Assessing the impact of international cooperative initiatives on biodiversity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biodiversity conservation within the gamut of global environmental governance has gained significant traction over the past three decades. Many initiatives to meet global biodiversity conservation targets have been launched in the meantime. Frameworks such as the latest Kunming/Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) have identified the importance of NGOs, social movements, firms and sub-national actors as change agents towards redressing biodiversity loss. This report terms such non-state actors ‘International Cooperative Initiatives on Biodiversity’ (ICIBs). It presents a framework to assess their impact on biodiversity conservation, and applies it to eight relevant cases. Although many uncertainties remain, the report shows that ICIBs reach 100s millions of hectares worldwide, and substantially contribute to enhancing biodiversity in those areas.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
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 it