MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148346951 · doi:10.1111/1477-8947.12035

Sustainably managing natural resources and the need for construction materials in <scp>P</scp>acific island countries: The example of <scp>S</scp>outh <scp>T</scp>arawa, <scp>K</scp>iribati

2014· article· en· W2148346951 on OpenAlexaff
Julie Babinard, Christopher R. Bennett, Marea Eleni Hatziolos, Asif Faiz, Anil Somani

Bibliographic record

VenueNatural Resources Forum · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsEsri (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityContext (archaeology)ReefAtollNatural resourceThreatened speciesBusinessEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningFisheryGeographyEnvironmental scienceEcologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The growing demand for construction materials in S outh T arawa, a remote atoll in the S outh P acific, provides an example of the environmental and social challenges associated with the use of non‐renewable resources in the context of small island countries threatened by coastal erosion and climate change. In many small P acific island countries, the availability of construction materials is limited, with the majority mined from beaches and coastal reefs in an unsustainable manner. Growing demand for construction aggregates is resulting in more widespread sand mining by communities along vulnerable sections of exposed beach and reefs. This has serious consequences for coastal erosion and impacts on reef ecosystem processes, consequences that cannot be easily managed. Construction materials are also in high demand for infrastructure projects which are financed in part with support from international development agencies and donors. This paper reviews the various challenges and risks that aggregate mining poses to reefs, fish, and the coastal health of S outh T arawa and argues that the long term consequences from ad hoc beach/reef mining over large areas are likely to be far greater than the impacts associated with environmentally sustainable, organized extraction. The paper concludes with policy recommendations that are also relevant for neighbouring island countries facing similar challenges.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 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

Citations15
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNatural Resources ForumSame topicMining and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207