MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403731396 · doi:10.1007/s43621-024-00551-5

Blue economy of Bangladesh and sustainable development goals (SDGs): a comparative scenario

2024· article· en· W4403731396 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Md Syful Islam, Zobayer Ahmed, M. Habib, Osman Masud

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscover Sustainability · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal and Marine Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainable developmentBusinessNatural resource economicsEconomic systemEconomicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Blue economy has the potential to promote economic growth, improve livelihoods, and create jobs while protecting marine ecosystems. This research uses a comprehensive analysis of secondary data sources to assess various blue economy sectors, including maritime transport, fisheries, aquaculture, offshore renewable energy, marine tourism, marine biotechnology, and ocean mining. By examining the blue economy experiences of developed nations like the United States, Canada, Japan, Norway, and Australia, the study identifies the best SDG practices and strategic lessons applicable to Bangladesh. In the case of Bangladesh, the research focuses on the blue economy initiatives, opportunities, and challenges associated with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The blue economy and SDGs nexus in the context of Bangladesh demonstrates that out of 17 goals, 12 SDGs (SDG 1, SDG 2, SDG 3, SDG 7, SDG 8, SDG 9, SDG 11, SDG 12, SDG 13, SDG 14, SDG 16 and SDG 17) are linked with blue economy practices in Bangladesh. However, in the case of developed countries, only six SDGs (SDG 7, SDG 8, SDG 9, SDG 12, SDG 13, SDG 14) are connected to the blue economy because of the diversity of blue economy practices across the countries. Situated along the Bay of Bengal, Bangladesh has significant potential to utilize its marine resources for sustainable development. However, it faces challenges such as inadequate infrastructure, regulatory gaps, environmental risks, and limited technological advancements. The study thus emphasizes the need for integrated policy frameworks, stakeholder coordination, investments in sustainable infrastructure, public–private partnerships, technological innovation, and community engagement.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations15
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiscover SustainabilitySame topicCoastal and Marine ManagementFrench-language works237,207