MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386846856 · doi:10.1007/s11625-023-01402-4

The contributions of citizen science to SDG monitoring and reporting on marine plastics

2023· article· en· W4386846856 on OpenAlexaff
Dilek Fraisl, Linda See, Rachel Bowers, Omar Seidu, Kwame Boakye Fredua, Anne Bowser, Metis Meloche, Sarah Weller, Tyler Amaglo-Kobla, Dany Ghafari, Juan Carlos Laso Bayas, Jillian Campbell, Grant Cameron, Steffen Fritz, Ian McCallum

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution
Canadian institutionsTreasury Board of Canada Secretariat
FundersInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
KeywordsCitizen scienceSustainable developmentMarine debrisGovernment (linguistics)Environmental resource managementLitterPolitical scienceEnvironmental planningEcologyEnvironmental scienceGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The accumulation of plastic litter in marine environments is a major environmental challenge along with the difficulties in their measurement because of the massive size of the oceans and vast circulation of plastic litter, which is being addressed as part of the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Citizen science, public participation in scientific research and knowledge production, represents a potential source of data for SDG monitoring and reporting of marine plastic litter, yet there has been no evidence of its use to date. Here, we show how Ghana has become the first country to integrate existing citizen science data on marine plastic litter in their official monitoring and reporting of SDG indicator 14.1.1b for the years 2016–2020, which has also helped to bridge local data collection efforts with global monitoring processes and policy agendas by leveraging the SDG framework. The results have been used in Ghana’s 2022 Voluntary National Review of the SDGs, and reported on the UN SDG Global Database, as well as helping to inform relevant policies in Ghana. In addition, here, we present a pathway that can be adopted by the relevant government authorities in other countries that have an interest in following a similar citizen science data validation and reporting process for this indicator and potentially others.

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)0.117
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.249
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1170.249
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.011
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 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

Citations31
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainability ScienceSame topicMicroplastics and Plastic PollutionFrench-language works237,207