MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W233231855 · doi:10.1177/002070201006500414

East-West Collaboration in the European North

2010· article· en· W233231855 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Geir Hønneland

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy Analysis · 2010
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésNorwegianPolitical sciencePeninsulaArcticWork (physics)GeographyIndigenousEconomyOceanographyArchaeologyEconomics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Since the end of the Cold War, a flourishing network of coUaboration has grown up between Russia and its neighbouring Nordic countries in the European north. The Barents Euro-Arctic region (BEAR) was established in 1993 by several north European states and regional administrative entities in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Russia. Its aim is to promote relations across the old east-west divide in the European north, and to enable joint projects in such areas as trade and industry, student exchanges, and indigenous issues.1 In addition, Russia and the Nordic countries are pursuing various bilateral schemes focused on a particular problem or chaUenge in the north. One of them is the joint Norwegian- Russian fisheries commission, which manages the valuable fish resources in the Barents Sea. In various bilateral and multilateral partnerships, western states are working to address the environmental problems on the Kola Peninsula. This article gives a brief overview of these cooperative arrangements and Russian perceptions of them.2THE BARENTS EURO-ARCTIC REGIONThe idea of a Barents region was first aired by Thorvald Stoltenberg in April 1992 when he was Norwegian minister of foreign affairs. After consultions with Russia and the other Nordic states, BEAR was established by the Kirkenes declaration of January 1993, whereby Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Russia pledged to work together at both the regional and national levels. At the regional level, BEAR initially included the three northernmost counties of Norway, Norrbotten in Sweden, Lapland in Finland, Murmansk and Arkhangelsk Oblasts and the Republic of Karelia in Russia. They were joined in 1997 by Nenets autonomous Okrug, located within Arkhangelsk Oblast, which became a member in its own right, and later by Vasterbotten (Sweden), OuIu and Kainuu (Finland), and the Republic of Komi (Russia). All these regional entities are represented on the regional council of BEAR, as are the indigenous peoples of the region.3 The Barents Euro-Arctic Council, on which Denmark, Iceland, and the European Commission sit in addition to the four core states, was created to promote and facilitate intergovernmental cooperation. The following countries have observer status: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Poland, the UK, and the United States.BEAR was designed to promote stability and prosperity in the area and its aims are described by the concepts of normalization, stabilization, and regionalization. It works, for example, to reduce military tension, allay the environmental threat, and narrow the east-west gap in standards of living in the region. It is also involved in the regionalization process underway in Europe as well as in the Arctic, turning previously peripheral border areas into places where governments can meet in a transnational forum serving a diversity of interests. Areas of particular concern are environmental protection, regional infrastructure, economic cooperation, science and technology, culture, tourism, health care, and the indigenous peoples of region.One of the most striking features of east- west relations of the European north foUowing the end of the Cold War has been the massive flow of people in both directions across country borders, some of whom decide to settle for good in the new country. Annual crossings between Norway and Russia increased from over 3000 in the early 1990s to nearly 110,000 by the mid20 00 s.4 East- west tourism is thriving; political and business delegations frequently visit partners on the other side of the border; students visit for longer or shorter periods; and finally, most of the towns on the Nordic side of the border are home to Russian communities of various sizes. Many Russians have married Scandinavians and have become eligible for permanent residence permits; other newcomers have come as a result of numerous exchange programs run by BEAR, obtaining temporary residence and work permits on account of their special qualifications. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,007
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,012
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,039

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0070,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0120,005
Communication savante0,0090,006
Science ouverte0,0010,016
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0100,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,011
Tête enseignante GPT0,330
Écart entre enseignants0,319 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations3
Publié2010
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy AnalysisMême sujetArctic and Russian Policy StudiesTravaux en français237 207