MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6930696840 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.13836731

CF_D3 Project Finance for Permanence. Sustainable financing for conservation areas

2024· report· en· W6930696840 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2024
Typereport
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsInvestment (military)Project financeClosing (real estate)SustainabilityFinancial modelingSustainable developmentWork (physics)Innovative financing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conservation areas (ecosystems) like the Amazon Forest have global and local importance but are under increased pressure from climate change and human interventions such as deforestation. A key barrier to longterm conservation is a consistent lack of funding and management. Project Finance for Permanence (PFP) is defined as “an approach or single initiative that secures important policy changes and all funding necessary to meet specific conservation goals of a program over a defined long-term timeframe, with the ultimate aim of achieving the ecological, social, political, organizational, and financial sustainability of that program.” PFPs have been applied in Brazil, Peru, Colombia, Bhutan, Canada, and Costa Rica. The smallest PFP has an investment volume of $77 million (Forever Costa Rica), while the largest has an investment volume of $642 million (Amazon Region Protected Areas (ARPA) for Life Brazil). PFP is a large-scale conservation program rather than a conservation project, and it takes a long-term approach with implementation periods of ten to 25 years. It involves many partner organisations, including authorities, NGOs, donors, and conservation trust funds. PFP’s business model is based on the reconciliation of conservation goals with financial means. The PFP approach is modelled after the private sector practice of “project finance” in which funding is raised for complex projects. The essence of project finance is that financial closing is a condition upon the development of an agreed business plan. The financial model is usually composed of two phases for implementation: (a) initially covering the estimated financial gap during the agreed implementation period through a transition fund; and (b) ensuring sufficient recurrent in-country funding to cover needs beyond that period. The ultimate financial objective of any PFP is to ensure long-term financial sustainability of conservation priorities. Ten enabling conditions that are key to the success of PFPs are described in this report. It requires evaluation about whether the enabling conditions are met, and whether there are other approaches that are more cost efficient given that you need the time and the investment at the beginning to develop all these agreements.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.556
Threshold uncertainty score0.634

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.5560.168

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.257 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicGestational Diabetes Research and Management→French-language works237,207→