Regime Interaction and Climate Change: The Case of International Aviation and Maritime Transport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from international aviation and maritime transport has proved to be a difficult task for international climate negotiations such as the Paris Agreement in 2015. Almost two decades prior, Article 2.2 of the Kyoto Protocol excluded emissions from international aviation and maritime transport from its targets, delegating the negotiation of sector-specific regulations to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the International Maritime Organization (IMO), respectively. However, progress at these venues has also been limited. Regime Interaction and Climate Change maps out the legal frameworks in the Climate, ICAO and IMO regimes, and explores the law-making process for the regulation of international aviation and maritime transport through the lenses of fragmentation of international law and regime interaction. The book sheds light on how interaction between these three regimes occurs, what the consequences of such interaction are and how they can be managed to resolve conflicts and promote synergies. This book will be of great interest to scholars of international environmental law and governance, climate change policy and climate change law.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".