Core Human Rights Principles for Private Conservation Organizations and Funders
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The international community is grappling with an unprecedented loss of biological diversity—a crisis that directly impacts both biodiversity and human rights. The degradation of biodiversity significantly impairs the ability of all people, particularly Indigenous Peoples and communities dependent on natural ecosystems, to enjoy their human rights. States are the primary duty-bearers under international human rights law; however, private conservation organizations and funders are crucial in driving conservation efforts and promoting a human rights-based approach. Despite their significance, acommon understanding of their human rights responsibilities has been largely lacking. To bridge this gap, UNEP is introducing the ten Core Human Rights Principles for Private Conservation Organizations and Funders. These principles guide private actors toward a human rights-based approach to conservation, fostering more inclusive and equitable practices that protect and promote the rights of Indigenous Peoples and others in conservation. The Principles also provide general guidance for all stakeholders on how to center human rights in conservation efforts and contribute to achieving the goals and targets of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF) through a rights-based approach.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it