MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963506631 · doi:10.1080/09614524.2019.1628922

Sustainable development in the Arab world – is the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) region fit for the challenge?

2019· article· en· W2963506631 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
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

VenueDevelopment in Practice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocioeconomic Development in MENA
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsSustainable developmentPolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomyDevelopment economicsGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p dir="ltr">The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) region and the wider Arab world are faced with multiple inter-connected dilemmas embedded in the social, economic, and environmental pillars of sustainable development. The question of how to design effective sustainability strategies that are alignedwith the context of the GCC region is a relevant one. In this special issue, contributors have investi-gated the obstacles to sustainable development in the GCC region, the impact of current develop-ment patterns on the sustainability agenda, and the way in which countries react to local,regional, and global sustainability pressures and debates. The issue aimed to provide a platformfor academics to present policy-relevant research and practical steps being taken towards realisinggenuine sustainable development within the GCC region, while teasing out the major obstacles tothis process. This regional focus is motivated by the shared challenge of GCC countries of reformingcarbon-based economies as well as their systems of high subsidisation and universal benefits in orderto incorporate sustainable concerns, merit-based rules, and more targeted policies. While these chal-lenges are shared with other Arab countries, as well as other countries exporting oil and gas, theorigins, current patterns, and future directions of sustainability reforms in the GCC region reveal inter-esting lessons to be learnt. <h2>Other Information</h2><p dir="ltr">Published in: Development in Practice<br>License: <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" target="_blank">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</a><br>See article on publisher's website: <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2019.1628922" target="_blank">https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2019.1628922</a>

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.238 · 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