Improving Policy Coherence for Portugal’s Ocean Economy
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
<img src="https://assets.oecdcode.org/ilibraryres/img/2024/DG-Reform_banner-Kappa_en.png" class="img-responsive" style="adding-bottom:5px;" alt="EU Funded Note"/>As one of the European Union’s largest coastal states, Portugal can make a significant contribution to sustainable ocean governance and achieving Sustainable Development Goal 14 Life Below Water. This report outlines a vision for aligning Portugal’s ocean economy with its global and regional commitments, focusing on the role of the Directorate-General for Natural Resources, Safety and Maritime Services (DGRM). This report examines how Portugal can strengthen policy coherence, governance, and resource allocation to foster a resilient blue economy. It highlights challenges and opportunities facing the DGRM and proposes actionable solutions for more integrated policymaking across maritime sectors. Grounded in the OECD’s Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development Recommendation, the report advises investing in workforce development, including capacities to identify policy interactions; enhancing digital infrastructure; simplifying administrative processes; and adopting a more agile agency model. These steps are critical for unlocking the synergies among sustainable blue growth, decarbonisation, and ocean digitisation. Supported by inclusive stakeholder engagement and robust evidence, this report offers a roadmap for transforming Portugal’s maritime sector.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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