MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Classifying Sustainable Development Goal trajectories: A country-level methodology for identifying which issues and people are getting left behind

2019· article· en· W2963240339 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Development · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainable Development and Environmental Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsProxy (statistics)Context (archaeology)Sustainable developmentNormativeSustainabilityRegional sciencePolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomicsComputer scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How useful are the Sustainable Development Goals for conducting empirical analysis at the country level? We develop a methodological framework for answering this question, with special emphasis on the SDGs' normative ambition of "no one left behind." We first classify all 169 SDG targets and find that 78 incorporate an outcome-focus that is quantitatively assessable at the country level, including 43 through a systematic approach to establishing "proxy targets." We then present a framework for diagnosing the embedded diversity of absolute and relative indicator trajectories in a harmonized manner, based on a country's share of its starting gap on course to be closed by the relevant deadline. In turn, we present a method for estimating the human consequences of falling short on targets, measured by the number of lives at stake and people's basic needs at stake. As a case study, we apply the framework to Canada, an economy not commonly examined in the context of global goals. We are able to assess a total of 61 targets through the use of 70 indicators, including 28 indicators drawn from the United Nations' official database. Overall, we find Canada is on course to succeed on 18 indicators; to cover at least half but less than the full objective on 7 indicators; to cover less than half the required distance on 33 indicators; and to remain stagnant or move backwards on 12 indicators. Among indicators assessed, the country is only fully on track to achieve one SDG. Shortfalls suggest approximately 54,000 Canadian lives at stake and millions of people left behind on issues like poverty, education, intimate partner violence, and access to water and sanitation. Our diagnostic framework enables considerable, if only partial, quantification of a country's SDG challenges, recognizing the wide range of contexts for underlying data availability and societal problems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it