Issues and gaps in international guidance and national regulatory systems affecting international live insect trade
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International trade in live insects involves the shipping of many different species, for various purposes, with a variety of handling requirements regulated by numerous authorities with varying objectives. The diversity of factors at play has both created and been subject to a complex regulatory landscape. A review of global production, shipping and use experiences from a range of perspectives has shown gaps and inconsistencies in international guidance and national implementation. Private carriers add another layer of uncertainty that is disproportionate to risks, resulting in variable practices and charges. Many benefits can come from international trade in insects, including pollinator services, control of pests and of disease vectors, and enhanced international scientific research and innovation. These benefits will be better achieved through a more evidence-based and efficient approach to regulating trade. This change in approach will in turn require an improved and widely accepted risk-management landscape for insect trade.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it