The Multilateral Fund for the implementation of the Montreal Protocol : addressing challenges of globalization - an independent evaluation of the World Bank's approach to global programs - case study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following the discovery of the Antarctic ozone hole in late 1985, governments recognized the need for stronger measures to reduce the production and consumption of a number of ozone depleting substances. The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer was adopted in 1987 and became binding international law in 1989. The Protocol is one of the first international environmental agreements to impose trade sanctions to achieve its goals. It is also precedent-setting as it differentiates legal rules between developed and developing countries - recognizing that the latter had contributed little to the global challenge of ozone depletion and hence were entitled to special consideration, despite the fact that all nations are responsible for protecting the ozone layer. The original Protocol provided no mechanism to assist developing countries in meeting control measures. Due to the dissatisfaction expressed by developing countries, the London Amendment in June 1990 revised the Protocol, thus giving birth to the Multilateral Fund and providing a financial mechanism for covering the agreed incremental compliance costs. The Bank entered into a legal agreement with the Fund in July 1991 whereby it agreed to assist its partner implementing agencies in channeling resources to developing countries to support investment operations for the phase-out of ozone depleting substances (ODS).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.059 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".