MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409661476 · doi:10.1016/j.eehl.2025.100147

Embracing global biodiversity toward a better planet

2025· article· en· W4409661476 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Haigen Xu, Richard D. Gregory, Yun Cao, Riquan Zhang, Lirong Zhang, Michael Gill, Dandan Yu, Jianfeng Yi, Wei Liu, Hongmei Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueEco-Environment & Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Major Science and Technology Projects of ChinaNational Science and Technology Major ProjectScience and Technology Commission of Shanghai MunicipalityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPlanetAstrobiologyBiodiversityBiologyAstronomyEcologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global biodiversity is the most essential component of the planet, and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) has been unanimously adopted by 196 parties worldwide in 2022 to achieve the global vision of a world of living in harmony with nature by 2050. Of particular importance is the timely update of the National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) and/or National Targets aligned with the GBF before the sixteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP16) to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Upon comprehensive evaluation of updated NBSAPs of 47 parties and updated national targets of 126 parties, we proposed pathways that could better inform the updating processes. First, the essential elements of the goals and targets of the GBF applicable to national circumstances should be equivalently translated into national policies and instruments. Second, when specific national circumstances do not match with those essential elements, parties need to determine their own national biodiversity targets based on their situation but in a way that maintains and reflects the ambition of the GBF. Furthermore, the key factors that promote the success of biodiversity conservation are highlighted in terms of the target alignment with the GBF, the ownership enhancement, and the capacity building. We anticipate that these measures could facilitate immediate actions to update the NBSAPs to align with the GBF at the highest level while remaining cost-effectiveness. • We proposed two key recommendations to assist parties in revising their national biodiversity strategies and action plans aligned with the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). • The essential elements of the goals and targets of the GBF applicable to national circumstances should be equivalently translated into national policies and instruments. • When specific national circumstances do not match with those essential elements, parties need to maintain and reflect the ambition of the GBF in determining their national biodiversity targets.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.217
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.201 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEco-Environment & HealthSame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207