MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3085006993 · doi:10.1002/pan3.10146

Developing multiscale and integrative nature–people scenarios using the Nature Futures Framework

2020· article· en· W3085006993 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

VenuePeople and Nature · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainability and Climate Change Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersPlanbureau voor de LeefomgevingMinisterie van Buitenlandse ZakenVetenskapsrådetMinisterie van Landbouw, Natuur en VoedselkwaliteitSvenska Forskningsrådet FormasRoyal Society Te ApārangiNorges ForskningsrådNational Science Foundation, United Arab EmiratesNational Research Foundation
KeywordsTransformative learningVisionScenario planningFutures contractSustainabilityManagement scienceComputer scienceProcess (computing)PluralProcess managementBoundary objectKnowledge managementSociologyBusinessEngineeringEcologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Scientists have repeatedly argued that transformative, multiscale global scenarios are needed as tools in the quest to halt the decline of biodiversity and achieve sustainability goals. As a first step towards achieving this, the researchers who participated in the scenarios and models expert group of the Intergovernmental Science‐Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) entered into an iterative, participatory process that led to the development of the Nature Futures Framework (NFF). The NFF is a heuristic tool that captures diverse, positive relationships of humans with nature in the form of a triangle. It can be used both as a boundary object for continuously opening up more plural perspectives in the creation of desirable nature scenarios and as an actionable framework for developing consistent nature scenarios across multiple scales. Here we describe the methods employed to develop the NFF and how it fits into a longer term process to create transformative, multiscale scenarios for nature. We argue that the contribution of the NFF is twofold: (a) its ability to hold a plurality of perspectives on what is desirable , which enables the development of joint goals and visions and recognizes the possible convergence and synergies of measures to achieve these visions and (b), its multiscale functionality for elaborating scenarios and models that can inform decision‐making at relevant levels, making it applicable across specific places and perspectives on nature. If humanity is to achieve its goal of a more sustainable and prosperous future rooted in a flourishing nature, it is critical to open up a space for more plural perspectives of human–nature relationships. As the global community sets out to develop new goals for biodiversity, the NFF can be used as a navigation tool helping to make diverse, desirable futures possible. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.280
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.256 · 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