MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413131623 · doi:10.3390/su17157158

Evaluating Landscape Fragmentation and Consequent Environmental Impact of Solar Parks Installation in Natura 2000 Protected Areas: The Case of the Thessaly Region, Central Greece

2025· article· en· W4413131623 on OpenAlexaff
Ioannis Faraslis, Vassiliki Margaritopoulou, Christos Christakis, E. Providas

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhotovoltaic Systems and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsParks Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatura 2000SustainabilityRenewable energyEnvironmental resource managementFragmentation (computing)GeographyLandscape ecologyHabitat fragmentationBiodiversityPhotovoltaic systemProtected areaEnvironmental impact assessmentEnvironmental protectionHabitatEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the adverse environmental impacts of solar photovoltaic parks located in established protected areas, aiming to determine the level of landscape fragmentation through the calculation of relevant landscape metrics. For this purpose, a case study was carried out in a Mediterranean Natura 2000 Special Protection Area (SPA), and landscape metrics were calculated using Geographic Information System spatial analysis tools. The analysis of metrics showed that the installation of renewable energy parks within the designated protected area negatively affect landscape fragmentation and the absence of carefully defined and evidence-based mitigation measures. The land cover categories that are significantly affected are those considered critical habitats of bird species that have been designated as SPAs. The results of this study highlight the need to integrate, in the National Renewable Energy Spatial Plans, specific biodiversity objectives, such as conservation objectives and the suspension of the installation of photovoltaic parks in certain areas that are important for conservation of biodiversity, in order to ensure the overall sustainability of renewable energy production.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicPhotovoltaic Systems and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207