VIII. Natural Resource Management And Conservation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2009, within the framework of the CBD, negotiations continued on an international regime on access and benefit-sharing (ABS) under the Ad hoc Open-ended Intersessional Working Group on ABS (ABS Working Group) and on liability and redress under the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (Cartagena Protocol). In addition, another meeting of the Ad hoc Open-ended Intersessional Working Group on Article 8(j) and related provisions (Working Group on Article 8(j)) made progress on a code of ethical conduct to ensure respect for the cultural and intellectual heritage of indigenous and local communities. Other notable developments include progress on the preparation of a new strategic plan for the CBD and more detailed guidelines on bio-fuels, private sector engagement, and links between climate change and biodiversity. The ABS Working Group held two meetings during 2009: its seventh meeting was held on 2–8 April in Paris, France, while its eighth meeting was held on 9–15 November in Montreal, Canada. In addition, two of the three technical groups established under the framework of the negotiations on an international ABS regime by the ninth Conference of the Parties (COP-9) to the CBD, which took place in May 2008 in Bonn, Germany, met during the year: the Group of Technical and Legal Experts on Compliance met on 27–30 January in Tokyo, Japan, and the Group of Technical and Legal Experts on Traditional Knowledge associated with Genetic Resources met on 16–19 June in Hyderabad, India.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.008 |
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".