Cambodia Country Case Study: Integration of Mine Action Into the Country Development Framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Internal CIDA country case study which outlines benefits and rationale for integrating mine action into official development programming in mine affected regions. Aimed at CIDA country desk officers. Cambodia was chosen for a country case study based on criteria it met for the Government of Canada's International Policy Strategy as a bilateral country of priority and the criteria created by the CIDA Mine Action Unit: Cambodia ratified the Ottawa Convention in 1999; its mine and UXO contamination are a large obstacle in Cambodia's development of poverty reduction; and the bilateral desk has the potential to integrate mine action into their programming. The level of contamination of mines and UXO in Cambodia has become an obstacle to their development. The concentration of contamination in the rural areas, overlaps with the most vulnerable populations who are poor or at risk of poverty. As Cambodians depend primarily on agricultural production for their economic and nutritional needs, contaminated land proves to be the prime obstacle between them and a self-sustaining lifestyle for their family. Families take the chances of losing life and limb because the national rate of clearance is slow and time consuming. Unfortunately for the steady increase in population, Cambodians are being forced to move to unused land that is usually contaminated putting themselves and their families at great risk and increasing the already overburdened health system.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".