of a wider range of direct and indirect positive outcomes to communities and/or the biophysical environment. This can be in the form of opportunities for social and community development, improved health and wellbeing, improved biodiversity, restored ecosystems and landscape character, and protected and respected cultural heritage. This first ever special issue on enhancement advocates that all forms of IA should consider opportunities for enhancement. Specific reference is made to strategic environmental assessment (SEA), environmental impact assessment (EIA), social impact assessment (SIA) and health impact assessment (HIA). The paper presents views from IA practitioners regarding perceptions of the barriers to greater use of enhancement in IA and suggestions for possible solutions to those barriers. Investment in enhancement initiatives contributes to sustainable development and resilience, and is consistent with corporate social responsibility obligations of proponents.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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