MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W299977695 · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139208628

Democratizing Global Climate Governance

2014· book· en· W299977695 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2014
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Geoengineering
Canadian institutionsInstitute on Governance
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccountabilityCorporate governancePolitical scienceLegitimacyClimate governanceScope (computer science)DiplomacyPublic administrationRepresentation (politics)Global governanceDemocracyCollective actionClimate changeDeliberative democracyEconomicsLawPoliticsManagementComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change presents a large, complex and seemingly intractable set of problems that are unprecedented in their scope and severity. Given that climate governance is generated and experienced internationally, effective global governance is imperative; yet current modes of governance have failed to deliver. Hayley Stevenson and John Dryzek argue that effective collective action depends crucially on questions of democratic legitimacy. Spanning topics of multilateral diplomacy, networked governance, representation, accountability, protest and participation, this book charts the failures and successes of global climate governance to offer fresh proposals for a deliberative system which would enable meaningful communication, inclusion of all affected interests, accountability and effectiveness in dealing with climate change; one of the most vexing issues of our time.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.192
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.170 · 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