MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2491430645 · doi:10.1057/9780333981481_8

The Input of Other Domestic Actors to the Fisheries Agreement

2000· book-chapter· en· W2491430645 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rachel Jones

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2000
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal and Marine Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationFishingCommissionState (computer science)Government (linguistics)Political scienceEuropean commissionFisheryBusinessGeographyInternational tradeEuropean unionLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The focus of the chapter is on the input of key sectoral and regional actors other than the central state to the negotiation of the 1995 EU–Morocco fisheries agreement. Chapter 6 highlighted the framework-setting role of the central state at EU level. The analysis of the mobilization of sectoral and regional actors throughout the negotiating rounds in this chapter provides a more complete analysis of the policy process. The Spanish government was expected by Commission officials to act cautiously over an issue which was far more explosive domestically than the dispute with Canada because few of the boats fishing in Moroccan waters were suitable for operating further afield. The focus is on the case of Andalusia, which is the region most economically dependent on the agreement in view of its lack of alternative fishing grounds, even if other regions such as the Canary Islands have larger fishing quotas in Moroccan waters.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0430.007

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooksSame topicCoastal and Marine ManagementFrench-language works237,207