Beyond static spatial management: Scientific and legal considerations for dynamic management in the high seas
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Natural and human stressors in the high seas act across a wide range of spatial and temporal scales. These include direct interaction such as fisheries bycatch or indirect interaction like warming oceans and plastic ingestion. Area-based management tools (ABMTs), such as marine protected areas and time-area closures, are a widely accepted and a broadly successful form of management used to mitigate localized human impacts on marine species and ecosystems. Protection provides an opportunity for population recovery, which can then propagate outside of the closure. As the United Nations negotiates a new treaty on the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction, efforts to design and implement high seas ABMTs at appropriate scales are critical to ensure that these spatial protection measures are most effective and climate-ready in the face of changing oceans. Here we identify the four most important temporal scales – contemporary, intra-annual, multi-annual and multidecadal – for aligning high seas ABMTs to relevant ecological, oceanographic and atmospheric processes. From this, we explore how managers and decision-makers can integrate this knowledge when implementing a new treaty.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it