MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383873947 · doi:10.3167/reco.2023.130201

Policy innovation through local, sustainable development evaluation

2023· article· en· W4383873947 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Harlan Koff, Citlalli Alhelí González H., Edith Kauffer, Carmen Maganda

Bibliographic record

VenueRegions & Cohesion · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPledgeSummitOperationalizationEarth SummitBiodiversityPoliticsSustainable developmentPolitical scienceEnvironmental planningClimate changeGeographyEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental resource managementPublic administrationLawEnvironmental sciencePhysical geographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The global political agenda has included some high-profile environmental summits over the past few months. Three of these events stand out. The 2022 United Nations (UN) Climate Change Conference in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, was held from 6–20 November 2022. This was followed from 7–19 December 2022 by the UN Biodiversity Conference in Montréal, Canada, and the UN-Water Summit at UN Headquarters in New York City from 22–24 March 2023. Of these three events, the Biodiversity Summit made the most impact as delegates committed to protecting 30% of land and 30% of coastal and marine areas by 2030. This pledge is remarkable because it re-establishes political commitments to protect biodiversity, which is a key component of climate action. At the same time, many observers of the summit questioned how nation-states will implement this goal. Like the SDGs, the “30 by 30” commitment is long on aspirations but short on operationalization details. This observation is not a criticism of the agreement per se but a recognition of the challenges preventing ambitious biodiversity conservation plans from being fully implemented.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRegions & CohesionSame topicEnvironmental and Social Impact AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207