Legal regulation of forest fire protection: the European experience for Ukraine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Problem setting. The article analyzes the status of the main normative legal acts in force, both domestic and international legislation. Some aspects of the legal regulation of forest fire protection are revealed. It is noted that Improvement of the forestry regulatory framework is a key and essential aspect for the development of an advanced state. Analysis of recent researches and publications. Commitment to reforestation after logging, sanitary felling after forest fires, diseases or as a result of winds and sailboats is a sustainable practice in European societies and an important aspect in the relationship between forest owners and society. At one time, this issue was paid attention to scientists: E.M. Gulid, O.V. Gulak, V.V. Deca, D.S. Chris, O.I. Lozynsky and so on. Target of research. The purpose of the article is to analyze the aspects of legal regulation of forest protection against fires. Special attention will be paid to comparative legal research on forest protection in Ukraine and European countries. Article’s main body. According to Art. 13 of the Constitution of Ukraine forest, like other natural resources of Ukraine (land, water, subsoil), is a national property that is the object of property rights of the Ukrainian people. Currently, the total land area of the forest fund of Ukraine is 10.8 million hectares, of which 9.5 million hectares is covered with forest vegetation, that is 15.7% of the territory of our country. According to V.P. Pechulyuk, legal regulation in the field of forestry in Ukraine cannot be called optimal and in line with international standards. In this context, scientists should agree that the important step in ensuring the fire safety of domestic forests is the full functioning of such monitoring system at the central, regional, local and local levels, its appropriate informational implementation, taking into account the specific features of individual regions regarding the level of fire safety. Forests at one time or another and the coordination and interaction of joint efforts by designated authorities, local governments and the public to minimize fire safety or mitigation. In view of the above, international instruments covering aspects of cooperation in the field of forest fires are few international agreements and acts of the European Community. Such as: 1. Ghana / Province of British Columbia (Canada). Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the Republic of Ghana and the Government of British Columbia, 1999 (On fire fighting training and advice). 2. Finland / Burkina Faso. Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Finland and the Government of Burkina Faso on Finland’s support in the fight against landscape fires, 1998 3. Indonesia and Malaysia. Standard Procedures for a Memorandum of Understanding on Disasters between Indonesia and Malaysia. This is the document that sets out the procedure for implementing the Memorandum of Understanding and so on. Conclusions and prospects for the development. Therefore, based on the above, on the basis of international regulations, the FAO’s recommendations regarding future actions on the legal aspects of forest fires management in Ukraine should be taken into account: regularly update information on international agreements and national legislation; further develop a plan for the development of international agreements and develop new contours of relevant operational guidelines and operational plans; including fire logistics; further review and evaluation of national forest fire legislation; to develop guidelines for the formulation of national legislation on forest fires.
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 | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".