MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3216117695 · doi:10.1071/mf21260

The ‘ecological character’ of wetlands: a foundational concept in the Ramsar Convention, yet still cause for debate 50 years later

2021· article· en· W3216117695 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

VenueMarine and Freshwater Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Conservation and Management
Canadian institutionsCarbon Engineering (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConventionCharacter (mathematics)WetlandWarrantNatural (archaeology)EcologyNature ConservationEnvironmental ethicsEnvironmental resource managementGeographyPolitical scienceLawBiologyArchaeologyEnvironmental sciencePhilosophyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Ramsar Convention text requires the Contracting Parties to respond to actual or potential changes in the ‘ecological character’ of their Ramsar Sites. After some years, the Convention’s obligations relating to the conservation of these sites and to the ‘wise use’ of wetlands in general came to be defined in terms of ‘maintaining’ this character. Defining and operationalising these concepts has been complex. This paper reviews the evolution of this, and the challenges that remain in relation to issues such as choosing an appropriate baseline condition to describe, the kinds of changes that warrant a response and situations of natural fluctuation or ‘regime shift’, where ‘maintaining’ ecological character may be an unduly static aim. The ‘character’ of wetlands nevertheless remains a valuably integrative concept, preserving something of the holistic vision developed 50 years ago by the Convention’s founders.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.522
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.258 · 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