MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2599136381

The Next Generation Of Chilling Uncertainty: Indirect Expropriation Under CAFTA And Its Potential Impact On Environmental Protection

2007· article· en· W2599136381 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Benjamin W. Jenkins

Bibliographic record

VenueOcean and coastal law journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Arbitration and Investment Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpropriationNatural resource economicsBusinessEnvironmental protectionEconomicsEnvironmental scienceMarket economy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For centuries, the signatory countries of the Central America- Dominican Republic-United States Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) have been linked by the migratory patterns of their sea turtle populations. This Comment proposes to use the sea turtle as a means of analyzing the CAFTA agreement. The goal is not simply to evaluate the potential effects of this trade proposal on sea turtle populations, but rather to examine how the sea turtle illuminates the unique challenges of protecting the natural environment in this region. In considering the challenges of creating effective environmental protections in the Caribbean and Central America, it is possible to forecast the potential impact of CAFTA’s environmental and investor’s rights chapters. President George W. Bush stated the goals of CAFTA: “Open trade and investment bring healthy, growing economies, and can serve the cause of democratic reform. [With CAFTA][,] our purpose is to strengthen the economic ties we already have with these nations . . . to reinforce their progress toward economic, political and social reform.” Although CAFTA did not draw much attention from the mainstream media in the United States, it created widespread protest in the other six signatory countries. The Agreement is similar in many regards to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) signed by the United States, Mexico, and Canada in 1994; an analysis of NAFTA ten years after implementation is a useful tool to examine the potential effects of CAFTA. Additionally, the Harken Oil case, in which Costa Rica’s efforts to protect the Talamanca coast ecosystem were challenged by an international oil company, offers an opportunity to apply the environmental and investment language of CAFTA to a real-world scenario in order to understand its potential impact on the protection of the marine environments of the region. This Comment maintains that, while CAFTA contains language that superficially addresses the issue of environmental protection, the underlying heart of the Agreement ultimately could hinder efforts to protect the natural environment in Central America.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.748
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.222
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 teacher head, 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

Citations17
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOcean and coastal law journalSame topicInternational Arbitration and Investment LawFrench-language works237,207