MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3119995514

Salmon farming in the North – Regulating societal and environmental impacts

2020· article· en· W3119995514 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ann-Magnhild Solås, Ingrid Kvalvik, Knud Simonsen, Ragnheiður Þórarinsdóttir, Nathan Young, Jahn Petter Johnsen, Signe A. Sønvinsen, Roy Robertsen

Bibliographic record

VenueMunin Open Research Archive (The Arctic University of Norway) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and biodiversity studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgricultureNatural resource economicsEnvironmental planningEnvironmental impact assessmentEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental degradationBusinessEnvironmental scienceEconomicsGeographyPolitical scienceEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Salmon farming is a rapidly growing industry in the North and its sustainable development depends on adequate governance. We have assessed the governance systems for salmon farming in four northern countries, Canada, the Faroe Islands, Iceland, and Norway. In all the countries, the industry is marked by controversies, linked to the environmental and societal impacts of its activities. The question raised is how the authorities address these challenges - what instruments are deployed to achieve a sustainable salmon industry? We have identified both commonalities and differences. The farming of salmon is to a large extent organized in similar ways, with net-pens in the ocean as the dominant production form. In general, the regulations pertaining to the industry have a lot in common. All countries require a license to produce, there are environmental monitoring regimes in place, and the producers are required to report on the same parameters, such as biomass, sea lice counts, disease management, and a range of other statistics. A major difference is the polycentric character of the governance systems in Canada and partly Norway. Still, despite differences in production volume and contextual factors, we see that fairly similar regulatory toolboxes are used to control aquaculture activities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.208 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMunin Open Research Archive (The Arctic University of Norway)Same topicEcology and biodiversity studiesFrench-language works237,207