Accommodation of Interests of the State, Business and Civil Society in Environmental Projects Implemented Through Public Private Partnership in the Russian Federation
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
Environmental projects have a number of distinctive features, among them an increased capital/output ratio, relatively high risks, lengthy payback periods, and outcomes that are hard to evaluate using financial indicators. Public private partnership (PPP) appears to be a viable approach for the implementation of such projects; however, existing mechanisms for the accommodation of long-term interest of the state, business and civil society are inadequate to ensure their success. In this context, the author presents an algorithm of multi-criteria analysis to evaluate the social efficiency of PPP-based environmental projects, which takes into account the impact of both financial and non-financial outcomes and includes crowdsourcing public opinion into the final decision-making process. Special priority is given to the assessment of multiplicative effects, as their role and impact on the feasibility of investment are often underestimated. The author’s conclusions and recommendations are illustrated using the case study of a construction project for a municipal solid waste processing facility.
 
 Full text available at: https://doi.org/10.22215/rera.v11i2.1191
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 | 0.000 | 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 it