MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3102159928 · doi:10.1017/9781108555791.024

Sustainable Mining, Environmental Justice, and the Human Rights of Women and Girls

2021· book-chapter· en· W3102159928 on OpenAlexaff
Sara L. Seck, Penelope Simons

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousNatural resourceSustainable developmentEconomic JusticeEnvironmental planningNatural (archaeology)Resource (disambiguation)Scale (ratio)BusinessEnvironmental justicePolitical scienceEnvironmental resource managementGeographyEcologyLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resource extraction of minerals and metals is often touted as a pathway to sustainable development, especially for poor countries and communities of the Global South. 1 While large-scale mining projects can bring with them certain benefits, and opportunities, they can also have significant detrimental impacts, particularly for Indigenous communities, who “often rely on natural resources that mining activities disrupt, threaten, or poison, and [who] have cultural and spiritual relationships to landscapes that may be destroyed or degraded.” 2 For industrial mining to meet accepted understandings of sustainable development, it must be responsive to the concerns of local communities, including Indigenous peoples, and women, who must all have the opportunity to choose to actively participate in, and benefit from, mining development.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.155
Teacher spread0.148 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicMining and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207