MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Many Faces of Environmental Security

2024· article· en· W4403530910 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

VenueAnnual Review of Environment and Resources · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransboundary Water Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsEnvironmental securityEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningGeographyPolitical scienceEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review surveys recent evidence on environmental security, bringing diverse approaches to the subject and evidence relating to different environmental issues into conversation with one another. We focus on the five environmental issues most commonly viewed as having conflict or security effects: climate change, water, forests and deforestation, biodiversity and conservation, and mining and industrial pollution. For each issue, we consider evidence along three dimensions: the impacts of environmental variables on violent conflict, the conflict impacts of policy and development interventions vis-à-vis these environmental issues, and their global policy framing and institutionalization. Through this, we draw particular attention to the poverty and/or inconsistency of the evidence relating to environmental variations, which stands in stark contrast to the extensive evidence on policy and development interventions; noting that policymakers have been much more concerned with the former theme than the latter, we call for this imbalance to be addressed.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.238 · 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