Climate service warnings: cautions about commercializing climate science for adaptation in the developing world
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the increasing emphasis amongst climate scientists and development professionals on providing ‘climate services’ in order to inform adaptation decisions in vulnerable countries. The climate service business model hopes to provide ‘on demand’ and ‘actionable’ information products that are useful for policy makers. Drawing from literature across the natural and social sciences, we outline potential benefits and limits of this model of providing climate information and products, as well as recommendations for improving climate services. We argue that a shift away from the commercialized model of climate services may be necessary to ensure the creation, and consistent delivery, of products that practitioners in the developing world are able to employ in making adaptation decisions. WIREs Clim Change 2017, 8:e424. doi: 10.1002/wcc.424 This article is categorized under: Climate and Development > Knowledge and Action in Development Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge > Climate Science and Decision Making
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 | 0.061 | 0.167 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.029 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.018 | 0.029 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.004 |
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".