Conceptual Framework for the Role of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper seeks to evaluate the role of ICT in achieving the sustainable development goals adopted by the United Nations in 2015. While SDGs do not specifically address ICT, or include a goal on development of ICT, as argued (Berleur & Avgerou, 2005)in this paper, it is an underlying element embedded in the very concept of sustainable development rooted in the definition as propounded by the Brundtland Report. The objective of this paper is to evaluate whether there is a possibility to develop a conceptual framework to ground the use of ICTs in achieving SDGs. For this purpose, this research has evaluated the common conceptual frameworks developed by scholars and posits that rather than developing an all-encompassing framework, it is possible to identify certain necessary features for the role of the ICTs in achieving SDGs. This approach enables policy and decision makers to look at the role of ICT as an integral component of socio-economic and environmental decision making and implementation.
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 | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".