MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145582916 · doi:10.1142/s1464333211003997

STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EFFECTIVENESS AND THE INITIATIVE FOR THE INTEGRATION OF REGIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE IN SOUTH AMERICA (IIRSA): A MULTIPLE CASE REVIEW

2011· article· en· W2145582916 on OpenAlexafffund
CLAUDIA KIS MADRID, Gordon M. Hickey, Michel A. Bouchard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalMcGill University
FundersMcGill UniversityInter-American Development Bank
KeywordsEnvironmental planningIndustrialisationStrategic environmental assessmentProcess (computing)Investment (military)Environmental impact assessmentBusinessAgricultureEnvironmental resource managementPolitical scienceGeographyEconomicsPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the last decade, South American countries have been promoting physical integration of the territory in response to regional export-driven industrialisation policies and the global demand for agriculture products, livestock, and energy sources. A prominent example of this is the Initiative for the Integration of Regional Infrastructure in South America (IIRSA), which was launched at the Meeting of South American Presidents in 2000. At the time of writing, 514 infrastructure projects (including roads, pipelines, waterways, dams and telecommunications systems), with an estimated investment of US$69 billion, had been initiated. Importantly, previous similar development processes in the region have caused serious negative environmental and social impacts. Therefore, Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) has been mandated to ensure that the social and environmental issues are adequately addressed in the project planning process. This paper identifies the conditions under which: (a) the SEAs of the IIRSA projects have been undertaken, and (b) the Action Plans have been (or will be) implemented. Using case studies, it analyses whether the SEAs that have been carried out for the IIRSA's projects can be considered effective under these conditions. Finally, drawing on the case study findings, potential ways for improving SEA performance and maximising effectiveness in South America are discussed.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.427
Threshold uncertainty score0.807

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations21
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Assessment Policy and ManagementSame topicEnvironmental and Social Impact AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207