MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411114858 · doi:10.14430/arctic81476

The Potential of DPSIR Framework to Develop a Holistic Picture of Arctic Industries and Livelihood—A Scoping Review

2025· article· en· W4411114858 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sara Moioli, Seija Tuulentie, Rannveig Ólafsdóttir, Sten Ivar Siikavuopio, Harald Vacik, Ivana Živojinović, Jerbelle Elomina, Sigrid Engen, Pasi Rautio

Bibliographic record

VenueARCTIC · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDPSIRLivelihoodThe arcticArcticEnvironmental planningBusinessGeographyEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceOceanographyGeologyAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Arctic and its resources are becoming a hotspot of increasing political, environmental, and social conflict. The Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) framework can be a useful tool when trying to disentangle the complex issues affecting the region and organize their fundamental components along a causal chain, thus promoting a much-needed integration between social and environmental sciences on one hand and science and policy making on the other (especially when a participatory approach is pursued). The aim of this article is to facilitate and improve future applications of the DPSIR framework in the Arctic context. This is pursued through a comprehensive literature review of the use of the DPSIR framework in the Arctic, with a focus on five of the most important economic sectors in the Arctic economy: aquaculture and fisheries, mining, forestry, tourism, and Indigenous livelihoods. In order to promote the most accurate and balanced approach to the DPSIR framework, its main criticisms and variants are also discussed. The article provides a summary of indicators used in Arctic case studies and focuses on the relevance of the framework as a tool for both local stakeholder involvement and participative policy-making processes. It also provides a general model for application of the DPSIR framework in the Arctic context and, when Arctic examples are not available, a summary of relevant examples outside the Arctic area.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0200.020
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 venueARCTICSame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207