MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2583403904 · doi:10.11575/prism/18962

A sustainable development critique of the Russian oil and gas disposition system: learning from Canadian experience with intragenerational equity

2004· dissertation· en· W2583403904 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ekaterina E. Goudina

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2004
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDispositionEquity (law)Sustainable developmentPolitical sciencePsychologyLawSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis aims to draw attention to the importance of taking into account the concept of sustainable development in reform of Russian oil and gas legislation. The thesis reviews the concept of sustainable development and focuses on one of its principles - the principle of intragenerational equity. The thesis evaluates the Russian oil and gas disposition system from the perspective of intragenerational equity. The results of this evaluation disclose a low degree of consistency with the concept. The thesis then turns to Canadian experience and evaluates the legal regime regulating mineral development in the Metis Settlements areas in Alberta for consistency with the principle of intragenerational equity. After carrying out a comparative analysis of the two legal regimes, the thesis concludes with suggestions as to improvement of the Russian legal regime, using the positive Canadian example, in order to increase the consistency of the former with the principle of intragenerational equity.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.623

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0250.024
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRISM (University of Calgary)→Same topicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research→French-language works237,207→