Use of Natural Resources in Sustainable Economic Development on The Example of The Venus Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Održivi razvoj je temelj nove filozofije koja se sastoji u procesu promjena u kojem se korištenje resursa, smjer tehnološkog razvoja i investiranja, te institucionalne promjene nalaze u harmoniji, omogućujući povećanje, kako sadašnjih, tako i budućih potencijala ljudskih želja i potreba. Za postizanje globalne održivosti bitno je prestati gledati na ekologiju i ekonomiju kao o ciljevima u konfliktu. Okoliš i održivi razvoj nalaze se već dulje vrijeme u središtu zanimanja znanstvene i stručne međunarodne javnosti, ali i cjelokupne svjetske zajednice, koja postaje sve svjesnija istinitosti riječi Alberta Einsteina kako se " ni jedan problem ne može riješiti na istoj razini svijesti koja ga je stvorila". Zato je danas jačanje svijesti i znanja o okolišu i održivom razvoju gotovo pa jednako pitanju opstanka civilizacije. Stoga je temeljna nit vodilja upravo teza da se zaštita okoliša smatra ozbiljnim problemom kojemu se mora pristupiti holistički ukoliko se želi postići i sačuvati kvaliteta života za nas same, kao i za buduće generacije, ali i da je zaštita okoliša značajan dio svih segmenata ljudskog života.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".