Editorial: Policy analysis and practices on environmental issues, COVID-19 pandemic and more
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This second issue of 2023 consists of eight articles, with four related to the policy analysis and practices on environmental issues, two on the COVID-19 pandemic management, and two on problems on municipal and local government organizations.A brief introduction of these articles is given below.The first article on "California's cap-and-trade program: is it effective in advancing social, economic, and environmental equity?" by Alvin Holliman and Kimberly Collins investigates the effectiveness of the California cap-and-trade program.Key findings include evidence of enhancing social and environmental equity but ineffectiveness in reducing carbon emissions in accordance with state goals.The second article is "A comparative study of the adoption of public-private partnerships for water services in South Korea and Singapore" by Soojin Kim and Yujin Choi.The findings show that while South Korea has employed the PPP model mostly to expand and modernize their sewage systems, Singapore has used PPPs to build and operate desalination facilities that produce potable water through the treatment and filtration of wastewater.The third article is "Grassroots involvement on Global South policy narratives and deliberative action on climate change loss and damage: a case in the Philippines" by Noe John Sacramento.Based on the case of a community-driven workshop in Bohol, Philippines, it highlights the importance of hearing grassroots voices and the need to balance technocratic and critical approaches to policy analysis.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".