MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135377962 · doi:10.5040/9781509920303

The Constitution of the Environmental Emergency

2018· book· en· W3135377962 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueHart Publishing eBooks · 2018
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEnvironmental law and policy
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersBC Cancer AgencyU.S. Forest ServiceMinistry of EnvironmentHome OfficeDavid Suzuki FoundationSustainability VictoriaUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsPrinciple of legalitySalientConstitutionEnvironmental lawLegislatureLawPolitical scienceSet (abstract data type)Corporate governanceLaw and economicsSociologyBusinessComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This book argues that environmental issues constitute an ongoing emergency for the purpose of theorising the relationship between law, legality and environmental governance. Like emergencies, environmental issues possess two salient epistemic features: the inability to know in advance which issues contain the possibility of catastrophe and the inability to know in advance what to do in response to a catastrophe. These features undermine the assumption that law can be equated with predetermined legal rules set out by the legislature and enforced by the courts. By developing a framework based on the concept of the environmental emergency, the book reveals and critiques the assumptions about law contained in existing accounts of environmental law. It then offers a theory of the rule of law that requires public officials to publicly justify their decisions on the basis of core common law constitutional principles, namely reasonableness and fairness. The book draws out connections between

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.016
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations17
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHart Publishing eBooksSame topicEnvironmental law and policyFrench-language works237,207