Equitable Utilization and Significant Harm: Focusing International Water Law on Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cornerstones of international water law, the Equitable Utilization Principle (EUP) and the Significant Harm Principle (SHP), were universalized from Western federal laws in the 1967 Helsinki Rules and the 1997 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses. A core theme of this article, one that has been little noted in the literature, is that such transfer into an international system of sovereign states, without the benefit of supranational courts with enforcement powers, undermines the utilitarian vision of the EUP. The article, moreover, furthers the argument that the factors of the EUP are nearly impossible to operationalize owing to the indeterminacy of their meanings, the inclusion of factors unrelated to utility, and a lack of weighting preferences. The intractability of the EUP leaves the SHP, which favors the powerful riparians, as the default principle. As a remedy we propose that (a) social, economic, and environmental needs must be made the...
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.050 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".