Impact Assessment Framework with Specific Protection Goals (SPGs) for Non-Target Terrestrial Plants (NTTPs)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this report we propose a preliminary Impact Assessment (IA) Framework that may be applied to the regulation of plant protection products (PPPs) and that fulfils the requirements of the Better Regulation Guidelines. Framework development focused on the use of PPPs for weed control and the protection of non-target terrestrial plants (NTTPs). Four weed control scenarios were described as case studies including (I) a reference scenario with emphasis on herbicidal weed control, (II) a scenario with focus on in-field protection of NTTPs, (III) a scenario oriented at off-field protection of NTTPs, and (IV) a scenario with full protection of ecosystem services. Six ecosystem services were evaluated: Crop provision (food and raw materials), wild foods, fresh groundwater, fresh surface water, erosion prevention and maintenance of soil fertility and habitat for species. The framework and Specific Protection Goals (SPGs) were tested using six case studies representing a range of crops and EU Member States.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".