Droughts and controlled rivers: how Belo Monte Dam has affected the food security of Amazonian riverine communities
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
Summary The Neotropics have vast river catchments with untapped hydroelectric potential, but there are multiple expected negative impacts of dams, including those on local food security and livelihoods. Yet, monitoring of dam effects on subsistence is rare, particularly during initial implementation. Our study assessed changes in human fish consumption near the Belo Monte Dam in the Brazilian Amazon during the period 2012–2021, which covers construction, operation and a severe El Niño-induced drought. Over time, fish became less common and were consumed in smaller amounts, even though fewer people shared meals. The largest changes occurred between 2013 and 2016 (post-construction but prior to full operation), resulting in a downward trend in fish consumption, particularly during the drought season. Adding more fish species to the diet did not increase consumption per person. These changes in fish consumption suggest that they stem from environmental impacts of the project (e.g., reduced river level), despite secondary effects from climatic events. These findings underscore the urgent need for comprehensive assessments of the social and ecological impacts of large infrastructure projects in the Amazon, along with sustainable and equitable management strategies to ensure food security and meet the needs of local communities.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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