Pre-disaster planning and preparedness for floods and droughts: A systematic review
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
Increasing intensity and frequency of climate-related disasters such as floods and droughts challenge existing governance models of disaster risk reduction. This paper systematically reviews 147 articles on pre-disaster planning and preparedness for floods and droughts in developed countries. The results show: 1) the formal adoption of an integrated system of disaster risk reduction and human development remains fragmented due to a lack of legislative and policy frameworks; 2) there is a trend toward the privatization of risk management by devolving responsibility for disaster liability to landowners; 3) planning and preparedness is more common for floods than droughts in the disaster literature; and 4) flood management is increasingly risk-oriented, whereas drought management in the disaster literature remains dominated by a crisis management framework. Integration of pre-disaster planning and preparedness with human development initiatives requires further investigation to achieve Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) at local, national and international scales.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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