MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117467793 · doi:10.1017/s000842390530998x

Governance for Sustainable Development—the Challenge of Adapting Form to Function

2005· article· en· W2117467793 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Political Science · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainable Development and Environmental Policy
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformative learningCorporate governanceSustainable developmentFunction (biology)NormativeInterdependencePolitical scienceSustainabilityBusinessEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningEnvironmental ethicsSociologyGeographyEconomicsLawEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Governance for Sustainable Development—the Challenge of Adapting Form to Function , William M. Lafferty, ed., Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2004, pp. xvii, 377. What distinguishes sustainable development as a governance challenge? William Lafferty characterizes it as a normative long-term challenge that has been formulated “ outside-in ,” i.e., sustainable development has been developed and decided upon on an international level, and therefore first needs to be communicated “at home.” It is a transformative challenge in that it requires the decoupling of economic and social development from further damage to natural life-support systems; and as the problems with the use and protection of natural life-support systems do not fall neatly within the border of states, there is a need for co-operation on the regional and global levels. Finally, Lafferty speaks of a task “confronted by holistic interactions, interdependencies and unpredictable results” (20).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.210 · 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