MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402825236 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2024-0158

The long-term effects of the Lacey Act Amendment on high-risk timber species: insights from 15 years of interrupted time series analysis

2024· article· en· W4402825236 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mandira Pokharel, John E. Wagner, René H. Germain

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmendmentTerm (time)GeographyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite comprising a small portion of US wood consumption, tropical hardwoods like Keruing and Meranti are highly valued for their aesthetic and physical properties. However, their sustainability is threatened by illegal logging and over-harvesting, compounded by the use of generic names that obscure species identities, complicating trade monitoring and regulation. Enacted in May 2008, the Lacey Act Amendment (LAA) aims to ensure the legality of plant and plant product sourcing in the US. This study evaluates the LAA’s impact on the import of these tropical hardwoods from Indonesia and Malaysia, hypothesizing that the amendment has curtailed illegal imports, thereby reducing import volumes and increasing prices. Using data from 1990 to 2023, we employed (i) intervention multiple regression analysis with autoregressive error and (ii) intervention auto-regressive integrated moving average models with step transfer function to analyze changes in import trends. Findings indicate that while LAA has significantly impacted import trends as anticipated, the effects are complex and evolving over time, highlighting the need for ongoing regulation analysis and enforcement monitoring. This research underscores the critical role of targeted legal frameworks in promoting sustainable trade practices and conservation, offering valuable insights for policymakers aiming to combat exploitative and illegal logging globally.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207