Functions of law in the sustainable development of China and a model for environmental legislation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper aims to present a discussion to stimulate interest in further research by highlighting aspects of Ontario’s Environmental Bill of Rights and exploring whether parts can be transplanted to improve sustainability in China. Design/methodology/approach In this paper, the authors trace the evolution of environmental law in China after 1978, identify increased citizen participation as a path to improvement and provide an overview of purposes and means in Ontario’s Environmental Bill of Rights which may be a model to consider. Findings Ontario’s Environmental Bill of Rights may have aspects to be added to China’s legal toolbox warranting further research. Research limitations/implications While this descriptive review identifies possibilities, further work is required to apply legal concepts from one jurisdiction to another. Context and details of implementation warrant further attention. Originality/value This paper provides a platform from which further more detailed research may advance sustainability in China by considering a legal framework used by others to integrate the development of society, economy and environment.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it