The evolution of the World Bank's policy towards forestry: push or pull?
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
SUMMARY The World Bank has historically funded, and thus heavily influenced, a significant amount of forestry activities in developing countries in recent decades. The Bank's approach towards investment in forestry has undergone major changes. Early projects financed industrial operations to the detriment of tropical native forests. In the early 1990s, the Bank's forestry strategy prioritized forest preservation. The Bank's strategy shifted again at the turn of the century, to focus on sustainable management and the role of forests in poverty alleviation. This paper examines the changes in policy direction undertaken by the Bank, in light of concurrent changes in international forest policy and the conservation community. The central question addressed is whether the Bank has led the way in bringing about change in the forestry paradigm, or were the different Bank strategies reactions to the policy environment and prevailing attitudes and pressures of the time?
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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