Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the German EU and G8 presidencies, and climate change were prominent issues on Berlin's summit agenda. This was also re- flected in the thematic emphasis of the Canada-EU high-level meeting in early June 2007 in Berlin. The concluding joint statement specifically de- clared energy and climate security to be one of the three main areas for fu- ture cooperation.1 No doubt and climate change are topics that are very much in vogue these days. However, as this article will argue, there are even larger tectonic shifts at work that will affect German and EU foreign policy in the long run and thus potentially impinge on future Ger- many-Canada relations. One irreversible change has been the emergence of as an integral part of foreign policy. This applies to national as well as EU levels. Another development has been the linkage of and climate change in the German and European discourses. A third dimension is not so much a change but a strengthening of an existing trend and that is the German fascination with the Arctic, which has become part and parcel of the political symbolism of climate change policies.Despite recognizing and climate change as topics for future cooperation, these new developments could cause some serious challenges to Canada's relations with Germany and the EU. One particular problem for Canada could arise from the German strategy of addressing and climate change issues outside of NATO, one of Canada's traditional forums for ongoing transatlantic consultation and dialogue. Controversial oil and gas exploration in the high north may be the harbinger of an older pattern of conflict over resource management in the north Atlantic and Arctic, which has pitched Canada and the EU against each other over products such as fish and sealskin. In addition, in any confrontation between the various Arctic nations it is not clear whether Germany would side with Canada, since its priorities are maintaining EU cohesion and securing supplies from Norway and Russia. Thus, while Canada and Germany will certainly remain partners in global and climate change issues and within any NATO, UN, or G 8 framework, this cooperative trajectory is not as clearly marked for specific regional spaces such as the Arctic or the north Atlantic.GERMANY DISCOVERS ENERGY SECURITY: BLURRING THE LINES BETWEEN ENERGY AND CLIMATE POLICIESBefore assessing the political impact of German and European (re) definitions of and climate change on Canada and transatlantic relations, it will be useful to take a closer look at the German debate, which has also informed discussions on the European level. In contrast to many of its European neighbours, in the past played only a secondary role in foreign policy decision-making in Germany. While in most western countries foreign and defence ministries have often been involved in formulating policies, in Germany this has been the domain of the economics ministry. Historically, West Germany saw as simply an economic - not strategic - good and relied heavily on market- bas ed solutions. From the late 1950s it had been dependent on oil imports, mainly from the Middle East and later Russia and the commonwealth of independent states, but it argued that to ensure secure supplies, competitive market conditions needed to be created in which price mechanisms would foster healthy relations between demand and supply. This German belief in market regulation meant that geopolitical considerations were seldom part of any policy agenda. Energy was depoli ticized as important decisions were left to private economic actors. In addition, because of its distinct national approach, became Germany's least EU-compatible policy area.2.During the last couple of years this unique German way of conceptualizing policy has changed. …
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".