ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THE U.S.S.R. DURING THE LATTER 20TH CENTURY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article considers the evolution of public participation in environmental protection and the “green movement” in the USSR and subsequent legal developments in the later part of 20th century. The article deals with legal history, using the diachronic methods to examine the evolution of public participation in environmental protection under the pressure of the totalitarian regime. The public participation in the USSR is divided into three main historical stages. An overview of the main challenges and achievements of the "green movement” in the USSR during 1950s-1990s is included; as well as causes and consequences of environmental activities in the USSR are highlighted. The three stages of the evolution of public participation in the mid-20th century are as follows: The first stage (up to 1980s) is characterized by the non-politicized activity, usually initiated by students or created by tourist clubs; the second stage (1980s – 1990s) has a special feature that is, liberalization of the political movement; and the third stage (beginning of 1990s) is described by the significant decline of interest in the Nature protection activities, which can be attributed to the unstable political environment at that 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".