Addressing policy challenges in implementing Sustainable Development Goals through an adaptive governance approach: A view from transitional China
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
Abstract In 2015, the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were adopted by all member states of the United Nations. This paper argues that actually implementing the SDGs is far more challenging than reaching agreement to adopt them. To overcome these challenges, a Four‐Step Adaptive Governance Framework was set up to facilitate implementation of these goals. Two‐level policy tools are presented to illustrate the policy evolution of China's development transitions, within the framework of “adaptive governance.” This study found that the Four‐Step Adaptive Governance Approach is deeply embedded in China's policy process, and it has contributed significantly to China's development during the past four decades. The Adaptive Governance Framework and this example of its application in China suggests it could be a useful tool for developing countries that are formulating their national strategies to achieve their SDGs by 2030.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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