Assessing United Nations conservation-oriented days, years and decades through the lens of a change model
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
Summary Since the 1950s, the United Nations (UN) has designated days (e.g., World Wetland Day), years (e.g., Year of the Gorilla) and decades (e.g., Decade on Biodiversity) with a commonly stated goal to raise awareness and funding for conservation-oriented initiatives, and these Days, Years and Decades of ‘…’ (hereafter ‘DYDOs’) continue. However, the effectiveness of these initiatives to achieve their stated objectives and to contribute to positive conservation outcomes is unclear. Here we used a binary analysis change model to evaluate the effectiveness of UN conservation-oriented DYDOs observed between 1974 and 2020. We also examined four case studies to understand the different strategies employed to meet specified conservation goals. We found that DYDOs apparently contributed to positive conservation outcomes when they were tied to social media campaigns and/or when they were strategically situated in current events or global discourse. Although the outcomes of DYDOs were varied, those with longer timescales and those that engaged local communities were more likely to be successful. We suggest that DYDO organizers should identify all possible paths of action through the lens of the change model outlined in this paper to strengthen the value and effectiveness of these initiatives in the future. Using this approach could help ensure that resources are used efficiently and effectively, and that initiatives yield positive conservation outcomes that benefit people and nature.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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