Evaluating migration as successful adaptation to climate change: Trade-offs in well-being, equity, and sustainability
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
The role of migration as one potential adaptation to climate change is increasingly recognized, but little is known about whether migration constitutes successful adaptation, under what conditions, and for whom. Based on a review of emerging migration science, we propose that migration is a successful adaptation to climate change if it increases well-being, reduces inequality, and promotes sustainability. Well-being, equity, and sustainability represent entry points for identifying trade-offs within and across different social and temporal scales that could potentially undermine the success of migration as adaptation. We show that assessment of success at various scales requires the incorporation of consequences such as loss of population in migration source areas, climate risk in migration destination, and material and non-material flows and economic synergies between source and destination. These dynamics and evaluation criteria can help make migration visible and tractable to policy as an effective adaptation option.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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