Advancing Environmental Mainstreaming in the Caribbean Region: The Role of Regional Institutions for Overcoming Barriers and Capacity Gaps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Environmental mainstreaming (EM) is a policy instrument to integrate environmental risks and opportunities into planning and implementation. A body of knowledge exists on identifying barriers for EM at the national level. This paper identifies contributions of regional institutions for improving capacities for EM at the national level, using the Caribbean region as a case study. The methodology adopted combines in-depth interviews with senior policy-makers and participatory workshops for medium- and junior-level staff of government agencies. Four barriers for EM are analyzed with specific roles for regional agencies, including weak leadership, insufficient science–policy linkages, deficits in quantity and quality of human resources, and institutional aspects. Research findings identify regional leadership as crucial to supporting the science–policy interface, to share data and knowledge across countries facing similar challenges, to provide assistance with national policy development for EM involving transboundary issues, and to ensure cross-sectoral perspectives in regional initiatives, especially those on economic development.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".