MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394681329 · doi:10.1002/wcc.887

Greener through gender: What climate mainstreaming can learn from gender mainstreaming

2024· article· en· W4394681329 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Geoengineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Guelph
FundersConsortium of International Agricultural Research Centers
KeywordsMainstreamingGender mainstreamingPolitical scienceEnvironmental scienceSociologyGender studiesGender equalityLawSpecial education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Addressing the urgent global climate crisis demands a rapid and meaningful expansion of “climate mainstreaming,” which refers to the integration of climate objectives in all aspects of development programs and policies. However, progress remains slow and uneven due to bottlenecks in policy and institutional change. Considering the parallel struggle recorded over decades to mainstream gender across the same policy arenas, a key question emerges: what can climate mainstreaming learn from gender mainstreaming? To answer this question, we review 57 policy, strategy, and guidance documents of United Nations agencies, all of which integrate these themes into food security and broader development programming. Our analysis identifies gaps in climate mainstreaming efforts and derives lessons from gender mainstreaming to bridge these gaps. It underscores the importance of adapting programmatic mainstreaming strategies in response to evolving contexts, for example, by simultaneously considering both mainstreaming and targeted interventions. Additionally, it highlights the need to adopt organizational climate mainstreaming and establish mechanisms for accountability. Finally, it emphasizes the urgency of embracing a climate justice lens; in practice, this involves prioritizing populations at greater risk of climate change impacts and actively engaging diverse perspectives in decision‐making, particularly communities facing multiple forms of discrimination. This article is categorized under: Integrated Assessment of Climate Change > Assessing Climate Change in the Context of Other Issues Climate and Development > Sustainability and Human Well‐Being Policy and Governance > International Policy Framework

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.005

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.224 · 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