The peaceful resolution of U.S.-Mexican transboundary water disputes
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
To deal with boundary and transboundary water issues along their border, the United States and Mexico established the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC) in 1889. Initially dealing only with surface water flows, its flexibility permitted changes such that groundwater and water quality issues could be addressed. In 1994, the U.S., Mexico, and Canada adopted the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) primarily to facilitate trade, but which can govern water as an article of commerce. Both NAFTA and the IBWC have been instrumental in promoting peaceful solutions to water issues. The article examines three cases: (1) Mexico's protesting of a U.S. plan to line the All-American Canal on the Mexico-California; (2) the underdelivery of Mexican Rio Grande water to the U.S. state of Texas; and (3) the case of an aquifer entirely within Mexico whose supply is being stressed because of a shift in agricultural production prompted by NAFTA. The article concludes that both countries should: (1) develop a more formal system for groundwater issues and (2) exercise vigilance with respect to NAFTA's ability to treat water solely as an economic good.
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 | 0.005 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 it