MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405631883 · doi:10.1007/s13412-024-00999-x

Standoff at the four-way stop sign: late-night diplomacy at the fourth session of negotiations (INC-4) on the global treaty to end plastic pollution

2024· article· en· W4405631883 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rachel Tiller, Emily Cowan, Ina Helene Ahlquist, Theodore Tiller

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Studies and Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeSINTEF IndustriNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsDiplomacyTreatyNegotiationInternational tradeSession (web analytics)Sustainable developmentPolitical scienceSign (mathematics)LawBusinessPoliticsAdvertising

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Within the final session of negotiations inching forward, the United Nations (UN) Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) completed its fourth session of negotiations (out of five) on an international legally binding instrument (ILBI) to “end plastic pollution.” This paper examines the results of the fourth session of negotiations INC-4, which took place from April 23 to 29th, 2024, in Ottawa, Canada. In this perspective paper, we analyze the trends, barriers, and themes shaping the emerging treaty text. Progress towards consensus on financial mechanisms and waste management was prevalent. This paper is based on close participant observations and document analysis throughout the negotiations, it became apparent that nearly all of the core obligations of the treaty came into brackets, which means states do not agree on text. There was additional divergence when it came to the inclusion of the production side of plastics in the treaty. We conclude by looking towards the fifth and expected final session round of negotiations in Busan, South Korea, in December 2024 by discussing if and how the plastic treaty will be effective when the full life cycle starting from production is not taken into account.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.669
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Studies and SciencesSame topicMicroplastics and Plastic PollutionFrench-language works237,207