Polices,Laws and Regulations on Land Reclamation and the Implications:Comparing China with Other Countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to bring forth the suggestion on revising and enhancing theLand Reclamation Ordinancein China through comparing the advanced experience in policies,laws and regulations on land reclamation in other countries with that of China.Methods of documentation and theoretical studies were employed.Results indicate that there are problems regarding currentLand Reclamation Regulationsand other relevant laws and regulations,such as the imperfect system,unclear duties and rights of land reclamation,and uncertain sources of funds for land reclamation.As a result,the knotty problems in relevant practices can't be solved under current law or policy settings,and the progress of current land reclamation is very slow.However,the great achievements made in land reclamation in some foreign countries just benefited from strict laws and regulations of land reclamation as well as perfect administration system.It is concluded that we should refer to the advanced experience on land reclamation in US,Germany,Canada and UK,and try to combine them with Chinese situation.To prefect the policies,laws and regulations on land reclamation in China can be attempted in the ways of perfecting law system,completing organizations structures,establishing standard system,stabilizing funding source for reclamation,setting up an incentive mechanism as well as enhancing propaganda and education,and so on.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".