MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140214688 · doi:10.1002/wcc.77

Climate hazards and disasters: the need for capacity building

2010· article· en· W2140214688 on OpenAlexaff
Gordon McBean, Caroline Rodgers

Bibliographic record

VenueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersInternational Science CouncilInternational Social Science Council
KeywordsDisaster risk reductionClimate changeResilience (materials science)Natural hazardEnvironmental planningNatural disasterEnvironmental resource managementUnited Nations Framework Convention on Climate ChangeFood securitySustainable developmentBusinessClimate resilienceAdaptive capacityRisk analysis (engineering)Political scienceGeographyEnvironmental scienceKyoto ProtocolEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Climate and climate‐related hazards such as floods, storms, and droughts have served as trigger events for more than 75% of the disasters that have occurred globally over the past decade. Proportionately, these disasters affect the least developed countries most intensely, proving to be especially harmful to poverty stricken populations. In the future, a changing climate is likely to exacerbate these effects and could make development unsustainable in many places. It is necessary to develop the capacity of all countries to combat hazards so that they do not become disasters. The international framework connects climate change and development, mainly within the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. The Millennium Development Goals and Hyogo Framework for Action on Disaster Risk Reduction, and most recently the Declarations of the G8 and the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate provide further mandates for action. Climate hazards are now clearly linked with issues such as food security, migration, and national security. The linking of climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction provides a framework for responding. The development of capacity for knowledge‐based reduction of hazards and disasters risk demands an integrated approach that recognizes the changing nature of natural hazards. Further, capacity development must also recognize the limitations in governmental response and facilitate alternate ways to overcome barriers. For example, the role of resilience is examined in order to demonstrate the tools available for policymakers and individuals, to respond to hazards as they occur. The path forward to sustainable development depends on investments in the development and then the utilization of knowledge‐based, integrated approaches that factor in the future in balance with the present needs of societies. WIREs Clim Change 2010 1 871–884 DOI: 10.1002/wcc.77 This article is categorized under: Climate and Development > Sustainability and Human Well‐Being Climate and Development > Social Justice and the Politics of 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 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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.167

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.015
Scholarly communication0.0160.015
Open science0.0060.027
Research integrity0.0120.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0410.005

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations75
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate ChangeSame topicClimate Change and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207