MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400153231 · doi:10.1787/f95d6f2f-en

Natural resource governance and fragility in the Sahel

2022· report· en· W4400153231 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOECD development perspectives. · 2022
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConsortium of International Agricultural Research CentersAgence Française de DéveloppementGlobal Affairs CanadaEuropean CommissionAfrican Development Bank GroupFP7 International CooperationUnited NationsUnited States Agency for International Development
KeywordsFragilityNatural (archaeology)Natural resourceCorporate governanceResource (disambiguation)Natural resource economicsGeographyEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningBusinessPolitical scienceEnvironmental scienceEconomicsComputer scienceArchaeologyLawChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report uses information gathered from 20 consultations with donors, UN agencies, regional organisations and expert institutions in combination with other available data, to assess the status of natural resource governance (NRG) in Mauritania, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger and Chad, identify links between weaknesses in NRG and fragility, and discuss policy implications.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.383
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOECD development perspectives.Same topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207