Twelve research agendas for advancing the peace-sustainability nexus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The world's social and environmental systems are currently experiencing an increase in the number of conflicts and irreversible human-induced changes. While destabilizing, these changes offer opportunities to advance the science involved to promote peace and sustainability. This forum outlines 12 key research agendas essential for advancing our understanding of the peace-sustainability nexus: global challenges (including the Anthropocene, disasters, and migration); socio-ecological systems (such as oceans, water, and heritage); policy solutions (focused on cities, food, and geoengineering); and guiding principles for peace and sustainability (emphasizing gender, justice, and plurality). Each agenda echoes the normative elements of peace and sustainability as processes while situating them within specific contexts. This approach works within limitations when mobilizing capacities to minimize unintended negative impacts of well-intentioned solutions. Beyond examining how each area either strengthens or weakens the relationship between peace and sustainability, this forum also encourages future research to explore the interconnections that might illuminate pathways for meaningful action. The brief overview of research trends and knowledge gaps can support future work in considering the capacities, constraints, and contexts underpinning the peace-sustainability nexus.
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 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 | 0.012 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".