Scaling up wetland conservation and restoration to deliver the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework: Guidance on including wetlands in National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans (NBSAPs) to boost biodiversity and halt wetland loss and degradation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wetland conservation and restoration is an essential component of delivering the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KM-GBF) vision of a world living in harmony with nature where “by 2050, biodiversity is valued, conserved, restored and wisely used, maintaining ecosystem services, sustaining a healthy planet and delivering benefits essential for all people.” This document supports the inclusion of ambitious wetland commitments and actions in National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) as a pivotal way of boosting biodiversity, to achieve the goals of both the Convention on Wetlands and the KM-GBF. This report focuses on the critical role of wetlands in achieving the 23 targets of the KM-GBF by 2030. It provides guidance to Parties to the CBD on how to incorporate the role and importance of wetlands and key actions into their NBSAPs in relation to each target. It also provides Contracting Parties to the Convention on Wetlands, with information on how to support delivery of the KM-GBF and achieve targets within the Fourth Strategic Plan of the Convention on Wetlands and the forthcoming Fifth Strategic Plan.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".