MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313597395 · doi:10.1080/09644016.2022.2156174

The Future of Environmental Peace and Conflict Research

2023· article· en· W4313597395 on OpenAlexaff
Tobias Ide, McKenzie F. Johnson, Jon Barnett, Florian Krampe, Philippe Le Billon, Lucile Maertens, Nina von Uexkull, Irene Vélez‐Torres

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Politics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransboundary Water Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAustralian Research CouncilVetenskapsrådet
KeywordsPeacebuildingEnvironmental securityConversationEnvironmental researchSociologyPolitical sciencePoliticsEnvironmental ethicsDisciplineHuman securityEnvironmental resource managementSocial sciencePolitical economyEnvironmental scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interest in the intersections of environmental issues, peace and conflict has surged in recent years. Research on the topic has developed along separate research streams, which broadened the knowledge base considerably, but hardly interact across disciplinary, methodological, epistemological and ontological silos. Our forum addresses this gap by bringing into conversation six research streams on the environment, peace and conflict: environmental change and human security, climate change and armed conflict, environmental peacebuilding, political ecology, securitisation of the environment, and decolonizing environmental security. For each research stream, we outline core findings, potentials for mutual enrichment with other streams, and prospects for future research.

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)0.050
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0500.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0060.030
Scholarly communication0.0180.040
Open science0.0030.009
Research integrity0.0110.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations104
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental PoliticsSame topicTransboundary Water Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207