MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2575073328 · doi:10.4324/9781315585475-3

Sustainable development in Arctic international environmental cooperation and the governance of hydrocarbon-related activities

2017· book-chapter· en· W2575073328 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christoph Humrich

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainable developmentArcticEnvironmental governanceCorporate governanceEnvironmental planningThe arcticEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceBusinessEnvironmental protectionOceanographyPolitical scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter argues that sustainable development as a frame of Arctic international environmental cooperation will most likely not result in constraining effects of any significance on future increases in oil and gas extraction. It points out the functions sustainable development served for Arctic international environmental cooperation. It describes the discursive context of the concept and of the changes it underwent. These changes suggest that in the existing Arctic international environmental cooperation, the concept of sustainable development can no longer serve as a suitable policy-guiding frame for identifying what is problematic about Arctic oil and gas activities. Subsequent Arctic Council activities, both in policy and in regulatory output, then very much focused on guidelines and on the legally binding agreements to cope with potential challenges from increased hydrocarbon activities. The Canadian idea was very much influenced by domestic processes, in which indigenous peoples had been successful in claiming and asserting their right to participation in the governance of their Arctic homeland.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.631

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations19
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207