The Evolution of the European Neighbourhood Policy and the Current Challenges of a Disintegrated Neighbourhood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper traces the evolution of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) since its origins until the present day. The ENP was initiated in 2003 attracting vast institutional and scholarly interest in its various aspects. The extraordinary events of the Arab Spring revolutions in the Southern neighbourhood prompted a renewed interest towards the ENP despite the internal economic turmoil faced by the European Union (EU) and its Member States. The EU institutions undertook a substantive revision of the policy in 2011 in addition to the regional split that had taken place previously. The legal framework of the ENP, comprising its objectives, methodology and instruments, is analysed to reveal the various stages of the existence of the policy and the shortcomings undermining its success. The initial stage of policy formation, the subsequent impact of the Treaty of Lisbon, and the most current state of affairs with a regional emphasis will be addressed in sequence. Full text available at: https://doi.org/10.22215/rera.v7i1.211
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 | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".