ENVIRONMENTAL DECISION MAKING IN A TRANSBOUNDARY CONTEXT: PRINCIPLES AND CHALLENGES FOR THE DENMARK-SWEDEN ØRESUND FIXED LINK
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is now possible to identify projects or activities in many countries whose policy objectives of promoting "sustainable development" have been achieved. The philosophy underlying the "sustainable development" concept captures misgivings about the nature of development and about social and technological ability to avoid further deterioration of the environment. Although many of the advances in environmental law and theory have occurred in international forums, implementation of sustainable development principles is less evident at the international than at the local level. The is due, in large part, to the difficulties created by multiple jurisdictions and the increased complexity of regional or global environmental problems. This paper considers the challenges and opportunities that exist for improving the implementation of the precautionary principle as a sustainability objective at the international level. It concentrates upon approval processes for development projects with potential cross-border environmental effects. A case study is provided of the decision making process for the Øresund Fixed Link between Denmark and Sweden.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.028 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.038 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".