MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4291115135 · doi:10.1111/csp2.12787

A freshwater perspective on the United Nations decade for ecosystem restoration

2022· article· en· W4291115135 on OpenAlexafffund
Steven J. Cooke, Acacia Frempong‐Manso, Morgan L. Piczak, Eirini Karathanou, Cristhian Clavijo, S.O. Ajagbe, E. Akeredolu, Ayron M. Strauch, John Piccolo

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation Science and Practice · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChartered Society of Forensic SciencesSociety for Conservation BiologyGenome Canada
KeywordsBiodiversityEcosystem servicesRestoration ecologyFreshwater ecosystemEnvironmental resource managementEcosystemAnthropoceneNovel ecosystemGeographyEnvironmental planningEcologyEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Globally, ecosystems have suffered from anthropogenic stressors as we enter the sixth mass extinction within the Anthropocene. In response, the UN has declared 2020–2030 the Decade for Ecosystem Restoration, aiming to mitigate ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss. Freshwater ecosystems are disproportionately impacted relative to marine or terrestrial systems and ecological restoration is needed to preserve biodiversity and ecosystem services. Paradoxically, freshwater is among Earth's most vital ecosystem services. Here we identify meaningful considerations from a freshwater perspective that will lead to progression toward the restoration of freshwater ecosystems: work across terrestrial and freshwater boundaries during restoration, emulate nature, think and act on a watershed scale, design for environmental heterogeneity, mitigate threats alongside restoration, identify bright spots, think long term (a decade is not long enough), and embrace social–ecological systems thinking. Further, we reflect upon the three implementation pathways identified by the UN to translate these considerations into practice in hopes of “bending the curve” for freshwater biodiversity and ecosystems. Pathway 1, building a global movement, could create a network to share experiences and knowledge promoting vicarious learning, ultimately leading to more effective restoration. Pathway 2, generating political support, will be necessary to institutionalize ecosystem protection and restoration by demonstrating the value of freshwater ecosystems and biodiversity. Pathway 3, building technical capacity, aims to improve the current and often ineffective restoration toolbox by incorporating evidence syntheses (i.e., appraisal of evidence base) and Indigenous ways of knowing (i.e., two eyed seeing). Given that freshwater ecosystems are in dire need of repair, it is our hope that these considerations and implementation pathways will contribute to an actionable and productive Decade for Ecosystem Restoration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.011
Scholarly communication0.0110.015
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0090.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.002

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConservation Science and PracticeSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207